Is it cheating to borrow players for contests? 4bars think so

Is borrowing players for contests:

  • Cheating

    Votes: 8 11.6%
  • Not cheating

    Votes: 52 75.4%
  • Don't care

    Votes: 9 13.0%

  • Total voters
    69

RamasII

Member
Good to see a post swimming against the tide of opinion! Thanks Phil.

Haha...

Just offering a different view...if the rankings worked better then it might be something that could work..? as the bands who have worked harder to get there would have the advantage when they needed to borrow..and the lower ones wouldnt be able to gain those better players to enhance their standing..if you follow..?!

And yes agreed about lower section doesnt mean worse player..and he is a very good player, good enough to sit in that band fulltime..
 
Last edited by a moderator:

WoodenFlugel

Moderator
Staff member
...but lets say I was doing a piece which has a huge solo for Cornet,Sop,Euph and I then borrowed, Roger Webster,Kevin Crockford and David Thornton...<snip>... I would guess that I would have gained a huge advantage in the contest...

Just picking up on this point for a moment, can anyone think of an instance where a (say) mid-ranking championship section band borrowed three or four players of the above sort of standard, sat them on the corner chairs in order for them to gain a significant advantage, with the express aim of winning a contest?
Isn't the whole thing just a moot point?
 

Bungle

Member
I think what would also annoy people is a borrowed player winning a soloists prize, but you're not going to borrow a player for a solo position if the're not any good! As been said before, a ranking of a band is no reflection of the standard of the players, we have three players who have played in championship bands and we don't even do the areas. So how do we rank, below 4th section?
 

JimboFB

Active Member
This particular example illustrates very neatly one other problem with the system, mentioned above - Paul Richards plays with Brunel Brass (a hardworking band rapidly rising), but he is ex-Sun Life and properly good... Any 1st section band could have also potentially borrowed him - and 4 years ago, he could have been borrowed for 4th section contests (I think he's been with Brunel since then?). Lower section player doesn't necessarily equal weaker player, as we all well know.

Proper good doesnt even come close Dave. But you make a good point. There were plenty of people moaning and groaning about Paul playing for Flowers. There's nothing in the rules to define how good a player is as to whether you can borrow that player or not, just what section band he is registered to play for.

And for what it is worth, Paul is fairly local based to Gloucester, is a good friend of the band, and has helped out many times since the vacancy for soprano arose.

Needless to say we have tried and tried and tried and tried to get him to 'sign' for Flowers, but i actually admire him for wanting to stick with Brunel and help a lower section band progress through the rankings.

The banding movement is only a better place with guys like Paul willing to re-invest their time and enegry into the developement of the younger generations.

Andy by the way - he was AWESOME over the weekend (for a lower section player ;) )
 

RamasII

Member
QUOTE=WoodenFlugel;804554]Just picking up on this point for a moment, can anyone think of an instance where a (say) mid-ranking championship section band borrowed three or four players of the above sort of standard, sat them on the corner chairs in order for them to gain a significant advantage, with the express aim of winning a contest?
Isn't the whole thing just a moot point?[/QUOTE]

Hi,

Yes I can remember Pontins comp....a few times if i remember correctly...if the prize money is large enough then it makes it worthwhile? lets say £1000 for third, so that means a good chance to get back some of what was paid out...(i dont do this but just offering a different view point...):D

Many times Ive made use of a bass trombonist on Euph...;)
 

RamasII

Member
Needless to say we have tried and tried and tried and tried to get him to 'sign' for Flowers, but i actually admire him for wanting to stick with Brunel and help a lower section band progress through the rankings.

Careful you might slip in to a different thread...:cool:
 

shawneuph

Supporting Member
The issue with the Championship section at Butlins was that the printed rules stated that you could not borrow a player for a principle seat, this was to stop bands getting a ringer in from a band like Corys or Dyke for example, because the Sop part or Cornet part for example may be incredibly hard (which happened about 4 years ago when we saw a couple of top sop players borrowed in), however Butlins dropped themselves in it this year by adding that a band could borrow a principle player if sanctioned by the contest officials, the officials then sanctioned the use of a number of borrowed principle players which completely went against the reasons of the original rule. The issue may seem insignificant to many but lets also remember that in the Championship Section the top 2 bands actually drew on 5 points each (Flowers 1 and 4) GUS ( 2 and 3) They were only separated into 1st (£7000) and 2nd (£3000) place by the fact that Flowers came above GUS on the set test piece. Whereas GUS did not have any borrowed players, Flowers used borrowed players on principle positions. Its easy to see why a number of people have an issue with the way officials dealt with the borrowed player rule this year, it quite probably did make a real difference to the result in the Championship section.
 

RamasII

Member
:clap:
agreed..and i thought Redbridge got someone out of retirment to cover sop? or something like that...following those rules...?

The issue with the Championship section at Butlins was that the printed rules stated that you could not borrow a player for a principle seat, this was to stop bands getting a ringer in from a band like Corys or Dyke for example, because the Sop part or Cornet part for example may be incredibly hard (which happened about 4 years ago when we saw a couple of top sop players borrowed in), however Butlins dropped themselves in it this year by adding that a band could borrow a principle player if sanctioned by the contest officials, the officials then sanctioned the use of a number of borrowed principle players which completely went against the reasons of the original rule. The issue may seem insignificant to many but lets also remember that in the Championship Section the top 2 bands actually drew on 5 points each (Flowers 1 and 4) GUS ( 2 and 3) They were only separated into 1st (£7000) and 2nd (£3000) place by the fact that Flowers came above GUS on the set test piece. Whereas GUS did not have any borrowed players, Flowers used borrowed players on principle positions. Its easy to see why a number of people have an issue with the way officials dealt with the borrowed player rule this year, it quite probably did make a real difference to the result in the Championship section.
 

shawneuph

Supporting Member
They did because they were under the impression they could not borrow a player for the Sop seat (even though they had a borrowed player lined up to dep)
 

Accidental

Supporting Member
I understand the frustration with bands putting quality borrowed players on principal seats, but how can you legislate for that without disadvantaging the bands who have genuine vacancies in principal seats?
 

shawneuph

Supporting Member
A genuine vacancy because the players that have applied are not considered good enough by the band ? I know GUS around 5 years ago could not get a Sop player so they put a cornet player on Sop for 12 months.
 

Accidental

Supporting Member
that, or because noone's applied at all yet.
We need to borrow a principal for our next contest. A quick internet search shows we really do have a hole in our player lineup and current adverts to fill the seat, but both of those 'proofs' would be pretty easy to fake if that became another rule and a band wanted to get round it!
 

shawneuph

Supporting Member
So what will you do at the area where you can not borrow any players in any seats ? Not compete ? Or you fill the vacancy with a player from within the band ?
 

Accidental

Supporting Member
Obviously not competing isn't an option!
The choices are to either fill the vacancy within the band or to use a dep who isn't attached to another band and can be registered with us, which are obviously also options for contests where borrowing is allowed - surely the aim is to just use the best people available within the rules for any given contest?

We've also been in positions where other bands have borrowed blatant ringers and arguably enjoyed a better result because of it (spot the dep from Dyke/YBS/Fodens etc was always a good game at Pontins!), but in entering the contest we all signed up to the same rules so we had to accept the consequences.
Having said that though, the situation this year at Butlins does seem extremely inconsistent and unfair.
 

ploughboy

Active Member
I can see both sides, I would say borrowing to fill empty seats or because of illness/holidays is fine. At Butlins we borrowed a 2nd Euph to cover for a holiday, a tuned percussionist to cover an empty chair, and decided not to fill the back row gap because one of our boys had to work.

In some contests though, a lower section band could borrow a player of some skill and pick pieces to enhance their performance based on said skill-full players ability.
for example - a 4th section band, in a YHBBA contest (where the rules state 4 borrowed players from any section - must be a YHBBA member band) borrowed a sop player from the top section, and played Stars and Stripes as their march therefore specifically featuring a player who was above the standard of the team. However in general i like the YHBBA's ruling, when you're borrowing players on short rehearsal time you need a bit of experience/quality to enable them to catch up to the standard of the rest of the band, whom have been practising for weeks. . .
 

WoodenFlugel

Moderator
Staff member
I understand the frustration with bands putting quality borrowed players on principal seats, but how can you legislate for that without disadvantaging the bands who have genuine vacancies in principal seats?

Or even, how do you qualify a 'quality' player over someone who is 'good' for the section or even 'average'? If you put a borrowed Alan Morrison on sop for the contest is he considered 'quality' still even if his recognised instrument isn't sop?

Herein lies the problem - its all very well saying bands shouldn't borrow above their standard, but how do you legislate for that in a clear and easy to interpret way? Or even what the band's 'standard' is in the first place?
 

Accidental

Supporting Member
Herein lies the problem - its all very well saying bands shouldn't borrow above their standard, but how do you legislate for that in a clear and easy to interpret way? Or even what the band's 'standard' is in the first place?
I honestly don't think you can!
You either allow borrowing and accept that some bands will manage to borrow better deps than others; or you don't allow borrowing and accept that some bands may not be able to do the contest at all whilst others will manage to register better deps than others.

The only caveats I think are policeable, already used by some contests, are that borrowed players can't be featured soloists and/or are ineligible for soloist & instrumentalist prizes.



I would be really interested to hear the views of the people who have voted that borrowing is cheating - don't be shy guys!
 
Last edited:

Thirteen Ball

Active Member
Just picking up on this point for a moment, can anyone think of an instance where a (say) mid-ranking championship section band borrowed three or four players of the above sort of standard, sat them on the corner chairs in order for them to gain a significant advantage, with the express aim of winning a contest?
Isn't the whole thing just a moot point?

Well, one could argue that Marsden at the last Pontins contest maybe approached this with a few borrows from fodens.... but at the end of the day they didn't break any rules so there can't be any argument - and I think all the end-chairs were their own - except a second sop which is again, all entirely legal as it left them a back-row cornet down. With the way their band can sound on any given day they were always likely winners so I doubt it changed the result.

Other thing is, I'm guessing they just had chairs to fill and simply used the contacts they had to bring in people who could do the job on a limited number of rehearsals - which on a piece like Les Preludes demands a certain quality of player. It's all very well to talk about 'ringers' but if (for example) your soprano player suddenly breaks a couple of fingers two weeks before a contest then that leaves you with someone coming in who has 1) missed most of the prep rehearsals and 2) needs to come up to speed quickly. To make up for that shortness of time a band needs to get in a player who can do the job quickly, which means a good standard of player.

At the end of the day, the borrowing rules are laid out well in advance, and any band who don't agree are free to pull out. I know that's why Emley don't do Brighouse march contest any more, and while I don't agree with their position, I can certainly respect that they've chosen to act on their beliefs rather than just complain on a website about it.
 
Last edited:

Primary

tMP Assistant
Here are some related products that tMP members are talking about. Clicking on a product will take you to tMP’s partner, Primary, where you can find links to tMP discussions about these products.

 
 
Top