NATIONAL TRAINING SQUAD

[jimcross]

I've just read what is on the TBA site under National Training Squad - Expression of Interest.
I'd appreciate any comments from people in the Tournament Scene ( which I certainly no longer am. )
On the surface, it just appears a bit 'bureaucratic' in it's make-up, and has little or no flexibility. It seems to me that 'the system' will do all the selecting, sort of automatically - so nobody can be questioned - nobody is responsible?

Probably just the modern way of doing things. Anyone ?

 

[becka_girl]

What system are you talking about?

 

[jimcross]

What system are you talking about?

Sorry, I'm a bit lost with your question. It's an expression which describes a set of procedures to be followed, say - tick the following yes / no boxes. - then. Do you possess Certificate III in Basket Weaving? and so on, so at the end of the procedure you add up the points of the contenders / applicants and the decision to employ a recently released mass murderer, as chief executive of a retirement village, is automatically made for you, and if it doesn't work out, it's not your fault. Something like that.

 

[Geoff300]

Jim
I think the "System Question " being asked was by Beca Girl
What exactly are you saying ????

 

[CHIN]

Is the bureaucratic nature of it stopping you from nominating Jim.

 

[jimcross]

I'm trying to be clear... Obviously failing. All I'm saying is, that as a matter of interest, I read what was on the TBA site re National Training Squad, and it looked to me that we chose national reps ( all of them ) by an inflexable system, not allowing for any discretion or judgment .

I wanted to know ( still do ) if I had read the 'system' right and selection had no provision to select someone ( or a limited number ( 2 or 3 say ) obviously of top current form, but who hadn't ticked all the administrative boxes. Am I right or wrong ??? That's all !

 

[becka_girl]

If u want answers, i suggest you contact the tba office. They are the only ones who can give you the correct explanation

 

[jimcross]

Look - just forget it. It seems I've managed to upset people, just by asking a question. Doesn't affect me, so I'll just go into 'I'm all right Jack " mode. All go back to sleep now - I'm sure someone will tell you when it's time to get up. Nighty Night.

 

[Michael Little]

I'm trying to be clear... Obviously failing. All I'm saying is, that as a matter of interest, I read what was on the TBA site re National Training Squad, and it looked to me that we chose national reps ( all of them ) by an inflexable system, not allowing for any discretion or judgment .

I wanted to know ( still do ) if I had read the 'system' right and selection had no provision to select someone ( or a limited number ( 2 or 3 say ) obviously of top current form, but who hadn't ticked all the administrative boxes. Am I right or wrong ??? That's all !

Jim, there is a set criteria to abide by, the team for international events can only be selected from the NTS, so yes this does not always mean the best players are chosen, but means an attempt to select the best from the squad is. This means that yes the system can be viewed as inflexible as there are a few guys not in the NTS who would possibly walk into an open national team. Should they change their mind and want to be involved like is possibly the case now, they aren't eligible to compete.

However the system needs to be there as it shows a defined criteria, a pathway and also fills criteria needed for funding purposes. People understand what is required, what are the benchmarks needed and how the process works. It should also be a system that evolves over time, to gradually improve along the way.

 

[jimcross]

Thanks Michael, thanks very much. That's the sort of response I was seeking. Don't know why everyone else was so 'prickly'.

 

[Scotty R]

I know I don't post here often but had to give my 2 cents worth with this one. I understand exactly where you are coming from Jim as I do with Michael too. I agree that I think the system should have that flexibility. Lets assume someone has just won the first two ranking events of the year and that person is not in the NTS because they took a year off from bowling competitively to either completely overhaul their technique or maybe just other commitments had to come first for that year. Should this person not be one of the first considered for an Australian team, I mean they're gonna be at the top of the rankings and they have obviously just defeated at least most of Australia's best bowlers not once but twice and they can't be considered for a national team. Seems a little crazy if you ask me. Yes having a clear cut system in place is great as it shows us what is expected to make it to that level but without any flexibility it not only hurts bowlers in the position I just described but it could also hurt national teams who could potentially have had more success with this bowler amongst them.