Page 45 - Spring 2018 Final

Readers Letters:Layout 1 03-Apr-18 12:35 PM Page 1

Hi Bob, 45
I have just read the 1st edition of The Indoor Bowler. This brought
the following comments to mind. I welcome the response from Ireland
regarding their take on the fixing (or not) of the fender. They have in place
what I would like to see; clarity (the fender is fixed), consistency (it is always
fixed) and communication (all bowlers know that this is the situation).
Surely the ESMBA could follow this example, instead of allowing `cus-
tom and practice` which is unclear, inconsistent and not understood the
Readers Letters same way by all of our bowlers, to continue!
and Emails. This leads me to another suggestion regarding potential changes to
the laws. The ESMBA quite rightly carries out reviews and revisions at set
intervals. There is no other practical way to keep the laws up to date. However, if a proposed law
change comes to their attention at any time other than when a review is taking place there would
be a delay in it being considered.
Could they not issue an `interim statement`, a `best practice instruction`, a `guidance note`,
or something similar, to deal with such a situation? This could do anything from merely bringing
the matter to everyone`s attention, through to immediately making it a law, which would then be
written into the next edition. In this way it could also act as giving notice that the matter will be
considered at the next review.
Now to the article entitled `Times up! – Oh! No it isn`t!`. The umpire was clearly right in the
decision made. Take a look at law (7) (b) which says that “non-penalty ends will be replayed from
the same direction and will not count as ends played”. This applies to this case because there
was a request to re-spot the jack, rather than a claim for shots to be awarded. Therefore, the end
was deemed to have not been played, and it is impossible to complete an end that has not yet
even been started!
And finally, I was intrigued by your `the gap between mats` article. Could you tell me where
I would be able to find the County `ruling` that you refer to? Or is this just
another example of `word of mouth` or `custom and practice`?
Matt Shaw

ED - Sense, Sense and more Sense! I certainly do not always agree with
readers comments any more than they do with mine but this email was
great. I always like clarity of an argument and Matt has put his case very
clearly indeed. As to the distance between mats in County matches, you
will find it in the ICC rules on the ESMBA Website.

Hi Bob.
Times Up in last issue. I would ask…..Did the other team get 2 shots
as no mention was made of this? Is the last end the last end played when
the bell goes or the 9th end in this case? The organisers should make
things clear at the start. They should stipulate for example:- ESMBA rules except jack off the mat
2 shots away in all ends except the 9th end when the jack will be replaced and the end played
again unless the bell has gone when it will be 2 shots away. The umpire was correct as maybe
the jack could have been hit of several times and the game last another 15 minutes or so.
Evan Williams

Ed - firstly Matt & Evan, you need to go back to the opening sentence of the article and see that
the game was in Wales and not necessarily under the same rules as in England. However, the
point I was trying to make was that the organisers were not experienced at timed games and their
rules did not forsee all the possible problems. As I understand it, It caused a lot of controversy,
particularly from the player who wanted the jack re-spotted. Timed game rules are NOT generally
in any National rule book, they are usually made up for each individual event. Sadly, I cannot find
my Welsh rule book, wherever it is it’s with my Scots and Irish books - somewhere!