Bear in mind I have been out of league bowling for the past 5 years and getting back into it.  Last night it is position round and we find out in frame 3 of the first game that a bowler on the other team did not have the required number of games to be eligible to bowl.  Instead of this bowler stopping and putting in the absent bowler that had the minimum required games and taking the absent score; he was still allowed to bowl as a "pacer".  I am well aware of what a pacer is.  My discussion with a league official is that it is position round and you are allowing a bowler whose scores do not count the opportunity to affect the oil pattern in one way or another.  He said, "Well does it really matter"?  I said it doesnt 28 frames in at this point (night was almost over).  But yes it does matter.  He just happened to be one of these bowlers that crow bars at the release point trying to generate Robert Smith rev rate and spraying it all over the middle of the lane.  So it mattered a lot.  I was coming off a run over the last month where I had shot 816, 809, and 792.  So with it being position round, you can understand how I was a little amped up going into last night.  Lo and behold my ball reaction was very inconsistent and fought to shoot 640.

I understand allowing a pacer bowl if the opposing team had nobody show up.  But it is a trio league and 2 qualifying members of that team showed up.  So there was really no reason for a pacer.  While this league official is telling me his side; I am trying to emphasize it is a position round and all points are more crucial than normal in the standings.  He said we could bring it up in the league meeting next week and my response was that I did not want to look like that one bowler in every league that everyone hates and I would just take the lumps but I guess I just come from a different place and mindset and not used to the more relaxed ways to run a league. I get this is not the big money league in that center.  But there is some competition where they run 10-15 brackets every night as well as the strike jackpot the center has.  I just thought it was a bad decision to allow an ineligible bowler the opportunity to bowl for free during a crucial week when points mattered more than normal.   

Rule 110d.  2.  Pacers are allowed unless otherwise provided by league rule.

Yeah.  I get it.  But this one has that feel like a batter trying to lay down a bunt in the 8th inning when the opposing pitcher has a no hitter going.  I just dont understand why that is allowed to take place.

Hmmm. I have to agree with Twohands on this one.

Its the principle of the event. This guy or gal didn't show up to be a pacer, so why in the heck are you going to allow him to continue as such, just because the league allows pacers?

Its pretty disingenuous to me! If I'm the secretary, I tell him thanks for coming but you should've checked your eligibility first! You place zero responsibility on the bowlers themselves. So what's to prevent this from happening again in the future since you've allowed the bending of the rules this time?

Well a few things....

Did the bowler/team know the person did not have enough games in? Did they know the league rules? The bowler may have known they only had X games in, but did not know they needed Y games in to bowl in the rolloffs.

However, it is up to the captain to know the rules, so no excuse there.

Further, if the league allows for pacers, not much you can do. Although it may seem disingenuous, remember that and make a point to bring this up during the meeting prior to league starting next season to change the rule moving forward. Or, if the league votes to keep the rule as is and allows pacers, you now know what can happen in the future.

It was allowed because everyone else was okay with it but you apparently?

If you shot 750 plus would you be making this post?

If the person had the correct number of games and you still shot 640 then would you complain about something else?

If you had the chance to go back and do it over again what would you have done differently?

Ignite,

This is all hypothetical.  He was told in the second frame of the first frame he didnt have enough games.  I was pretty clear in my original post.  As someone new to the area bowling wise; I was not going to make a huge stink about it and I did not throw any type of tantrum while I was bowling.  I dealt with it and walked out.  I want to be respected by my peers and want to respect them as well.  That has always been my approach as I want those around me to feel like they can approach me about anything bowling related.  When I went to the league official, even though I was upset on the inside I did not let it dictate the conversation.  I more or less went to him with an open mind because I didnt know how they do their leagues here compared to where I bowled for more than 35 years.  He said he gave the guy permission to keep bowling as a pacer and therefore that is where it lies whether I agree or not.  As far as what I would have done differently I really dont know since the league official ultimately allowed him to continue.  I am not a vindictive person.  At the end of the day I chalk this up to not giving up and grinding out a decent series even though the conditions were not favorable for higher scoring.

Is it possible you let this get into your head instead of another bowler "spraying it all over the middle of the lane" and causing an issue?

According to your OP, it's a trios league and I assume on a house shot. How much difference can one bowler make in a three game set?

Yes you are off base you sound like a 5 year old

Our league voted for no pacers and no subs in position rounds. If you’re not a full team member, with enough games in to have an average, you cannot bowl in position round.