Captain Australia - Ronald Voukolos

[Danni]

Hey Scott,

I just wanted to say that I agree 100% on what you said about Ronald and others who have also said that he didn't ask for this but now he has the responsibility of being the Captain of the Australian Mens Team. I am sure he'll perform the task as well as Frawls or Muir would but since they have step down from this position, it is now up to Ronald to step up to the plate with the support of his team-mates.

Anyway, I just want to say congrats Ronald, I am sure you'll do Australia proud.

 

[GeorgeF]

Scooter "where do you get Ronald having no experience for the last 10 years???? "

Who cares about what happened 10 years ago, no one cares what he did as a junior, its shouldn't count.....

What International tournaments has he bowled in the last 2 years? How many National events in Australia has he won? How many tournaments per year does he bowl?? Not many!!

I just don't agree how someone can bowl a few a events a year, not finish anywhere in the Australian rankings (currently 18th) and become Australian captain. This selection says to aspiring bowlers, bowl AO make the cut and then bowl Rachuig and your a good chance of representing your country. No wonder why tournament numbers are dwingling, why bowl, they don't count for anything anyway.

The problem with this country is that as bowlers we are set pathways (goal posts) in order to make National teams. Just as we start playing well and playing by the rules set down, TBA moves the pathway to another spot (goal posts to another position). Politics continues to haunt us and bowling will never progress further until this policital crap is sorted out and done with. Get rid of selectors, set down 6-12 events a year, go on some sort of rankings, let people bowl there way into the team. That way the guys who make the team, have bowled in a decent number of events over a variety of lane conditions in different states. Having it boil down to 1 event such as the AO was not fair by any means.

I personally would like to see his resume over the past 18 months, so other bowlers and myself know what it takes to make an Australian team. I'm sure it would be a talking point.

If this posts seems that I am dirty I wasn't selected you've got it wrong. My team would have included the Super 6 winner Michael Little, Matt Francis (No.4 on the Australian rankings), and a few others. Trotter I have no probs with, Ronald and Mac??? lets see there resume please...........

 

[Andrew Frawley]

for once I will be brief:
1. Winning the upper com bucka west open may look good on a resume.....but 16 games of matchplay on the desert is not good form for the 6 game (now 3 games on 2 conditions)
FIQ format....6 games per day, very common is this country.

2. Rachuig may not be the greatest guide but it does have 3 very good points A)it is only 7 games per day, B) it does have an influence on who are good team players, and C) the National selectors are watching.
(they normally don't attend the North Galargenbone Cup bowled on the great wall of china)
Andrew.

 

[swonky]

I'am no an adult, legally yes. But of adult bowling calabore no.

First the debate and fuss was over selection, now over captaincy. Not everyone and I mean NOT EVERYONE will ever agree on anything the selectors do. And if there were more strict guidelines and tournament as too have a ranking systems, I bet not everyone would agree on that either.

Australia is a great country with alot of great bowlers, the selectors at the moment give you a fair chance to gain automatic entry into the FIQ adult teams, with events such as the AO and the ladies event which was the SA CUP (correct me if I'am wrong)and some people took that oppurtunity and ran with it (congrats Belmo, Bill and Anthony) and other didnt, but there is always next year. But that Fact of the matter is you knew that spots were up for grabs, and unfortunately you didnt bowl well enough..

Now as for the captaincy.

Ron is captain, it can be taken in many ways, i'll give you two examples

"Ron is captain, good for him, he may not deserve it, but the selectors have choosen him, so I should congratulate and respect him"

or.

" Choosing Ron is ridiculous, I cant believe thouse idiot selectors choose him, I could make a better captain, hell even that kid from orange could make a better captain, I take this personally, so I dont respect or congratulate Ron"

The captaincy is BIG for some people, and for others not so big, but the WORD 'Captain' or INITIAL "C" is PRESSURE no doubt. And because of this forum, Ron now may feel added pressure.

For me I hope to represent Australia, one day, the fact I'm handicapped is a set back, but it is not impossible, so for all of those who didnt make it, dont give up.

And Ron I do not know you, nor you me, but if you read this congratulations.

 

[K-C]

When the format for all the FIQ teams trials and selections were first announced by TBA, I recall general consensus by bowlers on this forum that it was a fair format, and a step in the right direction by our governing body. Now, after all these trials have actually gone ahead, it does seem some of those that may have not performed as well as they would have liked on the day (and before the events, rated themselves a big chance) have sour grapes over the whole situation due to the fact that format ended up working against them.

Now to the actual topic of this post... I get the feeling from reading Bill's post on the matter that he understands the decision by the selectors even though he was disappointed. Why can't everyone else just accept it like he has, shut up and let the team get on with the job they have been selected for??

I also strongly agree also that people on this forum should be held responsible for their opinions. QBert, name up or shut up also thanks.

PS. Congratulations to Ronald. I am sure he will do the best job he can.

 

[Kim B]

Just off the topic for one moment here and to a segment of George's post recently.

"Who cares about what happened 10 years ago, no one cares what he did as a junior, its shouldn't count....."

Why doesn't and shouldn't it count what Ronald did as a junior?????

From that i take it as why bother starting young, just go straight into adults where you have worse bickering and backstabbing than in juniors. If that is the case then im sure some of the juniors who are recently aged out or to age out in the near future (some names like: Jarrod, Jason Belmonte, Brendan Heathwood, Jayde Flanagan, Nat Shelley and Michelle Halprin) would still give any adult a run for their money.


To Ronald, congrats on being selected as a new member of the team this year. I am sure your fellow FIQ bowlers will support you overseas and all will do fine job. Who cares about captain. The team should be bowling as a whole, one person can not win in a team situation. Why do we select a manager in this case? Take the pressure off the bowlers, let the manager and coach have the responsibility.

Good luck to all overseas. I do not doubt you will all do us proud back here in Aus.

Take care
Kim Barry

 

[BELMO]

MANKIND:
"hell even that kid from orange could make a better captain"

i RESENT being call a KID hahaha young adult i prefer to call myself!!!

hahahaha

LaaaaaaaaaaaaaaTer

 

[greg holmes]

The debate over the hows and whys of F.I.Q. selection seems, this year at least, to be hotter than ever. After reading the opinions
of others I am wondering whether in fact, our
sport should take a new direction.

Most sporting organisations have selection commitees of some form but in the case of bowling maybe F.I.Q. selection should be based purely on performances. After all the only controversy seems to be about the selected members and not those who made it on
their merits.

With that in mind I believe the format used at the A.O. could be extended and 3 tournaments used as selection criteria. Frawls has indicated that Rachuig is still used as a guide and so my proposal is to utilise that as maybe a selection process for
one or two spots. Sure there are going to be problems working out the guidelines but if these are set down BEFORE the tournament I am sure the knockers can be silenced. Might even encourage a few more top bowlers back into Rachuig.

The remaining spots could be allocated to long standing tournaments around the country (ie S.A.Cup. Sth Pacific etc). This would help keep these tournaments alive and everyone would get more than one chance at making the team. The reserves spots could be
allocated to the top two placed bowlers from
ALL tournaments (providing they hadnt already
made the team). This would then also reward
those bowlers who invest their hard earned dollars into travelling to ALL tournaments.

This proposal is not a slur at what has happened this year but merely a suggestion
at improving our sport. To all those who have
made the team congratulations. Do we really
need selectors or does our sport already have the mechanism's in place for a fairer
selection process without all the bickering
and swiping. There are very few other sports
lucky enough to boast the ability of a selection process similar to what I have proposed. Just food for thought.

Regards Greg Holmes.

 

[swonky]

Thats why I said it belmo to blow up your skirt.

It was all fun, and I'm supposed to respect my elders

*bows to sir Belmo*

 

[GeorgeF]

Frawls

I'm guessing that your posts was a pun on the events I bowl in QLD. Yes we have some dry carry contests but I think you forgot that I have bowled every NSW stop this year (currently 2nd), and bowl in the only "SPORT PATTERN" tournament series this country offers (where again I am coming 2nd). I bowl a tournament almost every week.

I bowl on anything that is given to me and if it is dry or wet I don't care, I'm there bowling week in and week out doing well. It comes down to tournament experience, you can practise all you want but as your friend Tim Mack says " You can't buy experience ".

If Rachuig is that important than why not include the 21 games as part of a schedule of tournaments through out the year where a bowler can bowl his way into the team.

You've got to feel for bowlers like Matt Francis and Michael Little who made an effort to bowl numerous National stops, did incredibly well in them, only to have 2 bowlers ranked 18th and 19th in Australia picked ahead of them.

The answer is simple!! Do away with selection, it creates too many arguements and problems. If there is no selectors, and a clear and fair format to making the team is set, you'll get no arguements from anyone. A 12 month schedule, minimum of 6 events Nationally, with Rachuig included. In return you would get a better following to tournaments and completly fair system and pathway to representing your country.

Bazza, as for junior experience stuff, I was referring to recent (within 2 years) bowling experience, not something that happened 10 years ago. Belmo, Jarrod etc have there experience from the last 12 months and they still bowl. The idea is to send a team that is in form at that time, not a team of experienced bowlers who haven't bowled well for the last 5 years but share heaps of knowledge.

Also for those who think Michael Little, Jason Walsh etc were not available for selection prior to AO, that is not what Kevin Braun told Michael prior to the tournament. Once again, say one thing, mean another. Let's fix up the selection process prior to worlds next year please......

 

[trev]

well said jim........

everyone has an opinion.

but getting back to the original post.......

ron has obviously been selected in the team on his ability and was the next best bowler.......right ???

ron has obviously been nominated captain cos he is the best leader out of the six.......right???

right or wrong.....its done

we will always have our gripes and opinions.

but to say that we should send an australian team in this sport without a captain and that it really doesnt mean much........what the heck is going on there??????

............but because i,m sitting on the fence and not really going anywhere in life (someone pointed that out in a previous topic)......i will sit back and not say a word !!!!!

anyhows.......
good luck to ron and his co bowlers

 

[Andrew S.]

Just one small query.

Was Ronald appointed Captain by the selectors, or was he made Captain by consensus vote of the team?

If the latter is the case then QBert has no alternative other than to withdraw his comments.
Andrew Shinnie

 

[SCOOPS]

Still no one has answered my question

Personally I dont care if Ronald is in or not. if he's in then obviously there are people out there that believe in hie ability and we shouldnt knock that

All I want to know is, as an extreme bystander

If he was the 3rd pick as leader of the pack and this decision was made by the selectors Then why wasnt he 3rd pick into the team
Seems simple enough to me

GOOD LUCK to all 12 REPS i'm sure u will do the country proud

 

[Andrew Frawley]

George,
I think you have missed my point
1.Rankings is this country is done as a service to bowlers by TBA. It is a requirement for funding by the Sports Commission to do this. The national ranking only serves to show who can bowl well on the condition served up. I am fairly sure that you will agree that they may look completely different if the lane conditions were set independently for each tournament, instead the local house shot serves as the weekends challenge. Maybe one day.

2. Next year the rolloff will be over at least 2 events...problem is we need to get the second event...self interest in that "no one is coming here to change our lane conditions" means that more work is required to find a suitable tournament at a suitable date. My belief is, and yours may be different, is that form from 8 months before the event is just that, it looks good on paper. Form two months before an event on challeging conditions is something that can be carried over. This year we had asian zone and had one qualifying event next year will be at least 2 events involving 5-6 blocks of 6 games in the points format. we need to just find out when the WTBA will set the dates for the World champs in stone so we can tender the qualifying events out.

Selection of bowlers will happen so forget about the thought, perhaps the number selected can change, but the big thing is that at least 3 bowlers can decide there own fate, they can even if they are some loud mouthed idiot, if they don't shower, if they continously complain about lane conditions, or if they think that they are not liked by some selector.... but IF THEY CAN BOWL THEY CAN REPRESENT THEIR COUNTRY, BY FINISHING IN THE TOP 3, please tell me if this does not sound fairer than previous years, because I really need to know if we are on the right track.

As far as Ronald goes, every bowler in that team may as well have captain on their shirt..it will all mean the same....zilch.
After Anthony Flynn, Ronald is the next best experienced FIQ bowler so it doesn't sound out of place to me, but I think I made my point of what a captain does at FIQ.

I just got a look at what the bowlers will be playing on in Hong Kong, very flat less than 2:1 ratio oil across the lane, based on what Kegel laid down in Denmark for this weeks world ranking masters I doubt any new scoring records will be shot..it is going to be plain tough for all bowlers. Good time to support all our team than to send them away with this crappy negativity.
AF

 

[DJ Luko]

ok ok ok i may be under the inluence but here goes... i have seen ronald bowl and he shows great leadership skills.... i havent seen much of the other guys in the aussie team but ronald seems to have valuable leaderships qualities and i am sure he will lead aussie well.

ronald seems to have more experience than the other guys so whats the problem?

it has been done so lets just get behind the team and hope they bring back the best....

cheers

PoonTastic

Luko

 

[GeorgeF]

Frawls I would have to agree with most of what you said except for the form basis. If the rankings are just a service and mean nothing, by your post as long as you bowl well on the roll off date and you bowl rachuig, you've got a good chance.

It then raises the question, why bowl tournaments?? I really feel there is too much luck factor involved when the selection process is over a small amount of games. Look at Team USA, there trials are all bowling based and you can only bowl your way into the team after months of local, regional and national roll offs. There is no luck involved over 120 games, you will get the best team.

Our selection process allows a bowler who bowls local champs, rachuig and 1 tournament the opportunity to represent his country which is wrong. Why shouldn't form from 8 months ago be taken into account, especially if they are National wins (like Matt Francis's NSW open win and Australian Cup win). Whats Matt to do? finish 4 in Australia in the rankings that mean nothing, win 2 majors for the year, bowl rachuig, bowl everything required only to have someone with less experience get infront of you.

My point is that if the selection was over a variety of events in different states and over a decent number of games, we wouldn't have this contraversy. Bowl 8 National events a year (which isn't that hard) and use your best 7 and throw in Rachuig on top of that. That would give you at least 90 games and a team who can bowl on a variety of conditions anywhere. Team USA other teams around the world don't have this contraversy, the forumla is simple, why don't we do it??

Like I said before, there is too much luck involved with the process we have now and it's message says, only bowl tournaments leading up to roll offs as they are the only ones that count. It's not right, it should be changed.

 

[dwambo]

NEWS FLASH!!!!!!!!

I have been informed who Qbert is.And to his surprise he has slipped up in 1 of his posts and let the cat out of the bag.
Now Qbert should I name u?? mmmmmmmmmmmm I need some new gear..

THIS IS JUST MY OPINION!!!

 

[jimcross]

I DO NOT agree with critisising SELECTIONS however arrived at.
I DO NOT agree with critisising SELECTORS DECISIONS;they have no chance of universal acceptance.
I DO AGREE with DISCUSSING alternate WAYS of SELECTION.
It is IDEAL that SELECTION be TRANSPARENT.
It is NOT IDEAL that any ONE EVENT plays too GREAT A PART in SELECTION.
It is DESIRABLE that BOWLING ABILITY be the almost EXCLUSIVE FACTOR in SELECTION.
It is DESIRABLE that the BEST possible team be SELECTED.

IT DOES NOT APPEAR IMPOSSIBLE TO ACHIEVE ALL OF THE ABOVE FAIRLY SIMPLY.

HOW ABOUT nominating 6 EVENTS which will be the SELECTION EVENTS each year?
Organisers could apply to TBA to have their event included,SO THAT TBA could ENSURE that the formats WERE SUITABLE for SELECTION PURPOSES [see FRAWLS post]
Those EVENTS to operate a SIMPLE POINTS SYSTEM for SELECTION PURPOSES,such as 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1,points for placings,with the one point repeated for all qualifiers.
THIS system to AUTOMATICALLY SELECT the FIRST 4 PLACES.
The SELECTORS then have the OPTION to select two 'WILD CARDS'provided that they have BOWLED in at least 4 OF THE 6 EVENTS.
The SELECTORS may choose NOT TO USE this OPTION,or to use it partially [One Wild Card].
RESERVES to be the NEXT 2 PLACINGS who were not selected.

IT IS NOT DESIRABLE THAT OTHER FACTORS,SOME OF WHICH HAVE BECOME TRADITIONAL,GET IN THE WAY OF TRYING TO ARRIVE AT THE BEST TEAM,BASED ON DEMONSTRATED ABILITY.

ADMINISTRATORS GENERALLY hate SIMPLICITY,but keeping your eyes on the doughnut,and not the hole,there is NO GOOD REASON for any pre-qualification other than being a financial TBA MEMBER.


Naturally,a person could be excluded from the selection process for 'cause'provided proper fair and open procedures with appeal provisions were used.

I thought I was wrong once,but I was mistaken.

 

[Michael Little]

Gripes first suggestions second.

First the issue of team selection in reference to bowling Nationally ranked tournaments. I will take reference to the booklet distributed by the TBA to National Selection Squad members. The specific pathways to being a National Team member include being a part of the training squad, presumably attending national camps and workshops (apparently this happens after you make the team) and the National Rankings Tour. I will also take a quote from the booklet of a summary about the 2002 National Elite Rankings System.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, ">quote

The National Elite Ranking System has been established to clearly answer the question of "who is best in the land?" It will also give a simple guage to bowlers, administrators, sponsors and the media just how certain bowlers are doing on the national major tournament scene. It also provides all bowlers a set path for making a National Training Squad and ultimately a National Team. All bowlers should remember that the rolling 12 months of rankings will be a major criteria in the selection of the Adult and Youth National Team in 2001/2002

Is it me or are those who "volunteer" to be selectors reading from a different booklet? This is where I think the problem lies. Bowling a tournament circuit in Australia was supposed to be a major factor in seeing who are our better bowlers. In relation to Georges query: what is the point in busting your hump bowling just about every tournament and supporting these events when it doesnt count for anything in the long run? This was supposed to be a set pathway. Someone has definitely gone bush! Having said that I also feel that bowlers that have been selected shouldnt be responsible for decisions which were out of there control.

To the topic of this post. If the team are all captains and the meaning of or relevance of having a captain means zilch and counts for nothing, then why make what has turned out to be a controversial decision to appoint Ronald. I am sure he did not put his hand up for the job and would be close to be wondering why he was picked for it. I can see it was a process decided by last man with experience standing but this decision must have been made knowing it would cause a negative reaction. If being a captain means so little then why make it? I am sure Ron didnt ask for this crap to be heaped on him.

Suggestions in regards to team selections. I stand by my post stating that the current process is on the right track. Let me know Frawls what you think of these suggestions.

Keep the points system for the 3 x 6 game blocks, but also include another points tally for total pinfall. If the TBA are thinking of having two tournaments to decide the team on, how about taking it one step further with what George has suggested but give two tournaments a bigger weight in the process with another 5 majors to carry less weight.

What I mean by this is for example have AO and South Pacific as Commission funded with a Kegel rep. These tournaments would carry a rating or percentage of 25% each totalling 50%. The other 5 tournaments carry 10% each and these could include 4 majors plus Rachuig. These tournaments in this series could be different each year in accordance to when FIQ dates are and when teams need to be finalised. Points are only taken from qualifying parts and this way you have two major tournaments with "as close to as possible" FIQ conditions and the other 5 which carry less impact on normal house or tournament conditions. This would give you about 80-90 games on a broad range of conditions. The other 3 team selections can go on a combination of how well they performed in these tournaments plus overall rankings results for the rolling year. You can even change the percentages used so the other 5 carry less impact.

We have only just started getting tournament numbers back up to a respectable level in the past couple of years. This could also be a way to keep the numbers going. Just look at Rachuig, that tournament would be close to resembling a corpse without it being a pre-requisite for National Team selection. The other ideal scenario is to have an independant lane man for these tournaments. I know this has been in the pipeline for a while. Then bowlers who make an effort to support the tournaments might have their achievements recognised.

Look forward to a reply.

 

[GeorgeF]

I agree, how do we put a proposal forward Frawls??