What do you think about.......???

[bm2]

Rachuig and De Veer have just finished for another year, and despite all states/territories sending away 7 representatives for their teams, you can have a quick scroll down the score listings to see that many bowlers who paid a lot of money to go away as a state rep, got "shafted" (for want of a better word) when it came to the number of games they got to bowl in the tournament, with more than a handful of bowlers getting less than five games over the 18 game series.

Now we all know that the competition is first and foremost about winning, but as our sport is so expensive, (and it is getting dearer every year to go away as a rep bowler), it is becoming very hard to justify forking over your hard earned dollars for the prospect of sitting on the bench for a greater part of the time.

Form counts, and I would be stupid to suggest that it didn't, but I am curious as to what other bowlers feel about perhaps changing the rules to that similar to which the ATBSO (o 45's) run their interstate challenge - the states send away 6 bowlers for a 4 man team format over 21 games, but it is mandatory that ALL bowlers must bowl 10 games minimum over the course of the challenge. This of course makes the coach, managers and captains very aware of who has and hasn't bowled, and are required to think about the lineups all the time.

Perhaps if bowlers could be guaranteed a minimum number of games, then numbers may increase for representative rolloffs - I know that to pay $1500 for 4 games is not something that I would be willing to do again.
( and I have, for the record, submitted this idea to TBA for consideration)

What are others' opinions???

Broni 8)

 

[Damage]

Catch 22 situation.
Yes, if you pay a lot of coin to go away you would probably expect to get quite a few games, you'd no doubt bowl a lot in the Nats, Masters everythin' else as well.
But the "Rocky"s the ultimate - so yes a player could be pretty narked if he didnt get many games.
But if a player is not performing it can have a negative effect on the rest of the team as well (not saying you underperformed or anything - I didn't see what you shot BTW ) So a coach has to take that into effect as well.
I'm sure other readers on this forum can remember similar things that have happened in thier time as reps, to others or themselves.

I dunno if there's really an easy answer to your question tho mate

 

[gardencitylanes]

Maybe 6 is the answer

Hi All


I myself having just returned from townsville and may I say bowled every game in racuig, did really feel for the guys who didn't get alot of games. It was something we spoke about as a team and we worked hard to keep it out of our thought processes. Thanks to the great team of guys that we had who I was very proud to be a part of we managed to play as a 7 person team despite a couple of guys having limited games.

My suggestion would be to make it 6 member teams with 5 to play each match. It makes it easier on everybody only having to find games for just one extra and not 2.

Just My Opinion.

Thanks

Zane Que

 

[Funky Chicken]

I have to say that I totally agree with Zane, in that you really only need six players (ie 5 bowlers and a fresh reserve). I mean 6 games a day with a break half way through isn't super physically demanding, and as such really only necessitates having one fresh reserve.

When you bowl in a tournament such as Rachuig or DeVeere you go in as part of a team, and should be cognizant of the fact that you may only get a handful of games depending on how you and the rest of the team are bowling. If this is a problem for you, then maybe you need to think long and hard before applying for the team.

In the NQ Mens Rachuig team this year we had a bowler who constantly whinged and complained to anyone that would listen (even when we were bowling) about the lack of games he recieved, and how much per game it was costing him. As you can imagine , this bowlers attitude severely affected the team morale, and unless he has a massive attitude re-adjustment then perhaps next year he should save his money for some form of intensive counselling or therapy. :x :x :x

Yes we all want to bowl as many games as possible, but hey I want to win Rachuig, so if I am averaging 190 and 5 other guys are averaging 210+ then sit me on the bench and I will cheer long and loud all day. End of the day I might only get 4-5 games but I still get a medal and get to say I bowled in a Rachuig winning side.

This is only my humble opinion.

Cheers

Steve Hunt

 

[Buzzer]

I don't think the format needs to changed at all.

7 people who qualify for their State are obviously pretty dam good bowlers.

It all comes down to performance on the Days. If you aren't bowling well in the tourny you have 6 others to choose from. Even the best of bowlers have off days. this way we can rotate around to get the best team result. (obvious huh)

However If your bowling well and getting unfairly treated by managers and or captains by not getting games due to personal interests, it is unfortunate but this needs to be addressed in your team or state committee. I don't think this warrants a change in the national game but definately a look at the way things are run in your own camp.

I have said this before to my friends I would rather have 2 games in a winning rachuig side than to bowl 16 in a losing one. At the end of the day you are there for Gold not to get the most games. If I get more games in a winning side all the better.

Yes it is a lot of money to blow and unfortunately I don't have any answers for you here other than you are aware of this risk before even nominating for the team. But I don't think changing the rules of rachuig is the first step to take.

Any way thats how I feel.

 

[ms]

Hey hey!

i am with Buzzer on not changing the format, coz what if you do have more than ONE player NOT performing!!

But everything else you guys have said, DITTO!

Its all about being PART OF THE TEAM!!

WE ARE ALL THERE FOR THE SAME REASON! TO WIN!!!

Eventhough my team, bowled like a bunch of knobs, we still tried our guts out and gave it our best!

EVERYONE IS THERE FOR THE SAME REASON! ITS ALL ABOUT BEING PART OF YOUR TEAM REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT OF GAMES EVERYONE GETS!

Thats my piece..

Martina

 

[DrewC]

Games in Rachuig.

The problem of everyone getting a go in rachuig is a tough one but at the end of the day you have run your roll offs and the bowlers who have nominated for the team all know what they are getting into long before they get to the nationals.

The idea of giving everyone a minimum amount of games may look good in theory but to me it provides some of the bigger states with a big advantage as they have a bigger pool of talent to draw on and therefore greater depth.

Not many people will remember who bowled in the winning team just which team won. It would be nice if everyone bowled but it's a tough competition and the bowlers doing the job have to get the nod before the guys who are struggling.

My thoughts.

 

[Tiger]

If I got just ONE game and Tassie won Rachuig - the $1500-$2000 spent would be worth it just for the celebration alone :lol: :lol:

 

[Jessy_2_Messy]

Easy to say Tiger.

 

[jockey]

If we are 7 not 5 then one rule change should be made!

In Townsville we had 7 bowlers all pulling together to get the job done. This included one who got 2 games and one who got to bowl 8.

One of them was contributing to the team harmony on his own accord when not bowling by helping provide and retrieve spare balls off the ball returns, allowing the bowlers to concentrate on their games.

However after a certain amount of games where this was not questioned, suddenly a request was made to the manager to keep that bowler out of the players area. Now if this bowler is part of the team and is not interfering with the opposition in any way, then they should have a right to be in the players area just like the 5 bowlers actually bowling.

Regardless of the costs involved to get to the tournament, which others here have pointed out you knew before you entered the roloffs to make the team, you are a team member and should be allowed in the area.

It is rules like this that take away from the great tournament experience it should be for these bowlers despite the lack of actual games bowled individually they may experience. Especially as in a lot of cases it is there first team.

If they are not allowed in the area then you are effectively saying they are not part of the team which is totally wrong and makes it hard to cultivate team harmony.

I don't know what other people think but I think the two bowlers who sit out each game in both Rachuig and Daveer have a right to be in the players area providing they are not interfering with play. In Townsville they (I sat out 4 myself) were just as important as the bowlers bowling in the games themselves.

It is both an inspiring and humbling experience to come back from bowling a strike to see a guy who would do anything to be bowling himself, just as excited as you are about the strike. That is what team bowling is all about, you can't have that though if a bowler is alienated because they are excluded from feeling part of the team.

Now you might say that is easy to say from someone who bowled 14 games. Considering I got a late call up as a second alternate and didn't expect to bowl that many games at all, I would have gladly sat on the sidelines many more than the 4 games I did if it meant being in a winning Rachuig side.

I believe that this issue of exclusion from the players area should be addressed so all team members do feel a part of the team regardless of how many games they might actually get to bowl.

Thanks again to Paul K, Sean, Chris, Barry, Joe, Trots, Louise and Justin for providing me with a first Rachuig experience to remember.

Regards
Jockey

 

[Andrew S.]

That last post was a little surprising.
If I'm a team manager I want those two spare bowlers as close to the team as possible. OK the players area does tend to get a bit full with 5 players and a coach and manager but the other 2 can still be very close to the team.
They are part of that team and should be there to encourage and generally spur their team on. There should be no doubts about what the non-playing pair do, or where they position themselves when they are not bowling.
All that should be thrashed out and gone over at team meetings prior to the event. Managers Coaches and Players should all know exactly what is expected of them and how to conduct themselves during competition.
I wonder who made the request to the manager to keep the non-playing bowlers out of the area?
If this was at the request of the tournament director he or she should have made the situation clear before the event. This is what a tournament briefing is all about. If that had indeed been made clear, then the team Manager should have passed it on to the team. Furthermore if this ruling was in place it should certainly have been made in conjunction with the team Management of all particpating States.
After all who is the Competition for, if not the participants?

 

[cruisy_chick23]

I agree with what people are saying. If i am wrong can someone please correct me but i thought that if you rolled off for Rachuig it was because you wanted to represent your respective state no matter how many games you bowl.

I can't sit here and complain about the amount of games i bowled because i bowled 15 of the 18 games. Had i have not bowled a low game i probably would have bowled another game but that was the price i paid for not performing in that one game.

What ever happened to the prestige of bowling for your State?
Can someone answer that for me???

There is my 2 cents worth.

 

[TMK]

There is only one way to purify Rachuig.
A 5 man Team.
No reserves.
Blood and guts for 3 days...5 of the States best...locked in.
No wondering...no one to blame..justification for spending the money.
Produce or get out.
No excuses.
No drama..your in the line up tomorrow...no matter how you bowled yesterday.
Its up to the Coach to sort you out...or get a new coach.
7 person team....equals...EMOTION.
We all know what Emotion does..20% will have good memories...80% will spew.
Dont crap on in the emotion stakes...if your on the sideslide..and your team is performing..then they are doing it without you..so why the hell are you there at all.
If your team is performing bad and you still havent had a game,then your even a worse alternative.
Its a reality check.
At the Olympics...or World games...you get one shot.
Its called peaking at the right time.
Reserves are for.....Linage for centres..cost to sending the Team.
Emotional problems.
Your either in or out.
Reserves....are the down fall off Rachuig.
Eliminate the problem...........reserves.
After 5,6,7 years of FIQ,13,14,15,yrs of Rachuig...12 yrs as Captain...
Thats what I think.
6....is bad.....7...is total trouble.
Coaches...are no more then an optional extra..their value has only been elevated through their own PR dept.
At Rachuig Level...you dont need a Coach..you need a good Ball driller.
A bold statement....
WA Rachuig....
Steve Hart,Michael Muir...then the FUBAR Team...Steve Wimbrdge,Greg Ball,Sanity,order,peace,motivation,starch,Tom Kury..or John Bushell.
Crack your nuts real open,blow egos sideways.
Relentless.
Most important...........know how to win.
Who needs reserves.
Committeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees.
Bet its the same in every state.

 

[Tiger]

Easy to say Tiger.

That was a joke by the way :roll: You know how Tassie bowlers like a good "knees up" especially after a win and all - well they used to anyway :roll:

Paying the $1500 to get out of this bloody town for 10 days and be able to put the head down and focus on some strong competition would be worth it - I wish I had $1500 :x
If I felt that I wasn't performing up to par, I would be the first one to be saying to the manager, if there's someone better, put them in, in my place - reason being that, if I knew through my own stubbornness that I cost my team-mates a chance at winning a Rachuig - I could NOT live with myself.
Regardless of whatever happens, I'd be roaring the place down barracking for my team-mates.

I can see a lot of merit in the above post.
With the difficulty in getting SEVEN players these days from some states, FIVE would be far easier to get, my only concern with that would be if a player is injured or is taken ill.
It would certainly put the onus on the FIVE to make sure they perform thier responsibilities outright - sometimes chucking people in at the deepend and seeing if they can sink or swim, is the best test of all.
A good ball driller can perform miracles - after all, it is an equipment game these days, so one would think that, they would be a necessity.

Just my 2c worth..... :arrow:

 

[Couldn't Give A Rats]

Hi there, you all have really good points.

I don't think the format needs to be changed, it's a pretty good format, but we hear that people complain about the nunber of games they get, maybe it is not? maybe they complain about some decisions being made that seem unfair , and other things like that? you never know till you ask them , people talk, and some twist words and before you Know it you are getting a concocted story, and then your team mate seems to have said all things under the sun, but unless you hear it direct , ask them what it was about etc and what exactly they said - :idea:


I hear that the reason people were asked to be out of the playing bit when they are not bowling as there was almost a opunch up between 2 teams I don't know if this is true just hear say, but as it was said earlier, shouldn't they be allowed down there 2? afterall the 2 sitting on the bench are part of the team too!

 

[AdrianS]

Just wondering if anyone can list all the teams tourneys with minimum game requirements,

I know in Dunn Shield and Emerson Shield everyone gets a pretty good stack of games, not sure about Vic Country Cup. Maybe President Shield, Rachiug and SA country cup are the only ones where someone can sit for the whole thing.(With SA country cup, from past experience and observation having a garunteed minimum number of games for each bowler would make a positive impact on this tournament, probably save it from going down the tubes!)

 

[Funky Chicken]

Hey Two Cents Worth,

You heard right about there nearly being a punch up during Rachuig, it was when NT played NQ.

Now being one of the bowlers that was there, let me tell you that none of the bowlers from either side had anything to do with it. It was two Managers that have over inflated views of their own self importance that got into a push and shove match.

Instead of discussing the matter in a civilised manner, they decided that when they couldn't yell over the top of each other they would get physical.

If it wasn't so pathetic it would have been funny!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

The Funky One.

 

[Couldn't Give A Rats]

Hey funky chicken thanks for confirming it, I had heard that it was the management and none of the bowlers but managers are supposed to keep the bowlers in line, maybe they need someone to keep them in line hey :lol:

 

[Andrew S.]

but managers are supposed to keep the bowlers in line,

Thats a brave statement.
You might learn a few new words shortly!

 

[bm2]

My thanks to all who have offered their humble little opinions with regard to this topic...for a while I didn't think anyone had an opinion, but after a couple of days absence from the forum, it appears I was wrong!

First and foremost, I was not having a whinge - I had more than my fair share of games during WDV, and would have had more IF I could have gotten my thumb in and out of the ball in the same manner I can at home! :roll: It is correct to say that it was a team tournament, and the overall result is what the team of 7 is aiming for. I suppose I was curious to hear other views after speaking to quite a few bowlers during the tournie who had been (for whatever reasons) relegated to a support role regardlessof their bowling abilities. There was a lot of talk during the year with regard to dwindling numbers for rolloffs in all the States and Territories, and I wondered if there was a connection in any way?

For me, there has been no greater honour than to have represented my state, and as long as I am able (and eligible) , I will continue to rolloff to be a part of it, because there is no other competition like it. I give my best regardless of how many games I get, and I am sure that all other competitors give the same. I doubt that the format of WDV and Rachuig will change, and I sincerely hope that the numbers of bowlers wanting a chance at being a state rep increase rather than decrease.

thank you again for your thoughts and opinions on my little question.

Broni 8)