|
||||
|
03-25-2015, 06:38 PM | #1461 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1931
Third Division League Leaders Northern Section Batting Leaders Pitching Leaders Southern Section Batting Leaders Pitching Leaders |
03-25-2015, 06:39 PM | #1462 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1931
Third Division Top Game Performances |
03-25-2015, 06:40 PM | #1463 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1931
Third Division Top 20 Batsmen and Pitchers |
03-25-2015, 06:41 PM | #1464 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1931 Third Division Top Systems |
03-25-2015, 06:42 PM | #1465 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1931
Third Division Financial Report
__________________
Last edited by chucksabr; 03-26-2015 at 09:07 AM. |
03-27-2015, 01:45 PM | #1466 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
League Gate Collapse. Down by 37 per cent. v. 1930. The bad economic conditions of the day have taken their toll on the gates of the various spectator sports throughout Britain, and the Baseball League has proved no exception. But the steepness of the decline was quite unexpected. The official report shows that the First Division gates fell from 8,148,510 to 5,345,435, a fall of 34 per cent. ; the Second Division went from 5,358,923 last season to 3,158,306 this, a decline of 41 per cent. ; and the Third Division, which contains double the amount of clubs of the other two divisions, went from 6,571,389 to 4,133,205, a drop on 37 per cent. All told, League gates finished the season with a total of 12,636,946 spectators, down from 20,078,822 in 1930. These are spectator levels not seen since before the war, during which time there were fewer teams in the divisions, as well as no third division at all. This drastic gate decrease occurred even as admission fares were also lowered. Average fares in the top tier stood at 1/3, down from 1/8 five seasons ago and down 2d from last season. Second Division fares were 1/-, down from 1/2 in 1930 ; and Third Division fares stood at 9d, down from 10d a year ago. None of that mattered, however, as the men of Britain stayed away in droves to conserve their precious dwindling resources in the face of widespread unemployment. |
03-28-2015, 09:54 AM | #1467 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Hunt v. Everton Baseball Club Decision To-morrow. This is an appeal from the judgment of the learned Judge of the Liverpool County Court, and it is a test case. By an agreement in writing, dated March 15, 1931, the defendants agreed to pay the plaintiff £9 a week from that date until September 26, 1931, in consideration of his services as a professional baseballer. Rule 7 in the Baseball League Handbook, 1921, stated that “the maximum wage, except as hereinafter provided, shall be £9 per week.” The plaintiff was qualified to receive the maximum salary. In the Baseball League Handbook, 1922, Rule 7 had been altered to read as follows :— “The maximum wage, except as hereinafter provided, shall be £9 per week during the spring practice period, provided the club takes this period outside of the team’s immediate area, and during the playing season.” Finally, in the Baseball League Handbook, 1931, Rule 7 had been amended to read as follows :— “The maximum wage, except as hereinafter provided, shall be £6 per week during the spring practice period, provided the club takes this period outside of the team’s immediate area, and during the playing season.” The question for the Court was whether the agreement was affected by Rule 7 as revised in the 1931 Handbook. The learned County Court Judge had found in favour of the defendants. Mr. J. E. Singleton, K.C., and Mr. F. Brocklehurst appeared for the appellant; and Mr. Wingate Saul, K.C., and Mr. P. E. Sandlands for the respondent. Mr. Singleton argued that the agreement had been in force for more than a month before the revised rule was introduced on November 17, 1930. Clause 4 of the agreement ran :— “The player shall observe and be subject to all the rules, regulations and by-laws of the Baseball Association, the Baseball League, the Britannia League, &c. … of which this club shall be a member. And this agreement shall be subject to any action which shall be taken by the Baseball Association under Rule 26 of their rules for suspension or termination of the baseball season; and, if any such suspension or termination shall be decided upon, the payment of wages provided for in clause 8 shall likewise be suspended or terminated as the case may be.” Under this clause the plaintiff had to observe the rules and regulations; but these only referred to discipline. There was no clause in the agreement which altered the terms of payment. If the parties had desired to make a stipulation in any circumstances which might arise, it should have been expressly stated. There was only one case in the contemplation of the parties when this might arise, and that was when the time of the playing season might be suspended or terminated, in which case the contract would cease to operate. The plaintiff had performed satisfactorily the services expected of him; and he was entitled to look to the club for the remuneration provided by the terms of the agreement. The League prevented agreements from being entered into for longer than a certain period. By Rule 31 of the Baseball Association Handbook an agreement must not be entered into for less than four weeks, or not longer than the current season, or for the last three months of the current season and the next. The fact that such conditions as to the length of service were imposed did not give the right to alter the remuneration stipulated. Clause 4 of the agreement said that the player should be bound by the rules, regulations, &c., and that the agreement should be subject to any action which should be taken by the Baseball Association and their member leagues. The agreement was in common form. Although by Rule 24 any rule might be altered, subject to certain conditions, the player was only so affected as to rules of discipline. His right under the agreement which had been accrued due could not be affected by a rule which was passed after the date of the agreement. Mr. Wingate Saul argued that the learned County Court Judge decided the question rightly when he considered that the rules, regulations and by-laws in clause 4 referred not merely to the rules then in force, but rules which would come into operation at any time. The plaintiff was a player with many years’ experience, and he knew that the rules as to remuneration had been altered before, and they followed the cost of living. The plaintiff had undertaken to obey all the rules, &c., and the word “all” must be taken to refer not only to discipline but to payments. Rule 7 also stated the wages were only payable in accordance with this rule. The words in Rule 7 as to obeying all the regulations and by-laws were the same in 1922 as in 1931; it was only the amount of remuneration that varied. The plaintiff could not be taken to be obeying the provisions of Rule 7 unless he fell in with the new regulations which the League had power to make. The Court will deliver judgment to-morrow. Solicitors: Mr. T. H. Hinchcliffe, Liverpool; Messrs. Mott and Parkes, for Messrs. Noke and Batchelor, Bootle. |
03-29-2015, 02:46 PM | #1468 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE KING’S BENCH DIVISION A Professional Baseballer’s Contract Hunt v. Everton Baseball Club (Before Mr. Justice Pelfrey and Mr. Justice Davis) Their Lordships allowed this appeal from the judgment of the Judge of the Liverpool County Court. The plaintiff was a professional baseballer, and on October 11, 1930, he entered into a written agreement with the defendant club by which he was to receive £9 a week beginning with the first day of spring practise, March 23, 1931, until September 26, 1931, a period of twenty seven weeks, in consideration of his services as a player. Another clause provided that the plaintiff should observe and be subject to all the rules, regulations, and by-laws of the Baseball Association, Baseball League, and any other combination of which the club should be a member, and that, if any suspension or termination of the baseball season were decided on by the Baseball Association, the payment of wages to the plaintiff should likewise be suspended or terminated. Effective on the date of the agreement, the rules of the Baseball League provided that the maximum wage for players should be £9 a week. During the continuance of the agreement it was decreased to £6 a week. The defendants refused to pay the plaintiff £9 a week, contending that the clause which made the plaintiff subject to the rules of the League bound him to accept alterations which were made in those rules from time to time. The plaintiff thereupon brought this action in the County Court claiming £81. The County Count judge gave judgment in favour of the defendants, and the plaintiff appealed. Mr. J. E. Singleton, K.C., and Mr. F. Brocklehurst appeared for the appellant; Mr. Wingate Saul, K.C., and Mr. P. E. Sandlands for the respondents. Judgments. Mr. Justice Pelfrey, in giving judgment, said that the case was a test case, and the judgment of the Court would affect many baseball players and their clubs. The agreement contained what was, on the face of it, an unqualified obligation on the club to pay the plaintiff £9 a week. The County Court Judge had considered only one of the questions which arose in the case. He had assumed that the plaintiff was subject to the rules of the Baseball League, and had asked himself whether he was subject to those rules as altered from time to time, or only to those which were in force when the agreement was made. The County Court Judge had overlooked the very important question which arose before the question which he had dealt with was reached—namely, whether the plaintiff was subject to those rules at all. In his (his Lordship’s) opinion, the plaintiff was not subject to those rules, and he had never submitted, so far as the agreement for payment was concerned, to the power of the League to alter its rules and diminish the maximum wage. The clause providing for the payment of £9 a week could have been made subject to the rules for the time being for the League, but it had not been so drafted. The clause which provided that the player should be subject to the rules did not qualify the payment clause. That clause provided for two things—(a) the extent to which the player was to be personally bound by the rules of the League; and (b) the extent to which the agreement was to be subject to those rules. That was limited to one matter—namely, the termination or suspension of the season by the Baseball Association and the effect on the payment of wages. The defendant’s argument appeared to be unreasonable. New League rules might reduce the maximum salary from £9 to £4 6s. A man who had been content to be bound by an agreement for half a year at £9 would find his remuneration halved. No one could know whether he would have entered into the agreement at all if he had known that such terms were possible. There was no option for him under the contract: he would still be bound. The appeal would be allowed. Mr. Justice Davis agreed. The appeal was accordingly allowed, with costs, and judgment entered for the plaintiff for £81. Leave to appeal was granted. Solicitors: Mr. T. H. Hinchcliffe, Liverpool; Messrs. Mott and Parkes, for Messrs. Noke and Batchelor, Bootle. |
04-19-2015, 12:40 PM | #1469 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,418
|
It's been three weeks since the last post! Have high wage bills killed the Baseball League...?!
__________________
"We're all behind our baseball team..." |
04-19-2015, 08:08 PM | #1470 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Quote:
The League is still in operation. I have been a bit behind on it for two reasons:
|
|
04-23-2015, 01:09 PM | #1471 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
League Halts Live Radio Broadcasts. In reaction to the drastically falling gate of the past several seasons, the Baseball League has moved to disallow broadcasts of all live league baseball games commencing with the 1932 season. The move comes as attendance to league games have dropped by 63 per cent. since the high mark of the 1925 season, due to the economic difficulties enveloping Great Britain. Occasional League broadcasts have been occurring since the first match was played on the radio in 1926. The argument of detractors against radio is that national broadcasts of popular clubs and games undermines support for local clubs both in the lower levels of the League, and of non-League and amateur clubs around the country, especially in the early portions of the season, when the weather is particularly cold and the elements unkind, and a man must be a diehard, dyed-in-the-wool enthusiast to turn up at a match. But it really requires no enthusiasm to sit at ease with slippers on, peacefully smoking and listening in. The concern of the League is that baseball is being transformed by radio into a “parlour game” and is thus challenging the commitment of the dedicated supporter. Supporters of radio broadcasts of League matches counter that running commentaries broadcast during the game actually help popularise the sport by bringing the thrill of the match to those who are only temporarily unable to afford the price of admission during the current slump. The director of Outside Broadcasting claims to have “indisputable evidence of a growing interest in British baseball directly due to broadcasting running commentaries.” There is still a great likelihood that the most important of matches, such as those contests in the EOI Cup Series, might still be broadcast to the degree that they can be considered sporting events of national import, in the same manner as the Grand National, the Derby, the Boat Race, Wimbledon, Cricket Tests, and the FA Cup matches are so considered. |
04-26-2015, 12:48 PM | #1472 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Union Scores Victory for Indigent Players. Baseballers won a great victory in Parliament in London on Thursday. The Professional Baseball Players’ Union helped to secure a judgment that will allow its players to apply for the dole during the close season. The Union has successfully lobbied both Houses to submit a bill stipulating that professional baseballers are to be re-categorised as “seasonal workers” who are released from employment annually once the season closes for the winter, and then re-engaged each March to begin spring practice sessions. Assuming Royal Assent is given, baseballers may now apply for unemployment insurance benefits during the winter, should they not find suitable other work. This win comes on the heels of an agreement with the Baseball League to return to the original £9 maximum salary structure after the League earned a black eye for the manner in which it handled the 33 per cent. wages cut it had imposed on the players last season. As appropriate as the cut may have been given the present economic conditions, it became clear that the people of Britain, supporters and non-supporters alike, laid their sympathies with the players against those of the League. This caught League officials unawares as they had broadly assumed that supporters would resent luxurious wages for men getting paid for playing children's games in the sunshine and warmth of summer. |
04-27-2015, 01:31 PM | #1473 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
A New League Season. A remarkable feature of League baseball, which will be resumed to-morrow, will be the few newcomers of established reputation. Even those clubs of enormous financial resources are shy to buy men at high prices, and those of the industrial centres have, in the present economic conditions, preferred to explore the byways in a search for recruits rather than go into the open market. Maybe the demand for players has been found to exceed the supply, but it is none the less significant that the leading teams will be found to be little changed from last season. Leicester City, who lost the EOI Cup last season to co-Champions Manchester United, have made but one acquisition, O’Friel, a diminutive Londonderryman with great speed and surprising power at the bat. United made no great moves to counteract the Foxes’ foray, save that of exchanging Williams for Morton of Sunderland, dealing from a surplus of catching to fix their problem in the right field. Other clubs’ acquisitions have bordered on the mundane and unremarkable. Gladu, a sharp French “Canadien”, will man the “hot corner” and likely take the place of the recently retired Lowe in the batting order for Walsall Swifts, who are fighting to regain some relevance. They have many of the top young players in the game and may yet achieve their ends. Throughout the League, however, the outlook on the pitch is decidedly cloudy given the dearth of improvements made by the various clubs. As it happens, Leicester City will meet Manchester United at Old Trafford to-morrow to start the season. They are, of course, considered among the leaders of the Championship. Sunderland and Preston North End are also top contenders for Cup series positions. But the most interesting side will be that of Middlesbrough who, on the back of last season’s Second Division Baseballer of the Year Barclay, have rocketed up from the Third Division to become one of the best baseball clubs in the kingdom, taking their place in the top tier to prove their mettle among the greatest of British baseball clubs. The other club promoted to the First Division, Stockport County, do not look as strong and may fall right back down by season’s end, as they do not have any great players of note to carry them forth. In the Second Division, the better clubs appear to be Coventry City, Torquay United, Blackpool and Gillingham. London’s best opportunity to place a fourth club in the Championship for next season appear to be Charlton Athletic, beginning their season to-morrow at home against Northampton Town, and who have been promoted from the Southern Section of the Third Division and celebrated with smart new kits more worthy of a good baseball club than a bad theatre troupe. The other promoted club for the lowest level, Barnsley, will almost certainly not be a club fighting for promotion. The top clubs in the Third Division from the Northern Section are Leeds United and Stoke City, and no other clubs appear close. From the Southern Section, Birmingham and Swindon Town will be the best contenders, although Tottenham Hotspur may be a dark horse club and surprise with a very good season. A new club, Ipswich Town, will take the place of Reading in the Southern Section, as the latter lost their bid for re-election after a disastrous campaign last season. There is otherwise disappointment in the Capital with the fall of Chelsea back to the bottom tier, which now makes eight clubs in place there, while only three London clubs are in the top flight and only two in the middle. It is clear that baseball has not taken up in the south as it has in the north. While this is also true of football, it is also the case that the greatest football club in the land, Arsenal, represents London to the rest the country, which helps make the case for the capital in that sport. In baseball, however, the sport has been well established as the Lancashire game, and any attempts to break from that mould will have to start with the dedication to establish top clubs in the south in general, and London in particular. |
04-27-2015, 01:39 PM | #1474 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1932: Clubs . . |
04-27-2015, 01:44 PM | #1475 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1932: Club Locations
First Division Second Division Third Division Northern Section (Bradford Park Avenue not shown) Third Division Southern Section (minus London clubs) Third Division Southern Section (London clubs only) |
04-27-2015, 07:32 PM | #1476 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Surprising One Run Victory. The surging Middlesbrough baseball club, new to the First Division this season after having raced up through the pyramid starting from the Third Division just two seasons ago, are showing themselves to possess quite some mettle as they attempt the impossible task of securing a championship as a phoenix club. After Boro pitcher Bray held Fulham scoreless in the first innings of yesterday’s match at Ayresome Park, Cottagers hurler MacDougal served up a base on balls to Woods, who promptly nicked the second base on the former’s first offering to batsman Tansey. Tansey then delivered a single to the centre field which scored Woods. From that point on MacDougal did not concede either a run or a base hit, although he did walk four more. Never the less, in baseball, it is not how many base hits your team makes that determines the outcome—it is how many runs, and sometimes, one run can be enough. And so it was yesterday as Bray took the measure of the Fulham club by conceding no runs, and incidentally, only three base hits in total. As such, it was quite a fast game, completed in a single tick under an hour and a half, quicker than even a typical football match, and before they knew it, the Middlesbrough faithful had seen their club earn the one run to nil victory, their thirty-fourth of the season against only twenty-three defeats. That is good enough to place Boro fourth on the top tier table, only two and one half lengths out of the second EOI series spot. |
04-28-2015, 02:35 PM | #1477 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1932 First Division Results |
04-28-2015, 02:36 PM | #1478 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1932 EOI Cup Series Preston North End defeated Leicester City Four Matches to Three |
04-28-2015, 02:38 PM | #1479 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1932
First Division Champions and EOI Cup Winners Preston North End Lilywhites |
04-28-2015, 02:41 PM | #1480 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In the canyons of your mind
Posts: 3,172
|
Baseball League 1932
First Division EOI Cup Runners Up Leicester City Foxes |
Bookmarks |
Tags |
britain, england, europe, promotion, relegation |
Thread Tools | |
|
|