Proposal 1 (Andy Carter/Chris Bishop, St Denys)
Andy Carter explained the principles behind this. To pro-rata reduce, by 10%, the points needed to be scored by each player on a match night. The purpose of this is to reduce late finishes, which have become more of an issue recently. Each player’s handicap would still be calculated as per the present system (moving by 5 points up or down depending on the result in their game) but the “starting points” would now differ to the handicap. For example, a “scratch” (zero) handicap player would now have to only score 180 points on a match night rather than 200. As a result, their “starting points” would be +20. A minus 250 player would now only have to score 405 points rather than 450, meaning their “starting points” would be -205. 

The ”starting points” will not become the new handicap, however. If it did, the better players would slowly creep up again towards -250 and the effect of the change would be lost for those players within a season or two. Carried

Proposal 2 (Tony Aldridge/Brian Cannons, Totton)
This proposal was identical to Proposal 1, but stipulated that the points needed to be scored by an individual on a match night be reduced by 20%. However, this could not be discussed as neither Tony nor Brian were present at the AGM. Not discussed

 Proposal 3 (Brian Bull/Clive Gamblin, Curdridge)
This proposal was to raise the upper handicap limit to +120 from +110. Brian Bull withdrew this proposal as he was satisfied that Proposal 1 would effectively perform the same purpose (as a +110 player would have a “starting points” of +119 under Proposal 1). Withdrawn

 Proposal 4 (Nick Wood/Mark Spridgeon, Totton Rec)
The proposal was for teams to play each other in handicap order, to save time sorting out the draw and to allow higher handicap players to develop against players of similar ability. This would end lesser players playing against opponents they simply could not beat (due to the maximum handicap perhaps being artificially low) and might encourage more players to join the league. Withdrawn

 Proposal 5 (Terry Azor/John Mullane, Chandlers Ford)
This proposal was for away captains to put their players where they wanted in the draw, after the home captain had written-up his team. This would mean there would be no draw “out of the hat” for pairings but instead the away captain could take a tactical view and put his players against whomever he wanted them to play. Matches might also start earlier if this proposal was adopted. Carried

 Proposal 6 (Chris Bishop, St Denys)
This proposal was there as it was felt that Proposals 4 & 5 might “skew” handicaps. This proposal therefore proposed that handicap adjustments be made after each league cycle, rather than after each game as is current practice.

If high handicap players only played each other (for instance, if Proposal 4 was adopted) and lower handicap players only played each other (also Proposal 4) then that might artificially affect handicaps so that when competitions were played a number of people might have “false” handicap. Withdrawn

Mark Spridgeon was happy towithdraw Proposal 4 in favour of Proposal 5. It was felt that Proposal 5 would not unduly “skew” handicaps and therefore Chris Bishop withdrew Proposal 6.

 Proposal 7 (Nick Wood/Mark Spridgeon, Hamble)
This proposal was to change the summer snooker league from a team competition to an individual competition.

Nick Wood felt that, unlike struggling to get a team together for team league games, an individual snooker league would be contested by keen players.

Chris Bishop advised that the idea behind a team competition was to encourage teams to enter the billiards league once they had played summer snooker. As this season’s snooker league was really a “pilot” event, Chris felt that more time was needed to allow things to develop. Not carried

 Proposal 8 (Terry Azor/John Mullane, Chandlers Ford)
 This proposal was for the billiard league format to be teams of four players rather than the current five players. This was withdrawn by Terry Azor as he was satisfied that Proposal 1 would fulfil the same aims as this proposal, namely to reduce match times and late nights. Withdrawn

 Proposal 9 (Chris Bishop, St Denys)
 The proposal was for the home player to always break (with the yellow/”spot” ball) to avoid wasting time “stringing”. This might save a few minutes on a match night. Not carried

 Proposal 10
This was more a call for a discussion than an actual proposal.

It was agreed that the Four Man Rule be kept, having been brought in after Covid to reduce postponements. Each team may use the rule twice per cycle (as things stand that would be four times per season) though no single individual may play twice on a night on more than one occasion in a season. 

It was agreed that the individual’s second game on a given night would not count towards ranking points.

That individual would play off the same handicap for each of his two games on a given night. His handicap the following week would be calculated on the outcome of the first of those games (unless if he won one and lost one his handicap would be unaltered).

Korbin Lowe raised the idea of three man teams helping new teams to enter the league (perhaps clubs where there is only one table). Whilst a welcome comment, it was noted that such clubs might be some distance from the Southampton area and would therefore mean significant travel distance.

ITEM 6 – ACCOUNTS 
The balance sheet was produced by Chris Bishop. 

Many “one-off” expenses have been paid in the past twelve months as trophies have been manufactured and (of course) paid for. These are now in place and, as a result, the expense on trophies in forthcoming years will be significantly reduced.

It was noted that some clubs still owed money from previous seasons, but it was agreed that this be written-off.

The HSBC account was closed in the Spring as, from January, charges began to be implemented which equated to a significant portion of association funds (between 10% and 20% of income).

An online “clubs and associations” account is now being sought and it is hoped that will be in place soon.

The funds held are currently in Andy Carter’s account (joint account with wife so if he’s hit by a bus there will still be access) though this is obviously not ideal.

The point was reiterated that captains are responsible for collecting fees for individual competitions and forwarding that money on. It is hoped that the new account may have the facility for funds to be deposited directly to it.

Clubs remain responsible for team entries, e.g. to the league.

ITEM 7 – CORRESPONDENCE
No correspondence was received

ITEM 8 – ANY OTHER BUSINESS 
Trophies were handed out to various winners of competitions, though the Usher Shield remains with Chris Bishop at present.

The League Shield also remains with Chris as an upgrade is planned for it.

We are steering away from awarding runners-up trophies, but if there is support for them they may return in the future. Given the significant expenses on trophies recently it was felt that runners-up trophies could be dispensed with for this past season at least.

It was noted that the forthcoming season will consist of two “cycles” so each team will play every other team twice. This will allow the vast majority of games (league, cup, individuals) to be played on Wednesdays. The doubles matches will probably all be allocated to Thursdays.

Small gifts of appreciation were also handed-out to Paul Adams, Peter Green and Sid Hunt for their contributions in their various roles over the years. Paul accepted his and Peter’s gifts, whilst Terry Azor accepted the gift for Sid.

We wish them all well for the future, and hope to see them at games…at least now and again.

The meeting was closed by the President at 9:30pm