"....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....."
See full text by following the link at the end of this post.
7 comments:
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.
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 or 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
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.
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 FIPJP. 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. Why does Bryan and PNZ hold the members of NZ Petanque is such low regard. Why do they treat the membership as though they have the intellect of demented geraniums.
I am wondering how many other international teams are formulating reserve strategies with FIPJP.
I can't help but wonder why PNZ with its fancy footwork is making us the laughing stock of the international petanque world - Why? -Tom.
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
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?
This post has received Spam. There are many deranged individuals out in cyberspace getting fun out of defacing other people's work. This post is now locked. If you would like to make a constructive contribution, please email it to me. -Tom.
Post a Comment