<< Go back to previous page

Hi everyone.

24/04/08 from Andy Gilbert

As most people know, I’ve been around the Petanque scene for maybe 12 years and I’ve seen a few changes in the governance structure and personnel. Without exception the incoming committee tweaks the system to finetune the problems that the previous committee were accused of being guilty of. Without exception, the vocal majority/minority will blast the current committee that they are not doing enough/too little communication/ just as bad as the previous committee etc. I fully respect the right and role of the protesters and there are occasions where I might agree they have a point.

I don’t accept that the committee is at fault. I believe the problem is deeper than that of the current committee (generically speaking).

I believe the sport needs an attitude transplant.

I believe the whole thing needs rubbing out and starting again.

We are a minority sport and we are underfunded.

Our profile is low, our costs for participation at a local and/or national level are comparatively cheap when compared to other sports such as Golf, bowls, mountain biking etc.

We don’t ask very much of our players if they want to rise to the higher levels.

And lastly, we listen to the loudest voice and tend to follow anyone with any idea that sounds good.

The accent is on the word follow because that is one of our problems. We will sit back and let anyone take up the reins, no matter how suitably qualified. Brian, Barbara and Bryan may not be doing the job in a manner that please everybody but the key thing is that they ARE DOING THE JOB!

I would ask all competitive players to look at another sport and look what the input and effort of those other top players are. We, as a sport and a governing body, ask very little of our top players. They have little financial outlay, relatively speaking.

In summary, it’s too damn easy to get near the top in Petanque.

Any player can play in the nationals even if it makes the event a logistical nightmare.

I think we are almost too scared to put rules and limitations in place in case we offend the Aucks/social players/anybody etc etc.

If we want a professional standard of sport we need to put in place professional standards for players.

If we want to compete on an international level we need to be doing what the international players are doing.

90% of PNZ members are social players and don’t want to rise above that level. That’s fine for them so let them continue to pay $6 per year for associate membership.

For the 10% who want to aspire to a higher level let’s get real. Your player subs could/should rise to $100 a year and you will be issued player licences. Only licence holders can play at the nationals or be in a development squad etc.

If you want to considered for the national squads, be prepared to attend player development camps (funded by your $100 member fees) Pay the coaches for their time. Pay the umpires for their time, pay the national tournament director for his time.

Look at other sports and see what their elite players are putting up with to compete at the highest level.

Oh I’m sorry, is $100 too much? When I look at the alcohol and fags tossed back at tournaments I figure $100 works out at 1 less drink or 4 cigarettes less per week. And i don’t think that is too high a price to pay if you are serious about becoming a top echelon player (remember that I also smoke and drink).

Recently we did make the effort to have a squad with a trainer prepare for the worlds. I don’t think it worked in terms of an improved result but i would want to give full marks for the dedication the squad put in.

At the national triples we saw a player turn up on the Sunday after having been out drinking all night. He was drunk and he then proceeded to try and assault an umpire. Onlookers perhaps thought it was amusing.

Any player who saw the incident and thought it amusing is in cloud cuckoo land if they accept that this behaviour is acceptable at the country’s premier tournament. As a player who has maybe spent a lot of time practising for the tournament, how much respect is this drunken buffoon showing to you and to the sport?

His attitude sucks.

But what about your attitude? How much respect do you warrant for your efforts to improve your game? How would this behaviour be tolerated by other players at a darts/golf/bowls tournament?

Whether we want to improve our own game OR the game of Petanque, it needs a change of attitude from the top down and the bottom up.

As I said earlier I really believe we need to rub out where we are today and start again with higher expectations of ourselves and our administrators.

Any one else believe we need to raise the bar?

-Andy Gilbert

This page has been viewed times

Top

4 Comments:

At 3:55 PM, NZPC Editor (Tom) said...

Andy, I agree with you with regards to bad player behaviour. Two years ago I wrote about this issue on this PAGE.

No one gave support. There is just no interest in setting up a simple process of dealing with baboon-like behaviour.

As I say in my proposal, this should not be something an arbiter has to deal with - this is the job of the tournament organisers. A web based list with names of people banned from tournaments, and showing the duration of the ban, will soon solve the problem.

These people are just idiots who cannot understand that their behaviour (not playing for whatever reason) affects a good number of other people who may have traveled a long way and have bought accommodation in order to play in a tournament.

It is is also interesting that with regards to bad behaviour we had this piece of mismanagement from PNZ last year about an unsubstantiated racial taunt incident in Masterton (this item made it to National Radio). However, there is no mention about whatever went on in Auckland during the National Triples this year (2008). We badly need commonsense, reason and consistency. -Tom.

Top

Andy, just by looking at your comments and also looking at the number of people who have read them (123) at this point, and the number of people who have taken he time to make a comment (1) at this point, shows just what apathy we have in our sport. I don't know how many times people have said to me " agree with your comments" or "you are wrong" or "stop bloody well stirring", yet they WILL NOT put their name to their opinions.

With this apathy how can we expect the sport to grow. I agree with some of what you have said. We are very lucky that our sport costs us so little each year, apart from travelling costs and that is a personal option. Whatever format we have for selecting teams for international tournaments, someone will not agree but as long as it is seen to be fair then that should be accepted. We seem to potter along changing this format and that format, no-one really knows what is happening. There does not seem to be a permenent structure that we can follow simply.

I have been a strong critic of PNZ. That is my right as a paid up member. I am still concerned at the lack of communication from PNZ. Our CEO told us when he first took over the position that he wanted to ensure good communication. The last CEO newsletter was October 2007.

There has been no mention of the recent Trans Tasman tournament on the PNZ website apart from the results which appeared some time after the WPA and the petanque Blog had listed the results. There is still no mention of what happened at the PNZ AGM which was held a fortnight ago except to tell us that the format for choosing the teams to go overseas has changed i.e we are not sending one!

I don't agree with you that the committee is not at fault. We elect these people to lead, to make decisions, to improve our sport but i do not believe that is being done. We are not further advanced or better off than we were 4 or 5 years ago. We bow and scrape to Spark and Peugot but they dont give us that much - and I don't think they should! How can you ask for sponsors then turn around and decide not to send a team away.

The Peugot National Triples and the winners go to the world champs! - Oh except for this year. And, what about the players, who have practised hard, got their teams together, entered the tournaments and then, bang, no chance to go overseas. Who can you blame but the committee. They made the decision. I made my case at my interview when I applied for the CEO job. The decision was made to go in a different direction. I am still

waiting to see the benefits of that decision.

Graeme Burnard

At 9:18 AM, Anonymous said...

I have posted a comment following Andy's comments. I see the site has now ben viewed 150 times and still only two comments. As I said in my other comment with this kind of apathy no wonder our sport is not progessing as it should. I do not believe that of 150 people, 148 don't have an opinion because I get a lot of comments face to face from people who either agree or disagree. If you are interested enough to register and sign in and read the comments, why can't you have the guts to give your own opinion.

Graeme Burnard

At 10:51 AM, NZPC Editor (Tom) said...

I have to agree with Graeme’s sentiments. Here we have Andy making a number of interesting observations about our game, but despite the fact that our Blog is running at an average of 178 visits per day (taken over last 7 days), no one provides any input. This is of course OK, but we do need to know what people are thinking, otherwise we all operate within a vacuum. The result of that could be that our “leaders” will decide what is good for us. It will also mean that we (as Andy has pointed out so well) just drift from trying this and trying that, without a vision or consent. Non-engagement is probably one of the most negative forces around. Again, if you feel uncomfortable about letting us know what you think, that’s fine, but please do not think or expect others to organise everything for you just right all the time. -Tom.

At 9:22 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It will also mean that we ...just drift from trying this and trying that, without a vision or consent."

Then we need to consider some strategic planning and a strategic plan over a 5 year period say, followed by an Operational plan to cover a 12-18 month period.

The strat plan needs to be drafted by a small group, then go out to the regions for feedback to ensure wide input and buy in - and if done appropriately and well, the Op plan should be easy to do.

If we don't plan and put it in print I feel we'll always do what we've always done and we'll always get what we've always got.

Mau

Top

<< Go back to previous page