| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

ReservePlayer07

Page history last edited by PBworks 16 years, 1 month ago

<< Go back to previous page

26/07/2007

 

Provision of a Reserve for the NZ Team at the 2007 World Petanque Championships

 

Part of the team's preparation for this year's World Petanque Championships has been to assess their risks during the tournament and establish an appropriate mitigation strategy.

 

If a player is ill or becomes incapacitated precluding that player from taking part in a scheduled game, a "reserve" will be called on to enable the team to continue in the tournament.

 

PNZ has been included in the formulation of this strategy and consulted with the FIPJP In the event of such an occurrence PNZ has delegated authority to the team manager and team captain to invoke the strategy as necessary. They will keep PNZ informed of all developments by the fastest possible means.

 

The team has evaluated the few options available for a "reserve" player replacement. One option would be to utilise Christian Fouquet who will be representing PNZ as their delegate at the FIPJP meeting and who will be in the stadium during the tournament.

 

The position of "reserve" is not synonymous with that of a 4th player in these championships. To be clear, a 4th player is pivotal in a team and is substituted in or out of the team thereby creating many tactical combinations. A "reserve" on the other hand is only used in the event of an emergency if one of the original players is incapacitated.

 

In the twelve years we have been sending teams to the World Petanque Championships there has been one emergency which has required the team manager/delegate to stand in for one of the original team members.

 

Bryan Wells

CEO

Petanque New Zealand

 

Text taken from PNZ website. This text was published on the evening of July 26, 2007.

See also 5 Replies to CEO June 07 Newsletter.


6 Comments:

 

At 11:55 AM, Anonymous said...

I was just thinking how well behaved PNZ have been lately and suddenly up pops another doozie!. Why, during all the fuss over the 4th player, was the matter of a reserve never mentioned. It is now obvious why Christian was selected as the "delegate".

 

I think it very important that we have a reserve or a 4th player or whatever you want to call it but why for goodness sake can't PNZ be upfront right from the start.

 

I can see them now. "Lets wait until the dust settles and then we will slip something in about the reserve player. They are all a bit thick out there, they probably won't even notice"

 

A word to PNZ executive members. When you find that you no longer have a position on the PNZ council which hopefully will be sooner than later, let me know. I know a very good travel agent who has cheap fares to Zimbabwe. Mr Mugabe is in urgent need of your services. Graeme (not so thick) Burnard.


At 12:02 PM, Anonymous said...

What planet are they on ?

 

Do they not realise they are setting a precedent for future selected teams to demand flexibility with the rules ? They are making a rod for their own back.

 

There is no reason why a "reserve" could not have been selected from the top four. When the e-mail came from PNZ asking if we wanted to be considered as the 4th player it clearly stated if we put our name down we would probably not get a game (as below).

 

4. The winning team captain, Murray Porter, has informed me that there is no guarantee that the fourth team member will get any game time.

 

But people still put there name forward knowing they may only be a "reserve". Of course I know the statement was intended to discourage anyone from putting their name forward, that would then open the door to the top 8. But unfortunately for them, some did.

 

If we have players whom are willing to be a "reserve" and rightfully won the rights under PNZ rules to be so, they should have the first refusal.

 

Also if - One option would be to utilise Christian Fouquet who will be representing PNZ as their delegate at the FIPJP meeting and who will be in the stadium during the tournament.

 

I would like to know what the other options are - David ?

 

sj


At 1:50 PM, NZPC Editor (Tom) said...

In my view it would have been so much simpler and more honest if we had stuck to the original rules set out by PNZ.

 

We would simply have inserted into our Worlds Team a 4th player selected from the qualifying teams that took part in the qualifying Triples Tournament earlier this year.

 

Instead we now have the absurdity of PNZ formulating a reserve strategy with the highest petanque body in the world, the FIPJP (Fédération Internationale de Pétanque et Jeu Provençal). This is especially ironic as the original qualifying players from the above mentioned Triples Tournament were told that they may never play a game, they would only be there in case of illness - a reserve. How does this mesh with the quote below?.

 

"The position of "reserve" is not synonymous with that of a 4th player in these championships. To be clear, a 4th player is pivotal in a team and is substituted in or out of the team thereby creating many tactical combinations. A "reserve" on the other hand is only used in the event of an emergency if one of the original players is incapacitated."
If this is so, why on earth are we denying our New Zealand team the many advantages outlined by our CEO: "a 4th player is pivotal in a team and is substituted in or out of the team thereby creating many tactical combinations." Why sell ourselves short with just a reserve?. Why are the PNZ brains in such a big muddle ?

 

Why do they treat the NZ membership as though we have the intellect of demented geraniums.

 

How many other international teams are formulating reserve strategies with FIPJP ?

 

"The winning team captain, Murray Porter, has informed me that there is no guarantee that the fourth team member will get any game time."

Who is in charge here ?

 

"PNZ has been included in the formulation of this strategy...."

Included by whom ?

 

Lots of questions again.

-Tom.


At 12:45 PM, Anonymous said...

This decision must have been made by the core executive - not the extended executive or the council representatives, who could not have been consulted - the council would surely not have agreed, given their previous directives to the executive. -Liz.


At 10:01 PM, Anonymous said...

How does the saying go... "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me".

 

I can't believe that after all the furore with the 4th player saga, that the PNZ executive could come out with such a silly process and not expect a back-lash. Given the depth of feeling about nominating players for national teams through the back-door, the PNZ executive go and poke at the 4th player monster again.

 

This may sound like a broken record, but all the players want is a clear and transparent process that will be clearly adhered to. There is no need to develop a reserve strategy with the FIPJP. Try following the agreed process and don't tinker with it just because it didn't have the result you thought it "should" have had, and then try and cover the tracks by "developing" a strategy.

 

Graeme - love the Robert Mugabe comment! Personally I think we need to cut the strings of the puppet master(s), as its starting to look like the same old puppet show from last year.

 

-Margret


At 3:44 PM, Anonymous said...

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. What happened to the so called transparent practices held up so loftily in the CEO's mission statement? Inclusiveness, communication - yeah right. Time to cut the strings for sure. And by the way, speaking of transparency, when can we expect to be informed as to who has been registered in the team for the World Champs? NO NAME


Top

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.