Opinions sought

A

A.J. DeAngelo

Registered
I don't know if there is a definitive answer to this scenario, but wonder what AZ'ers think. Here's the situation: VNEA pool league playoffs. Team A is supposed to host a match on a Wednesday evening. Team B is called on Tuesday and told that Team A cannot host the match. The reason is that the owner of Team A's venue has decided to rent the place out to a private party. This has happened before. Team B says, okay no need to forfeit, we will host the match. Team B is told no you won't, that because of this situation the match will be held at another venue also owned by the person who owns Team A's home bar. This is a location which is not affiliated with the league. Nobody has played (in league at least) at this location although it has been made known by the league operator that Team A was supposed to have moved to this location at some point but hasn't yet.
Team A believes that it is their right to choose any location they wish since they are the home team. Team B believes they forfeit that right and the venue should move to Team B's bar, or at least to a neutral location with which all players are familiar. Team A believes they should not be penalized for their bar owner's choice. Team B believes the bar owner shouldn't be rewarded for renting out his bar by having all ten players patronize another one of his bars. They believe that by doing so the guy has no motivation for not renting out his bar during future league matches.
What say you? And, isn't it nice that in a world fraught with real issues we can escape with the totally meaningless on occasion?
 
I don't play VNEA, ... is there a rule or bylaw about this?

What does your League Operator say?

I would say that team "A" needs to notifiy the LO and let them know the venue is not available for play and let the LO decide.


That said, if them "A" earned home-room advantage, they should get to keep that advantage. As long as the tables are acceptable, and the distance from home is resonable, I would say "Suck it up and play"
 
JustinHayes said:
I don't play VNEA, ... is there a rule or bylaw about this?

What does your League Operator say?

I would say that team "A" needs to notifiy the LO and let them know the venue is not available for play and let the LO decide.


That said, if them "A" earned home-room advantage, they should get to keep that advantage. As long as the tables are acceptable, and the distance from home is resonable, I would say "Suck it up and play"
Click to expand...

This kind of echoes true with me. With the exception of a couple places in my hometown, I really don't care where I play. All I care about is winning. Team B should take that mentality. They should call Team A and say "I don't give a sh*t where we play."

If this is based on principle alone, then perhaps the room owner hosting Team A shouldn't have rented out his venue on a league night. What's done is done, and Team B can't dwell on it like they were treated unjustly. Sometimes you just gotta bite your lip and play.
 
Is there a problem with team B's location? Seems to me that team B is being reasonable by asking that the match be played at their location seeing that it is available and that the alternate site proposed by A has not been used for league. The alternate might be an unknown to at least some of the players.

Or, everyone can agree to play on another date when the venue is available.
 
Team A is definitely pulling some BS with the short notice. They do have the higher seed though. If team B thinks it's really an issue worth pursuing then let the LO sort it out.
 
IbeAnEngineer said:
Is there a problem with team B's location? Seems to me that team B is being reasonable by asking that the match be played at their location seeing that it is available and that the alternate site proposed by A has not been used for league. The alternate might be an unknown to at least some of the players.

Or, everyone can agree to play on another date when the venue is available.
Click to expand...

There is no problem with Team B's location. In fact, it is a dedicated pool bar with lots of bar boxes. In the interest of full disclosure, I'll divulge the backstory on this situation.
I am a member of Team B. We play our playoff match tonight at 7:30. Yesterday we were informed by Team A that they would not be able to host the match. At this point we said, in effect, okay we don't want you to forfeit, why don't we host it? They said, oh, we won't be forfeiting, and you won't be hosting, we're going to play at another of our sponsor's bars.

This, in a nutshell, is the source of our ire. Of course it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, and we said we'll abide by whatever the LO says. We did wonder, however, if there was a rule that comes into effect in this situation.

Here is why we're miffed. The proposed location is terrible. The table requires the use of a short stick for many shots. The prices are astronomical at the venue. The "one free pitcher" rule is rescinded. But mostly, we're miffed because this bar owner has a history of doing this sort of thing and never suffering any negative consequences. It seems to us that he should at least lose the business of the ten pool players that he displaced. That is really the crux of our position.

I played on Team A for years (totally different players who all left to other teams for various reasons, mostly because they didn't like how they were treated or, in my case, because I moved to the other side of town. The reason I played there in the first place was because it was within walking distance of my house). When this same instance occured (which it did) we either played downstairs at the same venue (how ironic is this? The downstairs is a dedicated pool room with several nine foot tables) or asked the opponents if they would play on another day or if they wanted to play somewhere else. In this case we're told that we must play at another of Team A's bars.

I like the guys on Team A. I think the rest of my team does as well. I understand that they're the home team. But in my opinion they not only have the right to host the match, they have an obligation to host the match. If they can't then I believe they forfeit their home advantage. I understand it isn't their fault that the room got rented out, but it sure isn't our fault either. I see their side, but what I don't see is the logic that moves the match to a location that isn't even involved in the league in any way. As a sponsor, I think you have an obligation to host the matches. Team A's owner is saying, in effect, I'll host the matches unless I can make more money by not hosting them. In that case, you'll have to go to my other, even more expensive bar, and play there. That doesn't seem right. It doesn't seem like a big deal either, I'll grant you, but it doesn't seem right.
 
So, just to be clear (I was VNEA but this didn't happen)... if a pool room is supposed to host a match, and can't for some reason... they technically can be forfeited? Team B can take the wins? That's how it reads.

----

If I'm in Team B's shoes, and I feel like Team A is trying to pull something and is being less than straight, this is what I would say:

"you screwed up and chose to rent out the room when you knew it was time to host league there. Now you have to suck it up and play on our home court. We don't want to play in some unknown location that maybe gives you an advantage. You're playing at our bar. And if you don't agree to this, you forfeit.

All of that is assuming Team A is being jerks and trying to pull some sort of move. If they're being straight and have some actual complaint with playing at Team B's bar, then maybe just say 'screw it' and play where they want. At the end of the day, it's how you play that will decide who wins. Not some imagined home court advantage.
 
I would have simply agreed to play in the other location proposed by team A unless it is too far away to be a viable location.

In my opinion team B are being kind of assholish.

I may have invented a new word there.
 
A.J. DeAngelo said:
I don't know if there is a definitive answer to this scenario, but wonder what AZ'ers think. Here's the situation: VNEA pool league playoffs. Team A is supposed to host a match on a Wednesday evening. Team B is called on Tuesday and told that Team A cannot host the match. The reason is that the owner of Team A's venue has decided to rent the place out to a private party. This has happened before. Team B says, okay no need to forfeit, we will host the match. Team B is told no you won't, that because of this situation the match will be held at another venue also owned by the person who owns Team A's home bar. This is a location which is not affiliated with the league. Nobody has played (in league at least) at this location although it has been made known by the league operator that Team A was supposed to have moved to this location at some point but hasn't yet.
Team A believes that it is their right to choose any location they wish since they are the home team. Team B believes they forfeit that right and the venue should move to Team B's bar, or at least to a neutral location with which all players are familiar. Team A believes they should not be penalized for their bar owner's choice. Team B believes the bar owner shouldn't be rewarded for renting out his bar by having all ten players patronize another one of his bars. They believe that by doing so the guy has no motivation for not renting out his bar during future league matches.
What say you? And, isn't it nice that in a world fraught with real issues we can escape with the totally meaningless on occasion?
Click to expand...

I highlighted the important part. So...this is not a regular league night?
When I played in the VNEA, any make-up matches were always at the bar it was supposed to be held at in the first place.
Being that this is a playoff week, I'm assuming the other teams in the playoffs don't want to be delayed because of you guys playing on another night?
I don't think playing at a alternate site, of Team A, is even an option in my old VNEA League. I would have to go with the option of playing at Team B's place. Another reason would be the lack of space around the tables of the optional bar of Team A. OK, JMO.
 
I think I have to side with team B in this case. It is pretty bad, in fact, pathetic if you are having a play off match and end up playing in a location where you have to use a "short" stick to make a shot. This in itself should result in the preclusion of this venue for the match.

This of course is only my opinion on the matter.
 
First off, I feel there are certain priorities here that need to be addressed. Who's turn is it to bring the Krispy Kremes. Team A, or team B? :rolleyes:
 
Tramp Steamer said:
First off, I feel there are certain priorities here that need to be addressed. Who's turn is it to bring the Krispy Kremes. Team A, or team B? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

In the VNEA is there a rule that you have to take the chewing tobacco out before you eat a donut?
 
alstl said:
In the VNEA is there a rule that you have to take the chewing tobacco out before you eat a donut?
Click to expand...

It's funny cuz it's true. Also if you have a buddy across the room, it's a rule that you cannot walk up to them to carry on a conversation. You must do it from across the room, making sure your soundwaves travel straight across the shooter's face.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top