After many months of fairly regular meetings and discussions it seemed that the EABA would become the billiards committee of the EASB. The committee and area representatives of the EABA had voted that they would accept the offer and would eventually disband as an independent organisation. So certain did this seem that the October Issue of this magazine carried a cover picture of Albert Hanson as secretary of the billiards committee of the EASB. Alas, at the last minute it did not work out that way. The meeting which resulted in the split was held at Heathrow and was attended by Derick Townend, Albert Hanson, John Richmond, Roy Bacon, and Malcolm Lax on behalf of the EABA; and by Nigel Oldfield, Bob Tongue, Freya Broad, Geoff Foulds, Mr R. Patterson, and Mr J. McKenzie on behalf of the EASB. It was at this meeting that differences in emphasis were made apparent, differences that the representatives of the EABA, on behalf of their membership, felt unable to accept.
On the 12th November, Albert Hanson issued a statement on behalf of the EABA committee which was circulated to all members with copies to the EASB. This main points of this statement are summarised below.
Summary of main points in the order in which they appeared in the statement.
In view of the above points and the feeling that it seemed likely that the interests of billiard players would become once again secondary to the interests of the snooker fraternity, the committee of the EABA decide not to accept the offer of becoming the billiards committee of the EASB.
The EABA secretary also wrote to Ms Freya Broad, EASB coordinator, setting out the reasons for the split. He thanked Ms Broad for the good working relationship they had established during protracted discussions and hoped that there would continue to be contacts between the two organisations. He pointed out that the game was not big enough to have two organisations arguing as to which was the more official body, and hoped that a harmonious working relationship would be arrived at sooner rather than later.
The Billiards Quarterly Review contacted the EASB with a view to obtaining their version of the events which resulted in the split. We have not received any direct communication but Mr Nigel Oldfield of the WPBSA, and who is the person who has been most heavily involved in the formation of the EASB, is quoted as saying:-
"We are very disappointed that the EABA have decided not to join the EASB in what we see as a very exciting future for snooker and billiards. We wanted the EABA to disband and become our billiards committee, so that we could all be working under one umbrella. We are fully aware of the enthusiasm and commitment of the EABA and I hope that our difference can be resolved in the future. Of course, it's not good for billiards in the long run to have two separate associations but the EASB will be running the Strachan English Amateur Championship and Strachan English Under 17 Championship. I am confident that we will become the recognised body for billiards and snooker by the Sports Council, the IBSF and the Home International Billiards and Snooker Federation."
The next development was that officials of the EABA, and officials of the EASB, separately met with representatives of The Sports Council with a view to making an application for a grant. The EABA received the following reply:-
The letter goes on to say that the Sports Council would be willing to offer its services as mediators in any discussion aimed at bringing the two bodies together. Readers will no doubt recall that it was the withdrawal of The Sports Council grant that was the beginning of the end for the B&SCC.
BQR would comment that it does not seem a totally unreasonable request to extend the closing date for entry to the championships, though February 11th seems late. However, it does seem unreasonable that dates (and venues?) should be the prerogative of the executive committee (of the EASB) - what would be the point of having a billiards committee at all if they were not given authority in these matters? As regards membership of committees, whether billiards committees, snooker committees, or the committee of the local conkers convention, it would seem more democratic that members should be elected rather than arbitrarily appointed.
We are with Mr Oldfield in hoping that the differences will be resolved. It seems that there are moves afoot for further discussions. Discussions between the EABA and the EASB are reminiscent of Tennyson's Brook, "Kingdoms come and Kingdoms go, but I go on for ever."