STATE TEAM TRIALS AND ALSO BEING A AUSSIE REP CLASHING...

[noddy]

Hi all, I have been speaking to a friend of mine and many of yours out there about East Coast Roll Off's and i shock to find out she was not bowling.

When i asked the reason why i was informed that if she made the Australian Team it would clash with one of the trial dates which meant she was unable to make the team.

Last year when the Commonwealth Youth trails clashed with the first East Coast Trials there was another roll off date organised for these bowlers.

i suppose what i am asking is weather anyone out there thinks that the same should be organised for one of Australia's top female bowlers.

It's not like she is trying out for the first time this ladie has made east coast before and is also defending master champion.

THIS TOPIC IS NOT TO BE A BAGGING TOPIC JUST WOULD LIKE THE THOUGHTS OF PEOPLE WHO WILL BE TRYING OUT FOR THE TEAMS THIS YEAR AND IF THE SHOE WAS ON THE OTHER FOOT..

Narelle might be representing her country she isn't doing personal stuff.

Thanks everyone i hope we can really help Narelle out..

Alan notman

 

[granat]

I would consider Australian Representative duties or even trials as grounds for exemption or at least an alternative roll off date.
Especially if the precedent was set last year.

Graeme

 

[thokash]

I think that was the exact reason why people were allowed to trial for the Comm Games and come back a week later and do East Coast. "Representing your country" is obviously the ultimate peek everyone wants to achieve and this should be grounds to hold an extra rolloff date for East Coast.

 

[jockey]

I agree Alan, Narelle should be given the opportunity to bowl. She has represented the MTBA in the ECCC for a number of years and deserves the opportunity. After all if she was not representing her country she would be there at the trial with bells on. I think this is the only excuse for not bowling at a trial where dispensation should be considered.

I guess the only thing to be considered is how they can arrange to have Narelle bowl on similar conditions to everyone else. This has to be a consideration if all other bowlers are to feel like the palying field is an even one.

Although the precident may be there from last year the fact is the dates of the trials were moved to accommodate the Commonwealth youth games last year. This would be a first for them to hold two seperate trials.

Let's hope we have some common sense from the committee on this one.

 

[noddy]

Terry, the trials for the youth last year in the first roll-off were 2 seperate day's.. only the people trying out for the Australian youth team were allowed to bowl on the second weekend.

thanks for your input.. Alan

 

[Tam]

Noddy I think it would be fantastic if the MTBA and Narelle can come up with an agreement and let her either pre or post bowl the clashing roll off as her reasons are legitimate. She is an outstanding bowler and has always supported the ECCC, and yes as i recall those bowlers bowling in the youth commonwealth games still given the opportunity to try out for the ECCC by bowling the first roll off a week later so why should it be good enough for one and not the other... Fair enough Narelle is only one bowler out of the many that try out year but why should a person not be elligable to try out for her state team if a roll off clashes with a try out for the Country...

The MTBA last year made precident that special consideration would be given to those bowlers trying out for the Country. Therefore the same precident should be applied here and Narelle should be able to bowl at a designated time set by the MTBA. Some people may argue that this isnt fair and argue about the conditions and stuff like that but really this is the world of bowling people and someone is always going to find something to bitch or complain about and unfortunatley you cant keep everyone happy!!!

SO I SAY COME ON MTBA BE FAIR LET NARELLE BOWL!!!

Tam

 

[jockey]

I was unaware of this situation last year so the situation should be favourable for Narelle now last years precidents have been set.

All bowlers prior to the first rolloff could be informed of this forthcoming scenario for stage 3 (I assume we are talking about the Womens World Championships which clash with last rolloff Aug 3 - 13 etc.). If they decided it was not fair and did not want to bowl then they could be allowed to withdraw and receive their entry fee back before rolling a ball.

I suggest allowing Narelle to bowl at the centre on the same condition to be set down for the last trial the weekend before if lane availability permits. The scores could be kept private until the last trial and be added in block by block as progressive standings sheets are printed. This will mean that it would be as if Narelle was bowling on the day and everyone would be in the dark as to what they are required to bowl to beat her. Any other entrants turning up on that day could be bound by the code of conduct to keep the scores if they see them to themselves.

The alternative would be if lanes are available allowing the womens qualifying to be held over two days (i.e. a choice of current date or same day on the weekend before). This would make it fairer for all as Narelle would not simply be bowling on her own.

I don't believe it is fair to post bowl as that means a person (7th qualifier) will have to wait up to two weeks before they know whether they made the team or not. The whole team should be decided on the one day.

Supporting our National reps should be a priority for participants of this sport.

 

[Kingy]

State team trials and Aussie rep clashing

Hi Al,

I agree with you in principal. We always should have the best bowlers representing the state.
I know i have been out of the sport for 12 months, but some things never change. There never seems to be enough weekends in the year for Tournament Directors. They all seem to want the same weekends to host tournaments and roll-offs.
Sometimes we have have to make choices.
I feel for Narelle and anybody else who find themselves in the same situation, but i do not think that pre or post bowling is fair to all the other people.
I don't have a solution just an opinion!
Regards Brian King

 

[chopper]

Maybe the anwser is on the Rachuig entry form it states "Bowlers who commence the Victorian team selection trials, and are then required for national team duties, will be seriously considered for a place in the team, provided that appropriate documentation is presented to the tournament committee prior to the commencement of the second trial"
If Narelle bowles the first trial then the championships is positioned well and has to miss the third trial due to national call up this Rachuig rule could apply.
If the ECCC comittee introduced it of course.
Chopper

 

[Craig Ryan]

Re: State team trials and Aussie rep clashing

Sometimes we have have to make choices.
I feel for Narelle and anybody else who find themselves in the same situation, but i do not think that pre or post bowling is fair to all the other people.

In 2001 and 2002, I was selected to represent Australia in another sport.
The decision was left up to the MTBA in regards to whether I could bowl before the other boys who were rolling off because I would be overseas whilst the last roll off was on. As the only person affected by this, I was forced out of the rolloffs at the third stage (after bowling stage one and two)

Following that precedent Narelle unfortunately shouldn't be allowed to rolloff at another time.

I believe last years decision was based on the fact that about 8-10 bowlers were unable to bowl in the first rolloff. It is a large number of people who would have been forced to miss out - impacting the MTBA far worse then just one individual missing out.

That being said, I wish Narelle the best of luck bowling for Oz. It will be interesting to see how the MTBA handle this situation.

 

[BrenH]

We now have a situation where the MTBA has set precedents that would in theory allow any decision they make to be justified.

Personally I would hate to see Narelle miss out as she is always a valuable asset to any team.

However I do agree with Craig on this one in that because the situation affects one person and in the past the MTBA has been unwilling to let a single bowler bowl their games outside of the scheduled time that it should not be allowed to happen.

As Craig said it will be interesting to see how this situation is handled.
Brendan

 

[Whasup!]

Hey there Al,

As you know Narelle is a great mate of mine and I would love nothing more than for her to be able to defend her titles in East Coast, However do you recall last year I had planned my wedding date around all tournaments so that I too could defend my titles from the previous year, and then they changed the east coast dates on me so that the first trial fell on my wedding day. I was really dissapointed but was given no other option.
Narelle is at the pinicle of her career in bowling right now and there is none more deserving of being selected to represent our country than she,and besides she gives me a chance at making the side by not being there. :lol:

 

[noddy]

That was good to hear a few points of view.

All i hope is that the right thing by everyone is done.

i do like choppers idea that the M.T.B.A may be able to put a clause in place like Rachuig..

maybe we'll just have to wait and see..

Thanks everyone..