Fairer Representation at the Finals.

Discussion in 'The Rehearsal Room' started by IanHeard, Mar 20, 2006.

  1. IanHeard

    IanHeard Member

    Is it not time that we looked again at how many bands
    each region sends to the National Finals.
    Whilst I accept that the current rules are being
    correctly applied, it cannot be fair that the North of
    England on the strength of only 5 entries in the 2nd
    section is permitted to send 2 bands to Harrogate and
    the WoE Area which had 16 entries is also sending 2
    bands!(you do the math!)
    Having only ever played in the L&SC and the WoE
    regionals myself, its seems the larger regions tend to
    lose out in terms of fair representation at the finals
    to the North and the Celtic nations.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2006
  2. chizzum

    chizzum Member

    hmmm good point, I see where you are coming from but there is a little point behind it. But i agree something needs to be changed
     
  3. IanHeard

    IanHeard Member

    "Little point"......?
     
  4. chizzum

    chizzum Member

    there must be some point for them to nly send certain numbers from cetain areas
     
  5. brasscrest

    brasscrest Active Member

    The reason for the bottom limit of two bands per region is probably intended to ensure that there is a floor number (14?) competing in each section at the finals.

    Seems like the numbers were chosen in an arbitrary fashion. Just so we all know what the current rule is -

    Using the same spread, it could be changed to have one more level at the bottom, up to 8 bands - 1 qualify; 9 to 16 - 2 qualify.

    kirmat's point is a good one - there is a bigger spread from no bands to two bands qualifying than from two to three, which can be seen as a bit of a penalty for the regions with better attendance.

     
  6. Anno Draconis

    Anno Draconis Active Member

    I remember playing in the brief and unlamented "North Wales" region in the early 90s when there was 1 band (Point of Ayr) in the top section and 2 in the 1st section. I played for Northop and all we had to do was beat the other band in the 1st section (Buckley?); bizarrely Point had to get a certain number of points to qualify.

    It is a bit farcical and there certainly shouldn't be 2 bands in the North 2nd section qualifying. Maybe in similar cases the organisers could take one qualification place away and instead have a "wild card" place to be given to the highest placed non-qualifying band playing in the biggest section? Or a non-qualifying band with the best record in the Areas over the last 2 years?
     
  7. IanHeard

    IanHeard Member

    It is clear that when the thresholds were set, the organisers had not allowed for a dearth of entries as in the NoE 2nd Section this year.
    With more bands struggling I can see this being a growing problem and it would be nice if Besson/Kapitol could use some discretion and on a ad-hoc basis invite the odd extra band (as in other Contests) to address this anomaly or perhaps lower the thresholds.
    I think it would be unfair to cut the NoE qualifiers, we need to encourage particpation not limit it.
     
  8. GJacko

    GJacko Member

    It wasn't only NoE. Midlands second section had just 12 entries, the smallest (apart from top, which is limited to 12) by some way. Something to do with the taxing nature of the piece, I think.

    Fundamentally I think you are right, more bands, more finals places and vice versa. The rules do cater for this to a certain extent. However, I think what is really needed is a complete re-think of our organisation and competitions. Just need someone with the time, energy and money to do it. Any takers??
     
  9. Steve

    Steve Active Member

    I think we would all love the chance to get in there and start re-organising the banding movement Graham, unfortunately I cant see there being a vacancy!! If it isnt broken (beyond repair) then dont try and fix it seems to be the general attitude in my eyes. Unfortunately there is only so far all the unrest can go before the organising committees have to stop relying on the 'its traditional' excuses.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2006
  10. sugarandspice

    sugarandspice Active Member

    When you look at the National rules i guess its clear that the 3rd placed band just missed out, had there been 1 more band in the section then they would be going to Harrogate too, unlucky i guess.

    Agree with steve, if it ain't broke don't fix it. A line has to be drawn somewhere. Someone is always going to just miss out, some areas always have more bands than others. It's just the way the banding world works! :)
     
  11. johnmartin

    johnmartin Active Member

    One also has to consider the size of the sections at the subsequent Nationals. Ok for the RAH where there is only one section but what about Harrogate where the other four sections are held? 8 regions sending 2 bands each gives a sensible number of 16 bands minimum. Any bigger than that and you're getting into silly numbers, early starts and late finishes etc.
     
  12. Steve

    Steve Active Member

    Thats not what I said!
     
  13. sugarandspice

    sugarandspice Active Member

    Sorry, steve said :
     
  14. sooooper sop

    sooooper sop Member

    With me being a relative newcomer to tmp, please forgive me if I'm repeating anything said in the past......
    Brass band contesting in Britain must be the unfairest, most inconsistant and eccentric pastime ever, don't get me wrong I love it and hate it ....I'm sure you know what I mean!
    To have some poor soul locked in a box/tent and listen to possibly 20 plus bands and be expected to choose the best 3 or 4 without any guidlines or system of marking other than their own is pure tourture.
    We seem to accept the current format of contesting because it's always been done 'this' way. Surely there must be a better way, how about a national league, divided into sections with 3 or 4 contests marks averaged and the top 10 from each league qualify for the finals?
    Perhaps a consistant 'marking ' system for adudicators, with 2 judges per contest in seperate boxes?
    A CD recording of each performance, so that the judges can remind themselves of a performance, after all any 10 year old nowadays knows how to make a CD!
    Remarks and contepranious notes for each performance sealed in an envelope and opened in front of band representitives.
    I'm sure I could think of more points but would like to hear what you guys think, after all it's our movement and our contests, surely it would benifit from a little moderization?
     
  15. IanHeard

    IanHeard Member

    I concede that the rules are being correctly applied, my point is that the rules are unwittingly punitive to the larger regions.
    Having qualified for the finals on 5/6 occasions ( I`m very old!) I do understand the dynamic involved in the qualifying process and can take a knockback on the chin (usually!) but the disparity in the number of entries in this case is unusual and worth discussing and god forbid........ ..it needs a change of the rules.

    "It is broke and IMO needs fixing".
     
  16. brasscrest

    brasscrest Active Member

    I agree with you that this situation is likely to recur. So, assuming that a rule change is in order, what would you do?
     
  17. IanHeard

    IanHeard Member

    As someone else has said perhaps one or two bands could be considered for a "Wildcard" to attend the finals each year.
    Other high profile contests like the Open invite "extra" bands occasionally and no-one seems to mind that.
    If the Area contests can accommdate 20+ bands, why not the finals?(don`t forget the lower section finals don`t have to cater for the championship section)
    In today`s tough banding climate a National Finals appearance can be huge fillip to a band fortunes, lets be inclusive not be bound by outdated rules!
    Perhaps if we only had a dozen bands at the finals we could all be home by teatime!:)
     
  18. Accidental

    Accidental Supporting Member

    imo its not the rules that need changing, its the size of the regions.
    this year 82 bands competed in the L&SC region, compared with 43 in the North!
     
  19. IanHeard

    IanHeard Member

    Less but bigger regions or more but smaller ones?
    In the case of the latter we tried that and changed it to the current set-up.
     
  20. Accidental

    Accidental Supporting Member

    Same number of regions, different borders to ensure aq more even number of bands in each.
    You only have to look at a map of Britain to see how dodgy the current set-up is!
     

Share This Page