D
Ducati 851
And rory...im thinking this thread is a vendetta against shield maybe cos you were one that was sat out last year....maybe
A Better President Shield…
- Thread starter 01kay
- Start date
This is not a personal vendetta against Shield, I am simply pointing out that some people are not given a fair opportunity to bowl in Shield yet they still pay the same amount and put in the same amount of effort as everyone else.
As for idiotic comments you seem to be the one supplying them this was a interesting and important discussion until you filled it was your previous comments and I believe your metal focus would be best use supplying helpful comments rather then off topic ones that simply point fingers, my vendetta as you put it is not against Shield but rather against the amount of favouritism in sport, and as for the previous comment about AFL not playing players out of form I believe you should wake up to the sport as it happens all the time.
As for idiotic comments you seem to be the one supplying them this was a interesting and important discussion until you filled it was your previous comments and I believe your metal focus would be best use supplying helpful comments rather then off topic ones that simply point fingers, my vendetta as you put it is not against Shield but rather against the amount of favouritism in sport, and as for the previous comment about AFL not playing players out of form I believe you should wake up to the sport as it happens all the time.
*chook :>*
A child of bowling
01Kay wrote: bowl there best bowlers first, last or even in a combination of good and bad
There are no "good" or "bad" bowlers within the competition of President's Shield. We all qualify to get into our respective zone/state teams.. All those that make the team have proven themselves to be better than average bowlers. Even those that make up the draft, must have proven themselves somehow as they were hand picked out of all draftees..
01Kay wrote: 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?
Favouritism is introduced to anyone and everyone within LIFE. Favouritism is a human characteristic that is, like BOBBA said, human nature. If you are able to bowl more games than someone else just because you know the right people, then maybe you are in the sport for the wrong reasons. If you are able to bowl more games because you:
1. are in form
2. are able to adapt to conditions
3. can bowl consistantly
4. are winning points
then you have proven yourself to be the bowler that the team needs.
In tenpin bowling a good reputation is something that you strive for, to get your own name out there for sponsorship etc but also a good reputation that you have earnt from proving yourself not only to be an exceptional bowler but also an exceptional person. To be able to show that in a team environment you are not there for yourself but for the team. If this means sitting out so that the TEAM is able to win, then so be it. I would gladly sit out if this were the situation.
01Kay, have you spoken to the 2 boys from SA? or the others that have been mentioned? Do they have a problem with being sat out because the coach didnt want to break a winning team combination? Have you asked them that if something were to change, would they give up the GOLD medal that the TEAM won and settle for 2nd?
If they had a problem, or if they would kindly hand back the GOLD to receive the silver then maybe we have something to discuss, but until we hear from the guys themselves, majority rules..
There are no "good" or "bad" bowlers within the competition of President's Shield. We all qualify to get into our respective zone/state teams.. All those that make the team have proven themselves to be better than average bowlers. Even those that make up the draft, must have proven themselves somehow as they were hand picked out of all draftees..
01Kay wrote: 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?
Favouritism is introduced to anyone and everyone within LIFE. Favouritism is a human characteristic that is, like BOBBA said, human nature. If you are able to bowl more games than someone else just because you know the right people, then maybe you are in the sport for the wrong reasons. If you are able to bowl more games because you:
1. are in form
2. are able to adapt to conditions
3. can bowl consistantly
4. are winning points
then you have proven yourself to be the bowler that the team needs.
In tenpin bowling a good reputation is something that you strive for, to get your own name out there for sponsorship etc but also a good reputation that you have earnt from proving yourself not only to be an exceptional bowler but also an exceptional person. To be able to show that in a team environment you are not there for yourself but for the team. If this means sitting out so that the TEAM is able to win, then so be it. I would gladly sit out if this were the situation.
01Kay, have you spoken to the 2 boys from SA? or the others that have been mentioned? Do they have a problem with being sat out because the coach didnt want to break a winning team combination? Have you asked them that if something were to change, would they give up the GOLD medal that the TEAM won and settle for 2nd?
If they had a problem, or if they would kindly hand back the GOLD to receive the silver then maybe we have something to discuss, but until we hear from the guys themselves, majority rules..
K
king keroppi
Hey Chook,
Can I point out that not everyone qualifies to get into Shield - some are selected.....
As for talking to the kids who were sat out this year - that really isn't the issue here. We are just discussing other options.
Why is it on this board that everyone gets so hostile when someone has a different point of view??
Can I point out that not everyone qualifies to get into Shield - some are selected.....
As for talking to the kids who were sat out this year - that really isn't the issue here. We are just discussing other options.
Why is it on this board that everyone gets so hostile when someone has a different point of view??
To Chook the good and bad comment wasn't about the bowls skill but rather their ability to bowl good or bad on the day.
I haven't spoken to them directly but this didn't start out about them specifically, its about anyone that this happens to, am I the only one here who thinks its wrong that an individual pays thousands of dollars just to bowl two games? What I'm suggesting wouldn't effect the out come of the competition to any drastic extent, maybe those how disagree should do the math, I am simply suggesting that we give everyone a fair go, if giving everyone a fair go is seen as wrong by the people on this board then maybe the world is just full of mean people that simply wish to get in front of others rather then helping them, the way I see it is that junior bowling in this country is slowly fading away and that we are responsible, I see more and more young bowlers being ignored and left for dead as older bowlers are given all the attention in the world, is it not right to help and encourage these young bowlers? How much encouragement can they get from warming seats?
Its good to see that there are some nice people that post, I was simply making my opinion heard and open to discussion and people become hostile and point fingers, is this the way we what are future generation to act?
My thoughts..
Once you get to a state based level of competition it is the second highest level of representation you can achieve so I would have thought all teams go away to the tournament with the goal of winning. As it was mentioned before chances are nobody will even know who was in the team just where the team placed(EG SA boys won) If there is purely a desire to have all kids get a fair go then there is the Intercentre Cup which nicely combines participation with competition.
The idea of having a minimum amount of games bowled isn't too bad but it does put the smaller states/zones at a disadvantage, they often do not have as much depth as the other teams and you're going to ask them to sit out their best players at some stage of the tournament.
Shield looks pretty healthy to me...30 odd years and still going strong
Once you get to a state based level of competition it is the second highest level of representation you can achieve so I would have thought all teams go away to the tournament with the goal of winning. As it was mentioned before chances are nobody will even know who was in the team just where the team placed(EG SA boys won) If there is purely a desire to have all kids get a fair go then there is the Intercentre Cup which nicely combines participation with competition.
The idea of having a minimum amount of games bowled isn't too bad but it does put the smaller states/zones at a disadvantage, they often do not have as much depth as the other teams and you're going to ask them to sit out their best players at some stage of the tournament.
Shield looks pretty healthy to me...30 odd years and still going strong
PRESIDENT'S INTERSTATE SHIELD IS NOT ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL ITS ABOUT A TEAM!!! You know who wins President's Shield?? The best TEAM, not the best 7 boys and best 7 girls in the country. A Team. I think too many people focus on individual efforts at Shield and don't look at the team side of things. Who cares how many games someone bowls for their team they are still there and can still enjoy the great atmosphere and excitement Shield provides. There is no competition like Shield and the energy it creates is amazing. These bowlers still get to experience that and even if I had to sit on the bench for 16 games I would still want to return the next year because of all the hype and energy!! Numorous times I asked the boys from this year if they were fine and I quote their replies 'We don't care, as long as we get a gold medal'. What a great attitude to have while not bowling. As a captain I was delighted with this response and it showed what great people these two bowlers are (Mike Hosie and Aaron Pellegrini). Yes sitting on the bench can be demoralising, but if people sit and moan that they aren't getting any games, what are they there for? Obviously themselves. Bowlers know there are 7 bowlers and only 5 spots, so 2 are going to miss out, thats known, so why you would chuck the shits is beyond me!!! If your on the bench there is a team to support and I like Macca don't like the ruling on not being allowed in the players area, but that's a different issue!!! Without the support from the two who sat on the bench this year I believe we wouldn't have gone back to back. It doesn't take the best team of bowlers it takes the best team and they proved that!! Being there for the team is as important if not more than bowling well at Shield. Of course no team would win if they bowled 120 averages and were the loudest team, all being the closest of friends. But support by those on the bench is crucial and is what this tournament is all about.
Making a rule to say all bowlers have to bowl this many games is really not fair to anybody. Why should someone whos trained hard to be the best have to sit out to let someone who can't roll as higher scores take their spot?? It doesn't seem fair. Everyone knows if you bowl well your in, if you bowl not so well theres a chance that seat next to the managers and coaches is yours!!! Its the nature of the competition and its what makes it so great!!
For everyones information those two boys from SA are now more determined than ever to bowl well next year and prove that they deserved their spots. But as I have said before these two showed they deserved their spots by their commitment to the team, and nothing more could have been asked from these two members!!! These two were not disappointed that they didn't bowl that many games (2 each) as they were prepared to sit on the bench if they didn't bowl up to standard!!! Maybe some people need to understand this more and realise this competition is not about individuals its about teams!!!
Anyway thats my opinion,
Dion A
2004 & 2005 SA Shield Boys Captain
Making a rule to say all bowlers have to bowl this many games is really not fair to anybody. Why should someone whos trained hard to be the best have to sit out to let someone who can't roll as higher scores take their spot?? It doesn't seem fair. Everyone knows if you bowl well your in, if you bowl not so well theres a chance that seat next to the managers and coaches is yours!!! Its the nature of the competition and its what makes it so great!!
For everyones information those two boys from SA are now more determined than ever to bowl well next year and prove that they deserved their spots. But as I have said before these two showed they deserved their spots by their commitment to the team, and nothing more could have been asked from these two members!!! These two were not disappointed that they didn't bowl that many games (2 each) as they were prepared to sit on the bench if they didn't bowl up to standard!!! Maybe some people need to understand this more and realise this competition is not about individuals its about teams!!!
Anyway thats my opinion,
Dion A
2004 & 2005 SA Shield Boys Captain
The Spanner
Tenpin's Jamie Lyon
So when Michael bowled the 187 in game 12 (the second highest score in that game), why wasn't he retained or given a shot again later on ?
I understand that Game 12 is at the end of the 2nd day, so you might not want to start with him on day 3, but it looks like he deserved another shot.
Aaron had a 204 in his first game. It's not like they weren't up to the competition?
At junior level, I'd love to see a minimum 6 games, and a maximum 15. That would bring in more strategy on the managers and coaches as to when and where they play their team members.
Congratulations to those two guys who ended up with splinters in their butts. They deserve their medal entirely, but it would be nice to see the kids who have done all the work to get to the shield be rewarded with a share of games.
I understand that Game 12 is at the end of the 2nd day, so you might not want to start with him on day 3, but it looks like he deserved another shot.
Aaron had a 204 in his first game. It's not like they weren't up to the competition?
At junior level, I'd love to see a minimum 6 games, and a maximum 15. That would bring in more strategy on the managers and coaches as to when and where they play their team members.
Congratulations to those two guys who ended up with splinters in their butts. They deserve their medal entirely, but it would be nice to see the kids who have done all the work to get to the shield be rewarded with a share of games.
At one time or another in everyone's life, they will be forced to start at the bottom of the ladder and work their way up. One of these times, for many bowlers is sheild. a limit on games, although in theory sounds good, i don't belive to be practical for the sport. Although it seems to give a fairer chance to all bowlers involves, is it fair on the TEAM? All bowlers going into shield know that they are their as a team, they have trained as a team and witnessed each team member at work, and know that in some aspects of bowling, certain people are stronger/weaker than them. if, in the case of some of the younger and less experienced bowlers, the stronger:weaker is a little bit lopsided, i'm sure they are fully aware that one day, their time will come. Wether it be due to some of the older team members aging out, or just because they got better. In shield in Melbourne, i was greatly upset that i didn't get to bowl the last game of shield, because it was my last year in Southern/ACT but the person they put in instead of me, won the point that i probably would not have, which made all the difference... i have seen Captains, who it is their last year, sit themselves out for their last ever sheild game, to increase the chances of the TEAM winning that particular point...
Everything done in sheild is done for the team... to get the benifits of being in a team, you dont have to bowl a set number of games. hell, you don't even have to bowl any games, just knowing that your team mates know you're there for them, they're there for you and that you make the team better by being in it, wether its bringing your bowling skill or your support is something that you can only get in the players area, because once you're on the lane, you're on your own.
Everything done in sheild is done for the team... to get the benifits of being in a team, you dont have to bowl a set number of games. hell, you don't even have to bowl any games, just knowing that your team mates know you're there for them, they're there for you and that you make the team better by being in it, wether its bringing your bowling skill or your support is something that you can only get in the players area, because once you're on the lane, you're on your own.
Ice
Member
Well said Dion and I agree with you 100%. As a bowler who attended Adult Nationals last year and will again this year I know if I don't bowl well I will be sat out, and if I wasn't sat out and was bowling crap I'd ask to be sat out. I've actually received critiscm for that attitude, but I maintain it's about the team, not the individual, even if that individual is me. Sure I'd be disappointed but I have only myself to blame if I don't get my act together and perform. Finding yourself on the bench is something that could happen to anyone at any time, even the strongest of players have bad days.
I also agree that the suport of those sitting out is crucial, and it's fantastic to hear that a lot of the juniors understand this. If you have stood behind your team and supported them hold your head high and be proud as you are as much of that team as anyone else. There have been times where I have felt as a person who was bowling that the support and encouragement from those standing behind won the points, as much if not more than those who actually bowled the games. But there is nothing that demoralises a team more than having a team mate sulking about being sat out. It can make those bowling feel guilty about how many games they've played and why should a person who's bowled well be made to feel bad.
I am aware that some people's attitude is that there are 5 who qualified and 2 selected and the 5 who qualified should make up the majority of line ups unless they're struggling or injured. Now, before someone jumps down my throat, I'm not saying that's my opinion, I'm actually undecide on that one, because I know there are times someone has not rolled-off well and of course been selected because they were very deserving of a spot on the team. I'm just stating the fact that this is an opinion I've heard from others.
As for comments about favourtism I find it hard to believe that any coach would allow their personal feelings jeopordise a win, because their reputation is riding on their team's performance is it not?
To those who wish they'd had more games, practise hard and come back fighting next year and the best of luck to you.
I also agree that the suport of those sitting out is crucial, and it's fantastic to hear that a lot of the juniors understand this. If you have stood behind your team and supported them hold your head high and be proud as you are as much of that team as anyone else. There have been times where I have felt as a person who was bowling that the support and encouragement from those standing behind won the points, as much if not more than those who actually bowled the games. But there is nothing that demoralises a team more than having a team mate sulking about being sat out. It can make those bowling feel guilty about how many games they've played and why should a person who's bowled well be made to feel bad.
I am aware that some people's attitude is that there are 5 who qualified and 2 selected and the 5 who qualified should make up the majority of line ups unless they're struggling or injured. Now, before someone jumps down my throat, I'm not saying that's my opinion, I'm actually undecide on that one, because I know there are times someone has not rolled-off well and of course been selected because they were very deserving of a spot on the team. I'm just stating the fact that this is an opinion I've heard from others.
As for comments about favourtism I find it hard to believe that any coach would allow their personal feelings jeopordise a win, because their reputation is riding on their team's performance is it not?
To those who wish they'd had more games, practise hard and come back fighting next year and the best of luck to you.
K
king keroppi
>>For everyones information those two boys from SA are now more determined than ever to bowl well next year and prove that they deserved their spots.<<
Sorry Dion A but isn't this is exactly what 01kay is referring to. These guys now want to 'prove' they deserved the spot. Sort of leaves a bad taste in the mouth to me! If they'd had the chance to bowl more, plus with all teams being under the same guidelines, there would be a more 'level playing field' for all concerned and there would be no bad feeling for any bowler except those who think they should bowl every game.
Sorry Dion A but isn't this is exactly what 01kay is referring to. These guys now want to 'prove' they deserved the spot. Sort of leaves a bad taste in the mouth to me! If they'd had the chance to bowl more, plus with all teams being under the same guidelines, there would be a more 'level playing field' for all concerned and there would be no bad feeling for any bowler except those who think they should bowl every game.
These guys don't care they didn't bowl many games they got their gold medals and their happy!! Both know its their turn next year and that is whats meant by my quote!!! Obviously I wont convince you and I don't want an arguement, but I think you should know both are happy and keen to bowl next year!!!
Another thought if you are required to play bowlers for a minimum amount of games couldn't this lead them to be disheartened as they may keep losing on good games by their standards???? Wouldn't this also discourage people from bowling because their is also the humilation of defeat!!!
On a final note, I can't see why so many people are complaining when its the two guys who should be complaining, if anyone!!! But really who cares its over with they both have gold medals and are coming back next year!! And that is all I have to say on the matter
Dion A
Another thought if you are required to play bowlers for a minimum amount of games couldn't this lead them to be disheartened as they may keep losing on good games by their standards???? Wouldn't this also discourage people from bowling because their is also the humilation of defeat!!!
On a final note, I can't see why so many people are complaining when its the two guys who should be complaining, if anyone!!! But really who cares its over with they both have gold medals and are coming back next year!! And that is all I have to say on the matter
Dion A
K
king keroppi
Can everyone please understand that this thread is not about the SA Boys?? There were other teams who did the same thing! Sheeesh!
Andrew S.
Gold Coast
For what its worth, (and it doesnt apply to our Shield Team at this stage,) South Qld are considering adopting a 12 game minimum for all bowlers in this years Walter De Veer squad.
At Walter De Veer level it seems a reasonable experiment.
Most of the President Shield Team probably have their parents paying the majority of the bill, so the value for money issue most likely doesnt concern them too much.
However it is hard to justify 2 or 3 games to a parent who has just forked out over $1000 for the trip, let alone the other weekly costs involved in the sport.
At Walter De Veer level it seems a reasonable experiment.
Most of the President Shield Team probably have their parents paying the majority of the bill, so the value for money issue most likely doesnt concern them too much.
However it is hard to justify 2 or 3 games to a parent who has just forked out over $1000 for the trip, let alone the other weekly costs involved in the sport.
The Spanner
Tenpin's Jamie Lyon
Dion A said:
I don't think anyone would be discouraged by bowling against someone better than them.... that would make me want to come again next year and have another go at them if they beat me. You don't learn lessons like that sitting on a bench.
But what you have described is a 5 man team with 2 subs, not a seven man team.
Ok, say they bring in this rule of minimum games
Hyperthetically speaking....its the closing stages of president shied and you have a line up that is constently shooting 1050+ and winning 6 points each match, making significant ground on first, and then you have to take out one or 2 of these 5 and replace them with cold bowlers??? its shooting teams in the foot and creating situations where teams are going to have to constantly change lineups....isnt the whole point of creating lineups at shield to ensure you have your strongest 5 in the lineup in the hope to gain 7 points???
I remember last year when i was sat out at Illawarra...the team started bowling games of 1100+....there is no way i would want to change that lineup and i was happy to sit out because they were winning the points that we needed....
Hyperthetically speaking....its the closing stages of president shied and you have a line up that is constently shooting 1050+ and winning 6 points each match, making significant ground on first, and then you have to take out one or 2 of these 5 and replace them with cold bowlers??? its shooting teams in the foot and creating situations where teams are going to have to constantly change lineups....isnt the whole point of creating lineups at shield to ensure you have your strongest 5 in the lineup in the hope to gain 7 points???
I remember last year when i was sat out at Illawarra...the team started bowling games of 1100+....there is no way i would want to change that lineup and i was happy to sit out because they were winning the points that we needed....
The Spanner
Tenpin's Jamie Lyon
BT said:
That would all come down to team management. The other teams would be in exactly the same situation. And the 'cold' bowlers wouldn't be so 'cold' if they were bowled a little more often.
tonx
New Member
If the team can't win with all 7 bowlers, then there is no point having 7 bowlers there.
It is up to the manager to decide what needs to be done to win, and adding a minimum games per player would make the TEAM play together as a TEAM, managers included.
Its like AMF jnr shield down here (Victoria) last year. There is a minimum games rule for all members of every team;
The team that won deserved to win, as the managers picked the right bowlers in the right position, and they bowled as a team. That is what pressie shield should consider.
I personally would not pay $XXXX for my kid to go interstate and play 2 games. If it happened, they would not be bowling the next year. Believe me, without the support given to the younger bowlers, our sport is doomed, and so is shield.
JMHO.
It is up to the manager to decide what needs to be done to win, and adding a minimum games per player would make the TEAM play together as a TEAM, managers included.
Its like AMF jnr shield down here (Victoria) last year. There is a minimum games rule for all members of every team;
The team that won deserved to win, as the managers picked the right bowlers in the right position, and they bowled as a team. That is what pressie shield should consider.
I personally would not pay $XXXX for my kid to go interstate and play 2 games. If it happened, they would not be bowling the next year. Believe me, without the support given to the younger bowlers, our sport is doomed, and so is shield.
JMHO.
The Spanner
Tenpin's Jamie Lyon
BT said:
You were lucky ... you got to play 9 games out of 18 that year.
