Author Topic: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification (Read 19734 times)

morpheus · « **on:** March 19, 2016, 02:49:11 PM »

Stumbled across this on Facebook...

https://www.change.org/p/united-states-bowling-recertify-the-jackal-and-jackal-carnage-for-usbc-play

Ken De Beasto · « **Reply #76 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:20:58 PM »

OK so the argument is that USBC didn't do their job for so long thus the jackals ban should be voided? Or because they don't check up on other balls or other companies the ball should be voided??? At the end of the day the jackals are still going to be illegal.... Even if you field test other balls....

Sure USBC should inspect every company balls but I don't see why would any of us want to make an illegal ball legal.

And Morpheus brings up if do you really want to give another reason to bowlers to quit bowling if they buy a ball and can't use it the next. If we don't take it away then why have rules in the first place. Why not just make bowling so easy that bowlers will want to stay bowling. Why not give the new guy who shot a 300 in practice a 300 ring I mean it will keep that guy happy I'm sure he will stick around bowling.

The bottom line is the ball has to be banned and stop asap. If they continued to let the ball go into the market how would you feel as a regular bowler going into a pro shop buying a jackal then being told a week later the ball was suppose to be ban a week ago but usbc wanted to make sure with motiv that they are fine with the ban . USBC this n that wrong here n there that does not matter that is another topic. Them not doing their job does not justify making the jackal legal........

JustRico · « **Reply #77 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:22:39 PM »

http://youtu.be/e9mf3Bypyk8

freak761 · « **Reply #78 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:29:15 PM »

charlest, who said anything about awards? This is about USBC's ignorance and arrogance, it's unwillingness to listen or consider options or suggestions from it's members, and doing what's in the best interests of those members. They're not, if you disagree, fine. I respect your opinion as always.

charlest · « **Reply #79 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:41:31 PM »

Initially, this situation was filled with vindictiveness and frustration and readiness to blame everyone and anyone. Now it is just becoming a sad and pathetic picture of our sport and the game it is based upon.

charlest · « **Reply #80 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:44:28 PM »

Quote from: freak761 on March 20, 2016, 07:29:15 PM

charlest, who said anything about awards? This is about USBC's ignorance and arrogance, it's unwillingness to listen or consider options or suggestions from it's members, and doing what's in the best interests of those members. They're not, if you disagree, fine. I respect your opinion as always.

I did. Duh!
About 90% of the sanctioned bowlers I have seen are only concerned about the awards they used to and no longer receive. I was just pointing out the narrow view that many people have of the role of the USBC in administering our sport and our game.

WOWZERS · « **Reply #81 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:45:40 PM »

My ridiculous analogies are only examples of a USBC rule being broken, just like how Motiv broke the rule to not produce any new balls with a diff of greater than .060.

Sorry if you don't agree. I agree with the immediate banning of the ball.

I also agree I wish that Motiv had more time to prepare for this.
I also agree I wish the USBC would have caught this on their own.

If anyone doesn't like it, and I really do not like the USBC on many attributes, you and I are free to start a new bowling organization sanctioning body. Nobody is forcing you or I to be a USBC member. You and I are choosing to bowl a USBC sanctioned league. Compel your league to not sanction with the USBC and go without sanction, or to start your own sanction in your local association next year. The only way the USBC will EVER change is when there is a distinct and real rival that can compete and possibly exceed the USBC. Until then, with no other sanctioning body, the USBC knows they are the only game in town.

Look at the NHRA, IHRA, UHRA, PDRA, and so on. Multiple different drag racing sanctioning bodies. Why? Groups of racers did not like one or more of the existing sanctioning bodies, and formed a group that eventually started a new sanctioning organization.

charlest · « **Reply #82 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:46:01 PM »

Just an FYI -
In a small local county tournament today (equivalent of the Nationals :team, singles, doubles), they had 2 printouts. One was of the Jackal and one was of the Carnage, saying that these balls have recently been removed from the USBC approval list and anyone using them would be immediately disqualified.

WOWZERS · « **Reply #83 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:49:18 PM »

Glad they are enforcing the rules.

morpheus · « **Reply #84 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:52:04 PM »

Quote from: Ken De Beasto on March 20, 2016, 07:20:58 PM

OK so the argument is that USBC didn't do their job for so long thus the jackals ban should be voided? Or because they don't check up on other balls or other companies the ball should be voided??? At the end of the day the jackals are still going to be illegal.... Even if you field test other balls....

Sure USBC should inspect every company balls but I don't see why would any of us want to make an illegal ball legal.

And Morpheus brings up if do you really want to give another reason to bowlers to quit bowling if they buy a ball and can't use it the next. If we don't take it away then why have rules in the first place. Why not just make bowling so easy that bowlers will want to stay bowling. Why not give the new guy who shot a 300 in practice a 300 ring I mean it will keep that guy happy I'm sure he will stick around bowling.

The bottom line is the ball has to be banned and stop asap. If they continued to let the ball go into the market how would you feel as a regular bowler going into a pro shop buying a jackal then being told a week later the ball was suppose to be ban a week ago but usbc wanted to make sure with motiv that they are fine with the ban . USBC this n that wrong here n there that does not matter that is another topic. Them not doing their job does not justify making the jackal legal........

As I've stated many times, for a core that's been on the market for 4 years across 5 different balls, I don't think a grace period of 30 - 60 days was a horrible option to give members and/or the manufacturer time to replace these products. Not everyone has 6 balls and can just use something else so they either use a house/spare ball or don't bowl.

morpheus · « **Reply #85 on:** March 20, 2016, 07:57:01 PM »

Quote from: WOWZERS on March 20, 2016, 07:45:40 PM

My ridiculous analogies are only examples of a USBC rule being broken, just like how Motiv broke the rule to not produce any new balls with a diff of greater than .060.

Sorry if you don't agree. I agree with the immediate banning of the ball.

I also agree I wish that Motiv had more time to prepare for this.
I also agree I wish the USBC would have caught this on their own.

If anyone doesn't like it, and I really do not like the USBC on many attributes, you and I are free to start a new bowling organization sanctioning body. Nobody is forcing you or I to be a USBC member. You and I are choosing to bowl a USBC sanctioned league. Compel your league to not sanction with the USBC and go without sanction, or to start your own sanction in your local association next year. The only way the USBC will EVER change is when there is a distinct and real rival that can compete and possibly exceed the USBC. Until then, with no other sanctioning body, the USBC knows they are the only game in town.

Look at the NHRA, IHRA, UHRA, PDRA, and so on. Multiple different drag racing sanctioning bodies. Why? Groups of racers did not like one or more of the existing sanctioning bodies, and formed a group that eventually started a new sanctioning organization.

Here's the ridiculous analogies I was referring too quoted from your previous post...

"So we let this one ball slide, where does it stop?

Can I pass the fouline next time by .004 of an inch? Against you Morpheus? Or will you say, nah...you only passed it by .004, its ok?

How about the next rack that comes down against you in play Morpheus only has 9 pins...illegal rack, but the bowler says, hey, we allowed illegal balls, last week the guy passed the foul line, the light went off, but we said heck with it and counted it, why not racks with only 9 pins?

I am shooting a spare, ball goes into the gutter, ball pops out and I get the spare. Illegal, but since we let an illegal ball go, illegal racks, illegal tosses that went past the foul line, now we are going to count a shot that popped out of the gutter as well."

Ken De Beasto · « **Reply #86 on:** March 20, 2016, 08:04:03 PM »

Quote from: morpheus on March 20, 2016, 07:52:04 PM

Quote from: Ken De Beasto on March 20, 2016, 07:20:58 PM
OK so the argument is that USBC didn't do their job for so long thus the jackals ban should be voided? Or because they don't check up on other balls or other companies the ball should be voided??? At the end of the day the jackals are still going to be illegal.... Even if you field test other balls....

Sure USBC should inspect every company balls but I don't see why would any of us want to make an illegal ball legal.

And Morpheus brings up if do you really want to give another reason to bowlers to quit bowling if they buy a ball and can't use it the next. If we don't take it away then why have rules in the first place. Why not just make bowling so easy that bowlers will want to stay bowling. Why not give the new guy who shot a 300 in practice a 300 ring I mean it will keep that guy happy I'm sure he will stick around bowling.

The bottom line is the ball has to be banned and stop asap. If they continued to let the ball go into the market how would you feel as a regular bowler going into a pro shop buying a jackal then being told a week later the ball was suppose to be ban a week ago but usbc wanted to make sure with motiv that they are fine with the ban . USBC this n that wrong here n there that does not matter that is another topic. Them not doing their job does not justify making the jackal legal........

As I've stated many times, for a core that's been on the market for 4 years across 5 different balls, I don't think a grace period of 30 - 60 days was a horrible option to give members and/or the manufacturer time to replace these products. Not everyone has 6 balls and can just use something else so they either use a house/spare ball or don't bowl.

For sure I dont disagree with having a grace period but the timing they conducted these field test sucks because of nationals. Always pros n cons if they dont ban now be easier on people. Con maybe a jackal wins the nationals and you know some guy will claim it was all ball no bowling skill. Either way the ball needed to be banned and not RE-CERTIFIED like the subject at hand.

morpheus · « **Reply #87 on:** March 20, 2016, 08:36:12 PM »

Quote from: Ken De Beasto on March 20, 2016, 08:04:03 PM

Quote from: morpheus on March 20, 2016, 07:52:04 PM
Quote from: Ken De Beasto on March 20, 2016, 07:20:58 PM
OK so the argument is that USBC didn't do their job for so long thus the jackals ban should be voided? Or because they don't check up on other balls or other companies the ball should be voided??? At the end of the day the jackals are still going to be illegal.... Even if you field test other balls....

Sure USBC should inspect every company balls but I don't see why would any of us want to make an illegal ball legal.

And Morpheus brings up if do you really want to give another reason to bowlers to quit bowling if they buy a ball and can't use it the next. If we don't take it away then why have rules in the first place. Why not just make bowling so easy that bowlers will want to stay bowling. Why not give the new guy who shot a 300 in practice a 300 ring I mean it will keep that guy happy I'm sure he will stick around bowling.

The bottom line is the ball has to be banned and stop asap. If they continued to let the ball go into the market how would you feel as a regular bowler going into a pro shop buying a jackal then being told a week later the ball was suppose to be ban a week ago but usbc wanted to make sure with motiv that they are fine with the ban . USBC this n that wrong here n there that does not matter that is another topic. Them not doing their job does not justify making the jackal legal........

As I've stated many times, for a core that's been on the market for 4 years across 5 different balls, I don't think a grace period of 30 - 60 days was a horrible option to give members and/or the manufacturer time to replace these products. Not everyone has 6 balls and can just use something else so they either use a house/spare ball or don't bowl.

For sure I dont disagree with having a grace period but the timing they conducted these field test sucks because of nationals. Always pros n cons if they dont ban now be easier on people. Con maybe a jackal wins the nationals and you know some guy will claim it was all ball no bowling skill. Either way the ball needed to be banned and not RE-CERTIFIED like the subject at hand.

The Jackal has already been used at the open so all the more reason for me to define a grace period. In fact, Sweden did define a grace period but if individual organizations like the PBA want to ban immediately, that would be entirely up to what they believe is best for their members.

As for recertification, I signed the petition because I want transparency in this process and the USBC has provided no details about the "field testing" that identified the issue. If the issue was identified by an anonymous donation of balls for testing, I think it calls into question the credibility of anything approved or banned by that organization.

JustRico · « **Reply #88 on:** March 20, 2016, 08:43:08 PM »

As for recertification, I signed the petition because I want transparency in this process and the USBC has provided no details about the "field testing" that identified the issue. If the issue was identified by an anonymous donation of balls for testing, I think it calls into question the credibility of anything approved or banned by that organization.
[/quote]

Exactly my point...

Ken De Beasto · « **Reply #89 on:** March 20, 2016, 09:03:42 PM »

For sure i understand that part that you guys want proof. But Im just saying and few others are saying is Illegal = ban nothing wrong with it. not Illegal= its ok just let it slide. Non of us disagree that proof need to be shown I mean come on now your not guilty until proven guilty

Jorge300 · « **Reply #90 on:** March 22, 2016, 12:29:30 PM »

I am sure I will take flak for this but:

I am sick and tired of hearing that this core was approved for x years and across y number of balls!

By saying that, you are implying that Motiv knowingly manufactured a ball out of compliance and thumbed their nose at the USBC by sending them test balls in compliance while manufacturing their illegal balls. I, for one, do not think that is the case. The core, as designed, is in compliance. Something in the manufacturing process in the not to distant past when wrong, whether it was a change in materials, a change in the mold do to overuse, or something else, we do not know. That is what caused the balls to now be out of compliance. The issue is that Motiv did not detect this and correct it. That is where the anger should be placed, if there is any at all.

Rico, someone else stated this and will again, you probably have forgotten more about this game then I will ever know. I respect your opinion and that knowledge. But, I don't understand your stance. Why is wrong that someone, whether it was a competitor or a random citizen, sent the USBC a case of balls it found to be illegal and asked them to check them? Isn't that part of competition, making sure you understand your competitors products so you can produce better ones? And do you not think that this happens in other industries? Now, the penalty part is different story. I personally feel the USBC was correct in removing the balls from competition. As far as the original Jackals go, unless you know exactly when the defect started, you can't allow any of them to be used. Potentially, every ball made after the ones tested by the USBC to approve them initially, could be illegal. Or potentially, only the last few hundred made are illegal. But there is no way to differentiate that especially since 99% of them are now drilled. It shouldn't matter if the difference found makes a true advantage or not, illegal is illegal. What if the USBC found the illegal balls, made a deal with Motiv to stop manufacturing them, correct the mistake and then start again. People would be wondering why there was a shortage of Jackals and Jackal Carnage 's in a little while and it then came out about them being illegal....where is the transparency there? If that is truly what you are concerned about then that scenario should upset you even more.

Author Topic: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification (Read 19734 times)

morpheus

USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

Ken De Beasto

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

JustRico

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

freak761

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

charlest

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

charlest

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

WOWZERS

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

charlest

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

WOWZERS

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

morpheus

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

morpheus

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

Ken De Beasto

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

morpheus

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

JustRico

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

Ken De Beasto

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification

Jorge300

Re: USBC Petition for Jackal Recertification