<< Go back to previous page

Published with permission on July 26, 2006.

 

Selection Process Feedback Form

 

Dear Member,

 

The current PNZ selection process has been evolving over the past three years and as part of this evolution we are keen to receive feedback from our members about selection and how the process can be improved. Following the feedback in 2004 changes were made to the selection process. The feedback form can be completed by any member, whether involved in the selection process or not.

 

Post or email the completed form to the PNZ Secretary by 25th July 2006.

 

Postal: The Secretary, Petanque New Zealand, PO Box 31127, Lower Hutt.

 

 

 

1 Did you put your name down for selection 2006?

 

Yes

 

2 Was the amount of communication you received from the selector/s about the process:

 

 

About right

 

 

3 How easy was the selection process to understand?

 

 

About right

 

 

4 What areas of the process do you think could be made easier?

 

Try sticking to the selection criteria!!

 

 

5 Do you feel the selection process is fair?

 

No – the process was set out clearly i.e. attend certain number of set tournaments at you were supposed to perform well in. However, people have been selected who did not meet the criteria as originally set out. Instead selection seems to have been based on social connections rather than playing ability.

 

Attending tournaments costs time and money and I’m willing to waste either to attend tournaments when I feel that the criteria is not being applied either appropriately or fairly.

 

If you answered no, please list how you think this could be improved

Try sticking to the criteria!! Yes some exceptions should be made for some individuals who might stand out. And by stand out I don’t mean consistently being in the bowl and then in one tournament with a very small field suddenly having a good run. It needs to be consistent across a number of tournaments.

 

 

6 Do you think there should be criteria for entry into selection?

 

Yes – reality being what it is, a number of people who put their name forward this year are not up to par. They should be informed of this at the time of putting their name forward and then advised about what they can do to improve their performance and that they should look at putting their name forward again next year. This should be done positively, in a non-condescending manner.

 

However, doing something like this would also require PNZ to actually put some effort into player development, so that players who are on the fringes (or want to make a serious tilt at making the fringes) are given the opportunity through coaching and mentoring. This is something that the PNZ has done poorly and is driving people away from competitive play.

 

If yes, then please specify what you think these criteria should be?

 

Finishing in the top 16 at the selection tournaments

 

 

 

7 Where do you think the process should focus to achieve a consistently performing team?

 

Getting proper coaching and development going – which includes looking at both the current group of top players and appropriately identifying developing players. Many of us have changed our playing styles based on what the previous national team coach and selectors wanted. This has not been for the best, and has affected performance, as many of us have been working in isolation with no feedback or encouragement. Coaching and development need to be cornerstone of any consistently performing team.

 

Developing players should be identified for ability – not for their social habits. I worry that a lot of potentially good female players are being bypassed because they happen to smoke, drink and have a good time when playing. Talent and ability should be the focus of any process – not social contacts.

 

Players also suffer from partnership woes. Any process needs to look at matching-up players who may not have consistent partners and developing those relationships rather than hoping that they are going to happen on their own. This will require more commitment from selectors and a serious effort on their behalf to grow the player base, rather than pandering to those already at the top. Unfortunately there has been little effort in this area and it is an absolute if PNZ wish to continue the current selection process.

 

 

 

8 What attributes do you think a successful team should have?

 

The stamina and the will to win.

 

 

9 Petanque is a team sport. What personal attributes should be considered by selectors when selecting a team?

 

 

Playing talent and ability. If there is friction between the players it is upto the coaches and team management to handle it – not the players, as they have other things to focus on.

 

 

10 What was your experience of the selection process this year?

 

Crap – from that fiasco regarding the women players at the national doubles in 2005 to the whole social clique thing that has developed in the last 2 years, I have little faith in the process. Especially when it doesn’t even follow its own criteria!!

 

 

11 If you were a selector, what would you do differently?

 

 

Select for development potential and player ability. However you should know that already if you are a selector.

 

Remove conflicts of interest – if you are a selector, you should not be putting your name forward for selection. Equally, if you are a selector and your spouse is in the selection squad – one of you has to make a decision to quit. It is not appropriate for selectors to pick spouses, as it presents a biased view and raises questions about impartiality, regardless of how well they may have performed.

 

 

12 Do you think there should be performance measures for selectors?

 

Yes

 

If you answered yes, please list the performance measures you think could be used

 

 

At least try and get people who are not running PNZ, who can’t be accused of conflicts of interest. Selectors also should have some previous competitive sporting background and be prepared to attend coaching and team development sessions.

 

 

13 Are you putting your name down for selection in 2007?

 

No

 

If you answered no, please specify why

 

I’m not going to waste my time and money until appropriate changes are made, or PNZ can clearly demonstrate that its following its own selection criteria.

 

Returning to a tournament-based system would be more transparent and less divisive than the current system. Social politicking has taken over the competitive side of the game and is favouring only those who can afford to pay to compete, as well as creating a social clique that is dominating the selection process and making competitive play off-putting.

 

 

 

14 Any other comments you have that might be useful feedback for the selection process.

 

Too much time has been wasted hassling clubs to have international standard pistes with lighting and being correctly strung out etc. If the same effort had been put into player development, then the game might have grown rather than remaining stagnant. You can say there are now 1400 members, but forced affiliation of clubs is probably behind this “growth” not an actual increase in real player numbers per se.

 

Equally the same can be said about codes of conduct, etc. Why are we fussing about these petty things, when growing the player base should be more important?

 

On the matter of player reserves – either include them in the team properly or drop the criteria altogether. Stop using it either as a sop for those people who should have been selected but have been left out, or as favours to those who have been “good” to the game.

 

Good players are becoming extremely frustrated at the PNZ, and if they are not careful, we will vote with our feet and move onto something else.

 

-Margret Fleck.

---

 Create your own free wiki!Support CommunityPublic, Platinum wiki Privacy Policy RSS