A Better President Shield…

[01kay]

Hello All,

Now that this years President Shield is over and done with I would like to point out a few things that I believe will help improve this competition for future generations. The President Shield at the moment is a competition that junior bowlers around the country dream to compete in, however for some juniors even when they have reached that plateau of gaining a place on their states President Shield team their dreams of helping their state to victory are somewhat shattered by things beyond their control, I believe that a certain rule should be implemented to help those such bowlers so that as a whole their President Shield experience is more enjoyable and that the competition itself is brought up to a much more fair standard.

After looking at some of the results this year I notice that two separate teams had players which had bowled less then three games each, when I discovered this I was outraged, now I’m not judging the coaches of theses teams as they probably had there reasons and I wish to avoid angry responses but why should a person who has paid as much money and put in as much effort in training, fundraising, etc be forced to become a bench warmer, what people seem to miss is that these people who are not given a fair opportunity often feel as though they are not needed or where unable to contribute, because of this there will to bowl or there desire can become fundamentally damaged, my point is that we have these competitions to help encourage young bowlers to become better as both a bowler and a person but in the end, as some teams showed, we just let them warm seats.

My suggestion; that a rule be implemented stating that each person must bowl atleast a certain amount of games, this rule would stop teams from playing there best bowlers every game and in doing so would create a much more competitive environment, but most importantly this rule would give every bowler the opportunity to contribute to their team.

Now I know that wouldn’t be the first person to suggest this rule but I think that it must be implemented, I don’t care if its not a popular decision because in the end it is the right decision and the TBA should take note of this as its there responsibility to help bowlers instead of letting them warm seats, I look forward to your responses, particular the responses of those bowlers who bowled in the President Shield as juniors and went on to represent there country.

Regards,

01kay

 

[Dj bruv on da mix]

mmm tough one!... You can really only bowl someone if form warrants!.. you cant bowl someone because they have to bowl a certain amount games!, If bowling is to be taken seriously enough.. You Have to earn your right to bowl and not be a charity case... I bowled 2 games of President shield back in 1991 and my form was the reason, i had shot sh*t in nationals and then shot 2 games of sh*t in shield... So thats my thoughts! ( maybe only take 6 away instead of 7)

Bruv

 

[01kay]

Well if a persons hasn't earnt the right to bowl why then are they on the state team? If there not there to bowl games why take them away? Why make them spead thousands of dollars to warm seats? Besides which aren't the morals of sport to encourage people rather then discourage them? Aren't we discouraging people from entering these types of events, eg; "Congrats son you made the state team, now go fetch everyone a drink..."

As for the six players instead of the seven I think that should also be considered.

 

[Jay_212]

You have made a valid point there 01Kay... But i have noticed over the last few years, especially with the NNSW team and i know its the case with others, that the roll offs are struggling to make enough people to make teams and that the teams are becoming alot younger/less experienced, forcing teams to use the draft system.

This year, the NNSW team had 3 new boys and 3 new girls, we also lost a considerable number of good bowlers last year due to ageing out. Often during roll offs, teams are forced to select bowlers who struggle to make a 120 average because the local talent pool just isnt young enough. Dont get me wrong though there is alot of young rising stars out there. Although it all most seems like you dont have to earn your right to bowl for your state/zone, you just have to show up and pay your entry fee and your in (in some cases)!

It is a difficult decision for coaches and captains to sit younger or lesser experienced bowlers out of important games during shield but unfortunately the trend in age brackets in shield these days forces the older and more experienced bowlers to get the games. I know the shield experience is all about fun and making friends.. but remember, most importantly, you are there to bowl to win!!

Jay Bryson
NNSW President Shield Boys Captain 2005

 

[BT]

I agree with you Jay...its getting harder and harder each year

You also have to remember...WHY CHANGE A WINNING LINEUP???? No doubt one of the teams 01kay is talking about would be SA Boys. Why change a winning line-up there??? they were winning their points and look what happened. The scores may not have been high but at least points were being added. Michael and Aaron had no problems with what was happening...infact Aaron was stoked that he was getting a medal. I think that making a minimum amount of games is not a good idea as it can become detrimental to a team winning or losing.

 

[bitchy lil brunette]

Why Don't They Make The Shield Teams 5 man teams instead of 7?

 

[Rowdy]

5 man teams is a bit of a push

For instance, our team (Vic Girls) had one injured. If we were forced to play her or have one less bowler, then the decision lies- have her feel the pressure to bowl for the sake of the team and only hurt herself more, or have her sit out and lose any chance we have of winning.

The same thing happened last year, with one of our girls having to pull out in the middle of a game. No matter what, there needs to be a team member there to replace them, and i doubt you would have your reserve flying up for shield for the rare chance of bowling if someone gets injured.

On another point, there's the fact of teams having their best chance of winning. if you have 4 strong bowlers, bowling well all week, you want to be playing them as much as you can. A weaker bowler would surely know they are not bowling to the standard that is needed to win. Once again, i didnt bowl many games in my first year, but hey, its a team effort, i was there supporting my team the whole time and we won. I didn't walk away thinking i wish i had bowled more games, i walked away thinking- WE WON!!

So as much as it may be difficult for some people to sit out a lot of games, it something that has to be accepted. Less members in a team only applies more pressure to the bowlers there.. not that there isn't enough already!!

Everybody should just go out there and enjoy themselves. Bowling or not bowling, your apart of a shield team, competing against the best juniors in the country.

Jess

 

[da_cowman]

Thats like saying that the substitutes in a football, basketball, rugby league, rugby union, netball or afl team have to be used in the starting line up for a certain amount of games each season. But just because the players in those made it through the youth trials or were bought from another club does not give them a right to start x amount of games each season. Form is everything. If your team is on a winning streak of 10 games undefeated would you even dream of changing thier line up? I wouldn't, unless injuries made it nessacary. No other sport has a rule saying that each player must be played x amount of times in each season or tournament. We want Bowling to viewed as a sport by everyone, we have to keep treating it like a sport. Sports must be competitive, both on the pitch and for the position on the pitch, and, arguably most importantly, there to win.

Later Da Cowman!

 

[The Spanner]

I'd be interested to know if those two boys that were warming the bench for SA intend to try to make the team again next year. I see one of them was dropped to the bench after having the second best score in one game and didn't get to return, even after QLD Sth gave the 'top 5' a hiding.

It's a JUNIOR competition ... it's not about winning, although it's a nice feeling to win ... it's about player retention to the sport.

I've seen junior cricketers never play the game again after being made 12th or 13th man for semi finals and finals. I've seen soccer players go to league and union because the coach wouldn't give them a run in the forwards. They don't come back often.

If I paid out 2 grand for my kid to go to the Presidents Shield and sit on the bench for 16 games, I probably wouldn't fork out the cash again for him or her to go again.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Peter Martin.

 

[*chook :>*]

People also have to remember that it takes alot more than the physical ability of a person/team to win.

To be able to accept that your teammate/s have just that little bit more than you to be able to take an extra point or snatch that overall point, should make you want to encourage our teammate/s.

It is explained within the Vic team and should be in all, that just because you are asked to sit out one, maybe more games as in the case from 01Kay, it doesnt mean that you are not needed, not wanted or are trying to be discouraged.
You are needed, to provide encouragement, you are wanted to add voice to the team in chants, huddles and motivation, you are encouraged at the least to accept decisions and encouraged to become part of a team..

 

[micky_macca]

This is a very touchy topic but i'd like to add my own two cents....

With the topic of people sitting out and good bowlers staying in etc. If a team (7 bowlers) is well prepared for anything that may happen and willing to accept the fact that they may have to sit games out, then the upset, whinging, bitching etc will not occur.

It is a well known fact that in President's shield, the best bowlers will bowl close to 18 games, taking away the odd bad game, injury etc

As an example a few kids in our team this year may not have got that many games, but that doesn't mean they didn't contribute to the team, it's all about form as someone has already said. If you want to bowl all eighteen games then practice as hard as you can and your time may come.

And before someone says "It's easy for you to say" I've bowled two years and bowled 13 games and 12 games, the first year was due to form and the second a combination of form and sickness.

But the thing that I found worst was not being able to sit or stand right up with my team mates and cheer, thats the one rule I dont like. The team as a whole should be in the players area.

Good luck to all future competitors!!

 

[Ice]

As upsetting and disheartening as it can be to be sat on the bench and not get as many games as a person feels they should, we as adults have all been there at some stage during representative bowling, whether that be Intercity or Nationals and yes we all get upset about it.

However, the whole point of competing is to win and those that sit on the bench get a trophy/medal just as do the rest of the team. It is about 'team' not individuals and the goal is to win. Further to that a person could be understandably upset if they paid out all that money and despite being in form and bowling well sat on the bench because another player had to play a minimum of games, especially if that meant losing a competition that might otherwise have won. We don't want to be parting with all that money to attend Nationals to lose, we want to bring home the medals!

Sitting on the bench can be very character building, once it happens you make sure it doesn't happen again, you train harder and you bowl your butt off.

 

[Craigy]

In the words of a very knowledgable bowler/coach

"when you walk up onto stage to collect your medal for president shield if you read the back you will not see 2005 President Shield 1st place bowling 3 games or 6 games or what ever u will simply see 1st place" Sue Cassell

in my oppion it is a team event where the states or zones are competing to see who is the strongest so you want your strongest team possible.

 

[Dj bruv on da mix]

Spanner... At State Level and higher yes its about having fun.... But its Also about Winning!!... Your State Wins Then the possiabilty of Gaining Vaulable sponsorship... is Increased!!!... and yes all 7 members are responsible for that weather someone bowls 18 games or 2 games they have all contributed... and will gain the benefits of sponsorship... Its not about yourself its about the TEAM!... and if your there for yourself... then maybe you should play Table Tennis instead!...

Mark Foster

 

[01kay]

We have to realise that this is a junior event and because of this the main goal is not to win but to encourage, winning is just a bonus.

Also note that when I say a minimum amount of games I'm looking at a figure of around 6 to 8 games, thats not enough to upset the balance to any great extent and seeing as every team will be subjected to the same rule the field will even itself out anyways, all it does is give everyone a fair opportunity to bowl.

As for people saying that its a team effort, their right, it is a team effort however some people are more of that team then others and because of this that team effort becomes less team effort and more effort of others or of an individual meaning that the team effort that everyone sprouts is so important is being ignored, for it to be a true team effort everyone in the team must have a fair share of team responsibility, a bowler who bowls two games and wins a medal is not learning that one must earn a medal but simply learning that if their in a team with people that can win then they will win to.

 

[BOBBA]

I think what is important here is Human Nature. People are (well at least the majority) competitive in nature. A 'team' does not go away to an event like President's Shield thinking that they don't care about winning or at least medalling but that as long as everyone gets a bowl thats okay. The bowlers, coaches, parents, state supporters etc. while no doubt would like to be able to have all the bowlers contribute fairly evenly, would be looking at the best case scenario that is it comes down to having the least disappointment among the team. Let us take this years SA boys team as an example. It is clear that Aaron and Michael were not as much in form as the rest of the team. The outcome is that 2/7 may be a little disappointed however 7/7 received gold medal. Should the minimum games be implemented it is more than likely the boys would not have finished top thus 0/7 gold and therefore we would have 7/7 disappointed that their 'team' underachieved considering they went on to win. The desire to win overpowers the desire to contribute significantly (at least with the majority).

Thats all from me later all

BOBBA

 

[01kay]

Bobba made a good point that the team manager/coach/etc are aiming for a good out come but lets look at it this way, if the SA boys had played there two bowlers a minimum of six games and they had come second it just goes to show how unfair the competition can be, I believe that a team should win based on how good the entire team is, that means all seven players, its easy to have a team with five good bowlers and two lesser skilled one and then simply not play the two lesser bowlers so that the team can win, but its fundamentally wrong, its unfair and shouldn't be practiced, and lets just ignore this year competition for a sec and look at previous competitions I can guarantee you that players where played less or more games based on more then simply form, this sort of behaviour is known as favouritism, is this the sort of message we want to give future bowlers, that if you know the right person or have the better reputation you'll be given the right to bowl over someone else?

 

[~Mrs STORM~]

01kay...
Did u even bowl Shield this year? Or attend Nats??
If the people who sat out were happy to sit out because they understood they were not performing as well as the others then fine. They looked as if they were only young anyway so they have lots more opportunities to prove themselves out there.
And if the weaker bowlers had 2 bowl a minimum of 6 games say and this was the cause of breaking up the strongest line up, resulting in a fall in your finishing position, wouldnt you be a bit peeved that it happened?? I mean...this is the most saught after title in Junior Bowling, so the strongest 5 (or the 5 performing at their best) are the ones ur gunna have out there for the win and you wont want some rule stating that all bowlers must have a minimum of 6 games, as this could be the downfall of your finishing position.

Sorry if I sounded repetitive lol.
Jen

 

[01kay]

For your information Mrs Storm I was on the winning boys team in 2004, and no I wouldn't have been peeved because everyone would suffer the same fate, every team would have to bowl players that maybe out of form or of lesser skill, it would also bring more strategy into the game by making coaches decide whether to bowl there best bowlers first, last or even in a combination of good and bad, and in the end it would level the playing field and make the better team, based on all seven bowlers the winner.

EDIT: I would also like to add that if this rule had been implemented for this years competition the SA boys would still have won even if both Aaron and Michael had lost all there games (Based on a min of six games per person).

 

[Ducati 851]

That is the dumbest thing ive heard, and this is a rather amateur thread, apart form the fact Sheild is an amazingly fun experience for all those involved, everyone wants to win, and to do so you need the best performers, you dont see afl teams putting out of form players on the feild just cos they are in the team now do you, of course not, cos they want to win,use your head guys, i find it ironic (with the exception of spanner....of course) that all the people with an intelligent input to this thread were actually there this year.

My 2 Cents