What should happen if there is no umpire appointed and the skips cannot agree on a dispute?

In the scenario where there is no umpire appointed and the skips cannot agree on a dispute, the most suitable course of action is for the skips to choose a competent neutral person as an umpire. This approach emphasizes the principle of fairness and ensures that the game can continue with an objective decision-maker. By selecting a neutral person, the skips are taking proactive steps to resolve the dispute in a way that maintains the integrity of the game.

Choosing a competent neutral person helps facilitate an impartial resolution, allowing players to resume play with clarity and mutual agreement. This method reflects the broader spirit of sportsmanship in bowls, where the focus is on fair competition and collaboration among players.

The other options do not adequately address the situation. Continuing the game without resolution could lead to further disputes and dissatisfaction among players, while stopping the game until an official arrives would unnecessarily disrupt play. Relying solely on the controlling body may not provide immediate assistance, especially if a dispute occurs mid-game; it's more effective for the players to take control of the situation themselves by appointing a neutral party.