Monday - May 11, 2009
Absolute Vindication
This is an update on that post I made several weeks ago, about what seemed to me to be an illegal rule in the bylaws of that rinky dink league I belong to. Since I was the league’s secretary this year, the guy in charge of actually applying the rules, I fought against the league’s bylaw of “Legal lineup: A legal lineup shall consist of 2 regular bowlers. A vacancy counts as a regular bowler.” as hard as I could, because I knew it was wrong. And I lost. Even when the illogical conclusion occurred: if a vacancy is a regular bowler, then another vacancy is another regular bowler; thus a team that has 2 or 3 vacancies can never forfeit, because the vacant “bowlers” are never absent. This is blatantly wrong, since a team full of actual people can forfeit - and equal treatment under the law is about an American as a concept can get. But that didn’t matter. They wanted me to do it their way, because “that’s how we’ve always done it” and “a past president several years ago said he called the USBC and that’s what they said to do”. [ Welcome to life in New Jersey. “We know it’s wrong, but it’s our rule, and it’s there because somebody we never liked or trusted said it should be there, so follow it.” Um, yeah, right.
So of course I ignored them and their stupid illegal rule. And I got away with it for almost the entire season. Then they found out, got all uppity, had their revenge and voted me out. Plus they screwed me out of $120-170. That’ll teach me alright. And they did it with the bowling alley owner’s unspoken consent too. As he put it to me afterwords, “Lessons learned, huh?”
Well, all is not lost. The money loss isn’t going to kill me, and the secretary job sucks eggs anyway, so let somebody else have it. But what they don’t know ... yet ... is that I’ve been having these emails going back and forth with the rules people at USBC. When last I blogged on this subject, I’d just had a fight with the VP. So I wrote my first epistle, got my response, and showed it to him. All the while making nice-nice and saying how it wasn’t him I was mad it, it was my frustration with the rule, and look here, USBC says it’s wrong, and if you extend their thought just a little you’ll see the rule is illegal and should be ignored. Well, that mollified him, but “extending a thought a little” isn’t a capability that too many people seem to have. Especially on this league. So I had a big meeting with the guy who runs the alley. Took my rulebook and the email, and sat and talked and asked questions for the better part of 2 hours. I very gently and innocently painted him into a corner, then nailed both his feet to the floor. And then got out the matches. But he managed to untie his shoes and escape, giving me a big weasel-ly speech about how such a rule was Ok after all, and it wasn’t really ever applied except in my oddball league, so leave well enough alone.
Uh huh. Ok, that league is over now. All done. Bad evil arrogant Drew has been spanked and sent packing. Humbled. Crow eaten.
AS IF.
So I wrote right back to the nice lady at the USBC, and asked the same question again, looking for a stronger response ....
>
> To: rules@bowl.com
>
> Date: 05/10/2009 01:49 AM
>
> Subject: Re: Fw: Rule 105 questions - a vacancy is not a regular bowler
>
> Thank you for your response. Could I ask please for some more clarification?
>
> I understand what you said. I think I understand it perfectly. But when I extend the thought a little, that “A vacancy is not a bowler, cannot be counted toward the legal lineup.”, it begs the
> question: Is a bylaw that states that a vacancy IS a regular bowler an illegal bylaw? And given an illegal bylaw, is it better to ignore it, or just go along with it because “that’s how we’ve always done > things”? Especially when the discovery happens most of the way through the season.
>
> I had a 2 hour meeting with the owner of my local bowling alley about this. I took my rulebook and a copy of this email. He read it carefully, looked things up in the rules, and gave it a lot of
> thought. A lot, because many, perhaps most, leagues in his alley have such a rule in their bylaws. And after much thought, he said that such a bylaw existed to be nice to people. Because you don’t > want to “stick it” to a regular team who couldn’t make it to league one night (and didn’t prebowl or ask for a postponement). And if people were made to pay for the week they were out and then
> found out that they couldn’t even get any points for that night, then they’d be upset. And let’s try to not use the forfeit word, because nobody understands it, as forfeiting in bowling - with it’s earn the
> points method - is different than forfeiting in any other sport. So if a team has a vacancy, they should be cut a little extra slack if they forget to show up one night. After all, they’re already at a
> disadvantage because they don’t have a full team.
>
> Ok, I see his point. To him, as a business owner, it’s very important to keep the customers coming back. So it’s better to look the other way a little, unless those people on the team with vacancies
> get really behind on their dues, in which case screw ‘em.
>
> This is my first foray into flexible rules. So of course I found the exception that proves it: a dinky little league trying to survive by allowing a team to exist with only one member on it. And that one
> member isn’t too dependable. And of course she eventually quit the league. But for about half the season, her team was either in BYE status or had just one member who would only show up half the > time. And I scored those nights as “earn the points opportunities for the other team”, seeing as I should avoid “the F word”.
>
> But I really would like to know if your reading of the rules makes such a bylaw illegal. And if it is, what to do about it before, during, or after the season.
>
>
> confused and annoyed,
> Andrew Pearce
>
> ( now FORMER secretary, league #845145 )
**************************************************************************
> Subject: Fw: Rule 105 questions - a vacancy is not a regular bowler
> To: Drew458@barking-moonbat.com
> Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 5:02 PM
>
>
> This is in response to your e-mail below.
>
>
> We understand the center [ie bowling alley] point of view as a business owner however, Rule 105 does not have any options for use of the absentee or vacancy score. A legal lineup must be
> present. The problem at hand is usually that the league rules limit the composition of the legal lineup. For example the league will require two regular players be present in a league with a playing
> strength of four, when the league could adopt one eligible player as the legal lineup. One player means a regular bowler or substitute.
>
> For the 2009-2010 season a one person legal lineup can be used for a five person team, should the league adopt such a rule.
>
> Feel free to contact us should you have additional questions regarding this matter by replying to kathy.andersen@bowl.com
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Kathy Andersen
>
> Rules Extra Editor and Senior Rules Counselor
****************************************************************************
Well, that was better. But still not what I was looking for. So I tried again ...
Again, my thanks. My only question is what to do when such a rule is in the bylaws. Maybe you can’t really answer that one. I understand. Having fought against it, and lost, I chose to ignore it. Nobody paid any attention to me the Secretary anyway, so I got away with it almost to the end. This was not the best course of action, but I felt it was necessary.
We have such a bylaw in my league. “A legal lineup shall consist of 2 regular bowlers. A vacancy counts as a regular bowler.”. I know it’s wrong. Several emails back and forth with you have only enforced my awareness of that wrong. My president feels it is right. My vice president admits that it’s unfair, but the rule stays because a past president contacted the USBC 4-5 years ago and that’s what he was told. (I think that past president was being less than honest.) As I wrote, a long discussion with the alley manager only resulted in a nebulous response.
I am no longer Secretary, probably because of this. We have another new crop of officers next year, so maybe I can try to get it changed at the opening meeting. But that’s all I can do.
Such an improper bylaw rule is very common, likely because people are trying to be nice. Perhaps this topic would be worth a “know the rules” column in the magazine. I’m glad that next year’s rules will allow a work around, with the “one person who shows up can be enough if you want it” rule. Maybe you could publish a few paragraphs on how this new option helps eliminate this long standing misinterpretation, especially if you repeatedly emphasize that a vacancy is not now, nor ever was, an eligible player. Or a regular bowler!
thanks again,
Drew
The rule is in conflict with USBC Rules and cannot be enforced. The USBC rule prevails. Rule 100a states leagues can adopt rules that do not conflict with USBC rules.
Sincerely,
Kathy Andersen, Senior Rules Counselor
Thank you. Black and White. Straight up as it’s going to get, so even the most feeble minded can understand. A vacancy is not a regular bowler. A vacancy is not a member of your team. A vacancy is only a score you are given because you don’t have enough people. And you only get that score once your team has put forth a legal lineup (in other words, the minimum number of people on your team has shown up to bowl that night, or at least pre-bowled.) And since you can’t adopt a rule that conflicts with USBC rules, “A vacancy counts as a regular bowler” is an invalid rule. “Illegal” if you will. Unenforceable, even if “that’s how we’ve always done things”.
In your face!
Gosh, sometimes it’s so satisfying to be petty. Nyah nyah, na nyah nyah! 
Posted by Drew458
on 05/11/2009 at 07:15 PM
Filed Under: • Bowling Blogging •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
Once Again, The One And Only Post
(4 total trackbacks)
Tracked at iHaan.org
Thｅ advantage to having a guide with you is thɑt an expert will haѵe very first hand experience dealing and navigating the river with гegional wildlife. Tһomas, there are great…
On: 07/28/23 10:37
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We've Been Waiting For
(3 total trackbacks)
Tracked at head to the Momarms site
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We’ve Been Waiting For
On: 03/14/23 11:20
Vietnam Homecoming
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at 广告专题配音 专业从事中文配音跟外文配音制造，北京名传天下配音公司
专业从事中文配音和外文配音制作，北京名传天下配音公司 北京名传天下专业配音公司成破于2006年12月，是专业从事中 中文配音 文配音跟外文配音的音频制造公司，幻想飞腾配音网领 配音制作 有海内外优良专业配音职员已达500多位，可供给一流的外语配音，长年服务于国内中心级各大媒体、各省市电台电视台，能满意不同客户的各种需要。电话：010-83265555 北京名传天下专业配音公司…
On: 03/20/21 07:00
meaningless marching orders for a thousand travellers ... strife ahead ..
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Casual Blog
[...] RTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPL [...]
On: 07/17/17 04:28
a small explanation
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at yerba mate gourd
Find here top quality how to prepare yerba mate without a gourd that's available in addition at the best price. Get it now!
On: 07/09/17 03:07
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
