From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Fri Aug 27 09:34:26 1999 Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA21680 for britdisc-outgoing; Fri, 27 Aug 1999 09:32:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daffodil [137.205.192.30]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA21675 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Fri, 27 Aug 1999 09:32:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from relay3-gui.server.ntli.net (relay3-gui.server.ntli.net [194.168.4.200]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11410 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Fri, 27 Aug 1999 09:32:46 +0100 (BST) Received: from [212.250.65.2] (helo=default) by relay3-gui.server.ntli.net with smtp (Exim 3.03 #2) id 11KHNL-0002LV-00 for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Fri, 27 Aug 1999 09:28:43 +0100 Message-ID: <002101bef05c$24cc9f80$0241fad4@default> From: "matthew.lowe" <matthew.lowe@dtn.ntl.com> To: <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> References: <SIMEON.9908270824.A@lang-ah38.lang.bris.ac.uk> Subject: Re: National teams: a reply to Sammy Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 08:15:23 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk On a similar theme. The World Games in 2001 have been mentioned several times before, but no one has said if the BUF are interested in trying to qualify a British national team. As far as I can tell we would have to finish in the top 4 of 3 of the divisions at worlds next year (I think), and if there was interest in entering a team then this current discussion on squad selection techniques deserves more attention. Is it a realistic aim, getting into the top 4? I believe so, I also believe an appearance at the world games by a GB team would be great publicity for the sport in this country. That's my pennies worth, Matt ----- Original Message ----- From: rafael freire <raf.freire@bristol.ac.uk> To: <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Sent: 27 August 1999 08:55 Subject: National teams: a reply to Sammy > Sammy aired a question about a week ago- whether a > strenghthened club team should represent GB as the > national team- which received some responses but his > point was largely missed. > > The idea that a strengthened club team should represent > GB, as Sam is well aware, has been around for quite a > while. It arose largely due to poor performances by > national teams. Many (I'll come clean, myself included) > thought these poor performances were due to the national > teams not having continuity, cohesion and lacking > experience of competition at the appropriate level. There > is little doubt that the top club teams posses these three > components, hence the idea that the best club side > (albeit strenghthened) should represent GB was developed > (I'll come clean again, it wasn't me) . How this idea > could be implemented is, as Ian Stebbings pointed out, in > need of further thought. > > So here's my answer to Sammy: > > Open: I don't think sending a strengthened club team to > worlds would be a good idea at the momment. In my view > none of the current top teams have sufficient ability or > know-how to form the core of a national team. All of the > top three have strengths for building solid teams, but > then they also have glaring weaknesses. Choosing one team > to form the core would discard the strengths of the other > teams, without addressing its particular weaknesses. Had > this question been asked in the early to middle days of > shotgun (4-5 years ago), the answer would have been very > different. > > On the plus side, I think the open division has skilled > players that can do well at international level. Its just > a question of deciding who they are and how they should be > put together to form a team. > > Women: As I'm not part of the women's scene, I have no > idea whatsoever how they could form a strong national > team, though they clearly have talented players. Perhaps > some of the players concerned would like to offer their > views? > > Rafi (22) > > > > > >