 Jamie
|
Posted: 2 November 2009, 3:04 PM
If this thread proves anything it is that you can never please everyone
There has been substantial thought and discussion about this policy over the last ten years and some solutions have been attempted and discarded, like the nefarious "interim squad".
Like many other people around the place I have provided input to the policy over the years, most recently in the last few months when I endorsed the policy that Jeff Greenwood (definitely not an old geezer) has put together.
I think it provides the opportunity for proven performers known to have a good work ethic, maturity and talent to be recognised with the honour of pre-selection and the opportunity to make the most of the fundraising opportunities out there.
The policy is intended to be restricted to the chosen few leaving plenty of places in the team to be battled over. The first application of this policy seems entirely in line with how I thought it would be applied.
Classing a policy as "weak and muddleheaded" when it is a thought out compromise between different clamouring interests seems a very easy thing to say.
|
|
SimonB
|
Posted: 2 November 2009, 5:38 PM
i guess i am out of touch. chur.
was there any discussion about coaching along with the pre-selection? is that something they have to sort out for themselves?
|
|
Marquita G
|
Posted: 3 November 2009, 1:29 AM
What does coaching have to do with selection???? One would assume that if someone puts their name forward for selection to a national representative team, to compete at a World Championship, they would already have a comprehensive training plan in place in order to achieve their goals at that competition. Presumably such a plan would include a coach of some sort. If the individual wants to perform to their full potential they must take responsibility themselves for all aspects of their preparation and not rely on someone else to do it (or not) for them. This doesn't mean they don't accept help, just that they make sure they organise that help and make sure it happens. An NZOF appointed team coach will be just one cog in the wheel an athlete can utilise on their way to the competition.
|
|
robmcd
|
Posted: 3 November 2009, 10:23 AM
Well made point Jamie. "Weak and muddle headed" are cheap shot words and I shouldn't have used them. I understand that all the correct procedures for the formulation of policy were followed and that well qualified and competent people worked on it. I also understand that battling on too long on a forum like this is not the way forward so this will probably be my final contribution.
The arguments for the policy seem to precipitate out to 3 main points -
1/ A desire to recognise proven performers
2/ The need to develop a team focus
3/ The need for as much time as possible for fundraising
Point 1
I don't usually like arguing by analogy but I can think of no better way of making my point than asking - "Does the top 6th Form student in a school earn the right to be dux of the school at the end of the next year?" Of course they don't. They have to fight for it as a 7th Former and they and other students are better off for the competition.
Point 2
Is there really a problem to be remedied here? For the two years I have personal knowledge of the answer is no. There have been tremendous managers and coaches and the competitors have been a great bunch of young people. A supportive atmosphere already exists. Indeed the policy seems to me to work against the development of a team focus rather than for it. Essentially the selectors are saying there is an A and a B team. B team members or even those missing out could quite conceivably regularly beat A team members in the year preceding JWOC and wonder at the justice of the preselections. It's unnecessary and not fair to put both groups in that position.
Point 3
From what I am picking up this seems to have been the strongest factor in the introduction of the policy. My response is based on our experience as parents of a JWOC competitor for the last two years and discussion with some other recent JWOC parents. I still can't see how preselection helps with fundraising. Individual fundraising starts with the decision to trial for JWOC (or in the case of two families I know it is a year round activity). My knowledge is shakier when it comes to the manager applying to charitable trusts but surely these applications are for the whole team once it has been selected. The cheap flights argument may have some merit but for those who are university students in particular, unknown examination dates mean that they can't predict six months out when they will be travelling. They are also unlikely to know details of pre JWOC activities and training. The manager and coach are not appointed to late January. The period between selection and competition has been too short in the past but I note that the selectors have taken much of the pressure off by moving the selection date closer to the beginning of the year. Thanks.
Rob McDonald
|
|
Jamie
|
Posted: 3 November 2009, 1:56 PM
Hey Robb, I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill. I don't really see the problem. There are always A and B people in sport it doesn't mean people can't get along and work together.
And in regards to your Point 1: Do you normally become the Dux by getting unit standards in reading recovery and woodwork?
|
|
Greg
|
Posted: 3 November 2009, 2:06 PM
A completely useless analogy, if you want to go that way, pre-selection can be called, say 'sabbatical'
Sweden and Great Britain (and I think Norway and Finland) have all used pre-selection for their WOC teams in the past 2 years at least
|
|
Keith
|
Posted: 3 November 2009, 11:05 PM
Always amazing how much controversy JWOC selection causes.
1.Personally I can see the benefit of pre-selection. Some atheletes are a cut above the rest, so it makes sense to preselect them so they don't have to worry about peaking for a trial. Yes I think greg is correct that those countries preselect. It seems to make even more sense for a junior on the otherside of the world. So they could, for example, not go to Uni and do an au pair job in denmark for a year.
2. The fact that the selectors seem to be sticking to the policy is a positive.
3. The website is rubbish, who are the juniors that were preselected to JWOC?
4. Does this thread make maptalk more intresting for you Jamie? AP is now where the banter takes place, maptalk and nopesport are kinda of dead. And I don't think the juniors have ever been quite so funny since the era of kerrison, Dravitzki, prince, stewart, barr, edwards et al
|
|
© Ruffneck Productions