2005 World Petanque Championships

Brussels, Belgium

New Zealand Team

Christian Fouquet, David Lippard, Chris Priestley, Richard Swaney

Results

Championships

Round (1): San Marino: Won 13 - 9, Singapore: Lost 10 - 13, Italy: Lost 4 - 13, Argentina: Lost 0 - 13,

Tunisa: Lost 3 - 13, Portugal: Lost 9 - 13

 

Coup de Nations (Nations Cup)

Round (1): Slovakia: Won 13 - 1, Great Britain: Lost 10 - 13, Slovakia: Won 13 - 4

Round (2): Hungry: Lost 4 - 14, Tunisa: Lost 9 - 13

 

Summary: Played 11 games; Won 3, Lost 8.

back to top

Preparing For Brussels 2005: Michael Emerson (Coach)

Introduction

This article looks at the preparation the NZ team is undergoing before the World Championships in Brussels, September 2005. This article could be of general interest to many in the NZ Petanque community to learn more about the World Championships and how the players prepare. For players at all levels who want to improve their game there are ideas in this article that may help, or which can be adapted to improve their own game. The approach taken to preparing for the World Championships can be adapted to any competition. It’s also hoped that this article may give some insight as to how and why the national selectors make their decisions.

 

This article is in two parts:

Part 1 is an analysis of what is required from a team competing successfully at the World Championships. If you don’t know the right diagnosis you can’t choose the right medicine. So Part 1 lays down the vision of what NZ teams need to do to succeed.

 

Part 2 is a description of how the team are trained to achieve that vision. It includes a simplified explanation of the types of coaching and training they do.

 

Part (1): Analysis – Success at the World Championships

 

Preparation for the 2005 World Championships began with the debrief from the 2004 Championships. 2004 was the first time I’d been to the World Championships and while I’d spoken at length to many players from previous years, and watched many videos, there’s nothing like the experience of being there. It is clear that NZ petanque is up against some serious barriers in achieving success at this tournament.

 

Small pool of Players

The majority of PNZ’s membership are social or club players. Competitive players who regularly train and practice for improvement is probably less than 50 players.

 

World Championships in September, usually in Europe.

This means training through the New Zealand winter, with virtually no indoor terrains for protection. The terrains are wet and soggy, the total opposite of the super-hard bases in Europe. There are no meaningful tournaments here to help get the team competition prepared. And the costs are high – about $5000 per person plus daily spending money.

 

Little previous coaching information.

In 2004 I was the first New Zealand coach to go to the World Championships, so there was no body of coaching experience I could draw from. This article is part of the increased information becoming available to help the standard of play in NZ to improve. After last years Worlds, combined with two Trans Tasman’s, an Oceania and Pan Pacific Tournament, I had a much better idea of what was required for a team to succeed. I was in a position to make a better analysis of the game.

 

The Petanque World Championships are designed to ensure the most skilful and best prepared teams succeed. The highest skills in our sport are shooting `on the full’, and to be able to point consistently well on very technically demanding terrains. These are the skills needed at the Worlds. Preparation is firstly ensuring players are chosen with the right skills, combined with the right mental skills and attributes.

 

Then follows a cycle of:

  • Plan what each player and the team needs

  • Train to improve the skills and attributes identified

  • Test that the plan and training is working

  • Then the plan is redrawn, and so on as a continuous cycle of improvement

So armed with the last year or mores experience it was possible to plan what qualities an ideal team from New Zealand would need.

 

The qualities below are what is expected, for current and future New Zealand teams:

  1. Team of Four

    By far the majority of teams have four players. I was very glad we had four players available in 2004. It gives important tactical options and reassurance to the players. The increased options it gives clearly increases the team’s performances. And as coach I’ll always make sure it’s clear that it’s a team of four – not a team of three and a reserve.

     

  2. Mental Toughness.

    The Worlds is a unique and intimidating tournament. The players need to have a strong sense of self worth and confidence. Fragility will be exposed. Mental toughness and character needed in other sports is equally applicable to Petanque. Some adjectives I’d use to describe the mental attributes required of Petanque players at an international level would be:

    • Even-tempered and patient (not easily unsettled)

    • Resilient (quick to recover from set-backs)

    • Competitive (wants to win)

    • Self-reliant (not dependant on re-assurance of others)

    • Committed (to the team, to hard work and the game)

    • Aggressive (sporting aggressors make things happen)

    • Confident

    • Optimistic

    • Responsible (for their behaviour and their performances)

    • Coachable (some players never really listen, or they have all the answers themselves!)

       

  3. 60 % Team Shooting.

    This is the minimum standard needed to compete at the top half of the tournament. It’s also a fair target for where we’re at in New Zealand. This may not sound high, but it’s a higher percentage than we’ve had from previous New Zealand teams. To achieve this a team needs a first shooter who hits 70 % or more, a millieur at 60%  and a first pointer who shoots 50%.  And this is an average over a number of games, on terrains that are very difficult – usually needing to hit ball to ball to succeed.

     

  4. Technical Pointing.

    Most New Zealand terrains (which have soft bases) reward lazy pointing. Players who get the “weight” of the shot right can get a high success rate. Players develop a feel for the weight like lawn bowlers or golfers putting do. However, technical pointing is played very differently. When a terrain only has a few spots suitable for landing the ball, pointers have to read the terrain, land in the spot the terrain demands, and adjust not just the weight but the arc and appropriate spin. It is a far more precise and skilful shot. Pointers need as big a range of type of shots they can play as possible, rather than being limited to a single weighted throw.

     

  5. Leadership.

    A team needs to develop a strong intuition to allow a good flow to their game, and this comes through experience together. But it also needs a captain. You ultimately need somebody responsible for decisions on the terrain. The captain should have respect from all the players, but not necessarily be the best or strongest player. It is vital that the captain fully understands and shares a similar philosophy to the coach and can communicate very well with the coach. I also personally prefer for the captain to be the first pointer or millieur. It seems first shooters are best left to relax, and not think too much or worry about tactics.

     

  6. Team Composition.

    I believe NZ for some years to come will have to select a `role’ playing team for the Worlds. In a role-playing team there is little movement in each of the playing positions. A first pointer knows their role and sticks to it. The first shooter hits balls, but may not be a great pointer. The millieur will be a complete player and in Europe is usually the star of the team. The Belgian team is a good example of a successful role-playing team. With the small player base that we have in New Zealand, the role-playing team is the best option. This means a specialist pointer or shooter still has a chance to make the team and contribute well. It also gives players confidence to clearly know and settle into their roles.

     

    In the longer term as our game develops, the `complete’ team may be an option as our skills and experience improve. A complete team is one of fully skilled players, who may play to roles, but if one misses a couple of shots, the playing positions are shuffled. The French team are selected as a `complete’ team. All can shoot and point with equal confidence, and roles may be changed through a game.

     

  7. Financially Responsible.

    Petanque is a minority sport; there is no huge pool of money waiting to support the players. So there is always going to be financial costs to the players for going to the Worlds. This year the players will be away from their work for more than 3 weeks. This is because we need to get to Europe as early as possible and do a few warm up tournaments. So players need to be able to take that time away, and pay for their costs for this time. It is likely to be this way in upcoming years. So for each player there is significant cost both financially and in time away from work.

     

    We don’t want representation at the Worlds only for those financially able to afford it. However if team members can’t afford it outright, then they have to be prepared to work hard themselves to fundraise the cost of their trip or their contribution to it.

     

    While PNZ does what it can to raise funds through the sport and Trusts, the responsibility for finding the money must fall with the players. This financial commitment and responsibility is needed by 99% of representative sports players in NZ.

     

  8. Teamwork.

    The selectors will choose players that they know will work well together. There has to be some track record of success together. However teams must constantly strive to improve how they function together. Some of the most important qualities that contribute to excellent team work are:

    • Shared goals and vision. Members of the team have to know where they are going and how they are going to get there.

    • Open communication. The players, coach and manager have to be able to talk to each other very clearly and openly when things are going well and not so well. To help this you have to encourage short lines of communication, not lengthy unnecessary discussions.

    • Experience. The more tough competitive experiences a team has had together, the better. This is where the team hardens and bonds together, and many of the other qualities in this section are developed.

    • Challenge. The players should constantly aim to improve themselves and challenge each other to raise the standards. Training must be a challenge and give the players plenty of chances to compete against each other.

    • Support. The players must also know that whatever happens on the terrain they’ll get the full support of the others. All players have good times and bad times and one of the most damaging things for a team is when players don’t feel supported by others. The coach must encourage this supportive environment.

    • The team must be close, but not a clique. It is important the players all understand each other’s personalities, that they respect each other and show that respect. Hopefully they enjoy each other’s company. However it is not acceptable to have a clique-y team that is not open to outsiders. Selectors have a negative opinion of players who in any way ask to be chosen with other players who may be part of their clique.

    • Optimistic and positive team energy.

All the above points show on the terrain as a team that has an excellent flow or is `in the zone’.

 

In my time involved in Petanque in New Zealand the best example of complete teamwork that I have seen was that shown by the Gold Medal winning triples team at the Oceania tournament in Rotorua. Christian Fouquet, Niau Ruta and Georgio Vakauta displayed a very high level of all the qualities I described above. Their performances at Oceania were truly world class.

 

One of the great things to see in a team that is really working well together is that each individual plays above the level you normal expect of them. This was very obvious in the triples final where I saw three players (whom I knew were very good players having known them for a number of years) working so strongly together, that each of them individually reached a standard of play even higher than they normally play to.

 

Success at the Worlds

These eight qualities of a team will see NZ maximize its chance of success in the World Championships. And an important question that hasn’t been addressed yet is what is success at the Worlds? Is it winning it? Getting in the top 16?

 

Within a team, goals must be specific and measurable, and as coach I use objective criteria, not subjective ones. Unfortunately we can’t control how well the opposition team plays. What is expected from players is constant improvement and personal best performances.

 

Hopefully in 2005 the NZ team plays to the highest standard that any NZ side at the Worlds has. In the coached environment we are learning more objectively the standards of play achieved, not just focussing on finishing positions.

 

Last year`game assessments’ were recorded from each game we played. These can be viewed on the PNZ website. An important goal as a coach is to build this team so we play at a higher standard on this assessment than we did last year. This will show whether our actual quality of play has improved.

 

The biggest target for a NZ team will be getting in the top 16 of the Worlds. This will be the defining moment when we can say we’re really competing at the top level. But this would be a very high achievement and at this stage is possible but could never be expected. Last year we were 33rd and were 2 points away from being 25th. But some of the teams also ranked 33rd – say Canada, Great Britain and Cameroon are also very strong teams. The draw has a lot to do with finishing positions.

 

Currently 62 countries have entered for Brussels, so a top 16 position would be a great achievement.  But there are other goals along the way. The most games we’ve ever won at the Worlds is four, we’ve never got into the top 8 of the Coup de Nations, and never got to the second round of the shooting competition.

 

A good measure of success at the World Championships could be:

  • Improved standard of play year on year

  • At least one new standard or target achieved

Benefits that flow through to more than just the team attending the tournament. It would be nice if many NZ Petanque players gain some enjoyment from, benefit from, or learn from the World Championships team and their performances.

 

Avoidance of setting a goal of where we’ll come in the tournament is not woolly thinking, avoidance, or setting up for failure. It’s realistic. As already explained, our team can’t control the quality of play from our opponents.

 

So we focus as a team on what they can control – to point well, shoot well, make good decisions, support each other – and trust the results will come. And we set no limits on what might be possible to achieve.

 

Hopefully Part 1 has helped you understand the special needs of a team competing for NZ at the World Championships.  Having a coach go to the Worlds has helped Petanque NZ know better what needs to be done to succeed at the international game. Future teams and coaches will be able to build on and learn from the experiences gained, rather than the knowledge being lost with each change in team.

 

In Part 2, we’ll look at how the team prepares, what commitment in time they make and explain basic training principles.  We’ll give some sample training sessions, and explain our final build up plans.

 

Part (2): Training and Preparation for the World Championships

 

In Part 1 it was explained that the World Championships success comes to the most skilful and best prepared teams. Both parts of this are essential to perform well. Selecting a team to represent NZ that was the most skilful and had the ability to be the best prepared was the important first job.

 

Team Selections

In 2004 the selectors held 2 training camps involving more than 30 of our best players. Through the year the selectors had gathered a lot of information on these players. We had information from the Worlds and Trans Tasman 2004. Then the Oceania 2005 and Trans Tasman 2005 gave us the chance to learn more about the top tier players.

 

As well as these international tournaments, NZ tournaments were considered. Probably the most influential are the national doubles and national triples results and performances. Next influential are the regional championships (such as Auckland Triples and Wellington Triples), and then the strong regional Open tournaments.

 

Considering the players available for selection, the selectors soon realised that the 6 players in the final of the national triples were the best-performed players. These 6 had clearly performed the best over the tournaments viewed, both as individuals and as teams. Probably 3 or 4 other players were also seriously considered who had performed well through the selection period.

 

Using the qualities and skills (highlighted in Part 1) we knew a team at the Worlds needed, final selections were made.

 

Team Preparation

Once the team was selected it then became my job as coach to help prepare the team to perform at their best. To achieve this as coach, a number of roles are played. These roles include:

 

  1. Set Goals for the team.

    One of the first things I did with the team was to discuss what role each of them would play, and to emphasise we are a role-playing team.

    Christian Fouquet is our specialist pointer; it is likely to be the only position he will play. Christian was selected because in this role he was part of Auckland, New Zealand and Oceania championships winning teams. He is very experienced and has a very good knowledge of the game. This is why he is our team Captain.

     

    Richard Swaney is our pointing-millieur, as he also is a strong pointer on technical terrains, and can play the same pointing role as Christian. He also is a good millieur – he shoots well under pressure, is an excellent defensive pointer, and a very good contributor all around to the teams he’s in.

     

    David Lippard is our shooting-millieur, and will cover both of these roles. He is quite capable as a first choice shooter, as he showed in Trans Tasman 2005. He’s an all round player, so able to play the millieur position. He is also a strong strategist and is our Vice-Captain.

     

    Chris Priestley is our specialist shooter, and it is likely to be the only position he plays. Through the season Chris’s shooting had continued to improve and he had a very good TransTasman tournament. He has always been a good, pressure shooter who has often played his best in the big games.

     

    So each player had their roles identified, and I wanted them to take pride and ownership in playing these roles.

     

    At training fairly early on I tried to set the standard of `how we play the game’. We had a well-balanced team and needed to play a balanced game. Aggressive when it was needed, Defended well when needed. I wanted a flexible team that focussed on doing well and quickly whatever needed to be done. As training has progressed I have tried to continue to refine this knowledge of how we do things as a team, so the players now know the vision of how we’ll play the game.

     

    With the role playing team I’ve made it clear that there are 3 or 4 different combinations out of the 4 players that will be used in Brussels. So we don’t just have a Team a, but an A, B, C and D team combination that are each confident and capable.

     

  2. Establish Personal Training.

    The players are expected to do 3 personal training sessions a week. These should be between 45 and 60 minutes long. Each week I give them a training sheet for the week. There is usually a theme to the weeks training. Last week I’d identified that we were playing better at shorter distances than longer, so I had them do most of their exercises at 8 metres or longer. They do some of these sessions on their own, and sometimes together. It’s left to the players when and where they do them.

     

    Personal training sessions are where the players build a solid base of skills. They’re all expected to train at pointing and shooting. They all do more shooting than pointing, because it requires more time to get right. Personal training sessions have the following components:

    • Technique – exercises to improve and expand throwing techniques. An example is pointing to a small landing spot, changing the landing spot each ball. This makes the players improve their throw on technical terrains and expands the range of pointing shots they play.

    • Repetition – repetitive exercises making good technique a habit. An example is shooting 50 balls at 8 metres. Players make sure they concentrate with good technique for 50 shots, and record results.

    • Challenge – difficult exercises that challenge the limits of the players’ skills. Shooting a cochonnet is a challenging exercise. So is playing very long (over 10 metres) either pointing or shooting. These exercises are done slowly (at game pace) with few repetitions – usually about 10.

    • Competitive skills - these are exercises that as close as possible imitate the competition environment. This is the `re-assembly’ of the parts that have been trained.  Every facet of a tournament should be considered and prepared for.

    Each week or session they will do a mixture of all four types of training. As the tournament gets closer the players do more work of the challenge and competitive skills type. Earlier in our training we did more technique and repetition. This is the periodization cycle of training common to all sports.

     

  3. Run Team Trainings.

    The team gets together once or twice a week. At first it was once a week, but the last 8 weeks will be twice a week. On Saturdays we play competition games, trying to play in all ways like we intend to in Brussels. The games are assessed and the team discusses the games. We put a lot of emphasis on how we function as a team, decision-making and tactics. It’s as important how we play as the quality of performance, but we always aim for both.

     

    On Monday evenings we train together but we don’t play games, we do a modified type of personal training session. It is also where I put into place the philosophy of Plan, Train, Test, then Plan again, that I discussed before. So there will usually be a test exercise where the players can measure against previous performances. We need to know we are training the right way, that adaptation and improvements are happening. After this we will re-plan based on these results. All new plans and training sessions are discussed with the players. As the players become more experienced I leave more of the decisions about their individual training to them.

     

    On Mondays we also do a range of `Games for Learning’. These are modified versions of Petanque games that help the players learn more about the game and improving performances, rather than static exercises. When well designed, Games for Learning can have a significant positive effect on team performances.

     

    A challenge I had was designing suitable learning games for Petanque. I now have a `Team Training Exercise’ that is too complex to expand on, but is proving very effective. But a simple Game for Learning is playing a normal game but with a line 30cm behind the cochonnet as a pointing `dead-ball’ line. This encourages players to keep their balls in front of the cochonnet, which is tactically important in many games. I may also give the team a series of say 5 or 6 game situations laid out on terrains, which they have to move through successfully in the least number of balls.

     

  4. Manage Competition Preparation.

    If there were one thing I could have changed from last year’s preparation, it would be to ensure we had some competitions before the Worlds in Europe. Last year we missed a few opportunities. I believe even one warm up tournament would have made a significant difference to our performances.

     

    So this year we have two warm up tournaments, and a visit to a French Petanque school. On 10th & 11th September we go to Chalon-sur-Saone for an International Triples tournament, and on 17th & 18th September a similar tournament in Toulouse. Between these we spend 2 days at a Petanque school 100km out of Paris.

     

    The aim of these warm up tournaments is to get the tough competition vital to any team’s success. We need to win and lose hard games, build our resilience and team character. Giving the players a chance to expel any nervousness, and technically prepare on more difficult terrains than we have in NZ.

     

  5. Liase with the Manager.

    Another role I have is to liase between the players and Graeme Morris the team manager. This includes all practical matters such as travel arrangements, uniforms and fundraising.

Summary

You can see the team is following a carefully planned and complete preparation for the Worlds. The sole aim of this is to maximise the performance of the NZ team at the competition, and I am motivated to know improved performances makes the effort worthwhile for the players.

 

The time commitment from the 6 people involved – 4 players, coach and manager is massive considering we are all working full time. We are all lucky in that we get the chance to compete at the highest level at something we love. However at the same time the personal costs are significant – not just financial.

 

I hope you also now understand (if you were in any doubt), that lessons learnt in coaching and training for the Worlds can have benefit to any players serious in wanting to improve their game, and preparing for local competitions.

 

One of the questions I’ve often been asked is whether the selectors will ever choose a team for the Worlds that don’t live in the same region. I can only answer for myself, and the answer is yes, and it was considered this year. It does present some logistical problems, but it could work. However selectors need to be sure that players can perform well together, not just hope so. A team with players from different regions would need to have proved their teamwork already through either local or other international competition. The annual Trans Tasman competition will make the opportunity for a mixed regional national team more possible.

 

For those players who want to train and prepare for any significant tournament at any level, remember the formula we are using for the World Championships:

  • Know what’s needed for success. How good are the opposition? What standard of play is needed? What particular skills do you need?

  • Know where you’re at. Realistically how far away are you from success? Do you have all the skills? Strong in some, lacking others? Get a coach or mentor to help you if you’re not sure.

  • Plan. How will you improve? How will you learn the skills and use them consistently? How much training are you prepared to do? Who are you teaming with? The clearer the plan the better.

  • Train. No use in just making a nice plan. It must be followed through.

  • Test. This relates to `Know where you’re at’. Use warm up tournaments or test exercises to measure your progress.

  • From the test results, re-evaluate and Plan again.

For those players who do want to improve their game, and are willing to commit some time and effort, the training principles outlined will bring them more satisfaction from the game as their play improves.

 

This article will be just the beginning of more information becoming available to players and clubs on coaching and training, based on lessons learnt from international competitions. I have committed to provide more articles in future that will be less wide ranging than this overview, and will have more specific training and coaching advice. Also through PNZ, training programs should be available shortly for clubs and regional associations.

 

Lastly, I hope you all get behind and support our players going to Brussels this year. They’re a great team of players, all very dedicated to the sport and we are well represented by them. The competition runs from the 22nd to 25th September and the team leave NZ on 6th September.

back to top

Report: Michael Emerson (Coach)

Introduction

I am pleased to provide the coach’s report for the World Petanque Championships 2005. This report is prepared for the national executive of PNZ. The report shows how the team was prepared for the tournament, and individual and team results at the World Championships.

 

Selection Process

The panel comprised myself, Bernadette Lawton and Graeme Morris. We had the experience of more than a year together selecting teams as a panel including Worlds 2004, Trans Tasman 2004 & 2005 and Oceania 2005.

 

The nominated team was Christian Fouquet, Richard Swaney, David Lippard and Chris Priestley. Ian Baker was nominated as reserve.

 

Preparation & Coaching

I would like to refer to my previously published document `Preparing for Brussels’ which documents clearly how the team prepared. There is no need to duplicate that information here.

 

But following on from that document, before leaving NZ the team had had very little tournament experience together and I was relying on the two warm up tournaments in France for this experience.

 

The recorded games and exercises showed that the team was playing at a higher standard than last years team did in its preparation period. In training games the team played at 64% effectiveness. This was about 10% improvement on the 2004 years team in training.

 

Learning from last year’s preparation, this team did less repetitive shooting practice, and more game situation and learning exercises. This was to try and keep the preparation stimulating for the players.

 

I was generally very happy with the team’s preparation, especially knowing we were considerably ahead of last year’s performances. However I was concerned that the team hadn’t played many tournaments together.

 

At times the issue of on-terrain tactics and leadership produced tension within the group that was not always satisfactorily resolved. While I’d tried to make leadership clear and to set guidelines for tactics and decision making, there was at times an under-current of dissatisfaction that was hard to bring to a head and clarify or resolve. At times the team looked like it lost focus and direction on the terrain.

 

Preparation in France

The two tournaments we used as preparation were in Chalon-sur-Saone and Fenouillet. These both provided excellent tournament preparation for the team. The standard of play was very high, especially at Fenouillet.

 

There was much that our sport in NZ could learn from these two typically French tournaments, not just about playing the game. A Petanque tournament is more than just a game, it is a place people go for a weekend or day’s leisure. So a pleasant atmosphere and plenty of simple but good food and wine for sale made for a complete tournament experience.

 

I was very impressed with the depth of quality players in France. Of course with about 450,000 licensed competitive players, you know there have to be many players who play well. But at these two tournaments it was exciting to see the reality of so many quality players on the terrain at once.

 

In Fenouillet the terrains (all 250 of them) were very close together. When play started there were players and boules flying everywhere, with non-stop chatter over the loudspeakers. It was bedlam. But it was very enjoyable and a great experience to be part of.

 

At both tournaments we owe a lot to the organisers. Our party of 6 were provided with 3 meals a day and accommodation, for 3 days. This was very generous of them and there’s little we can offer them in return. They were just pleased to have us there and their gratitude was a humbling experience for me.

 

Between the two tournaments we went to CIEP Petanque School in Sergines, 100km from Paris. Claude Raluy is the director and our coach for the two days.

 

Claude places most emphasis on a very specific technique for throwing the ball. It is a method that can be taught incrementally in 3 levels. His technique covers the whole action from entering the circle, setup, stance, holding the ball; the throwing action, release and post throw movements.

 

For most players his technique means significant changes to their throwing action that may take time to learn and make accurate. However it is also great to find someone with confidence in teaching a clear, logical and progressive method.

 

The World Championships

Teams were put into eight pools each of 6 or 7 teams. The top 4 from each pool progressed. In each pool were one team from last years 1 - 8, and one team from 9 - 16. The rest were drawn at random. From the top 32 a barrage was played to reduce to 16 teams, then another barrage down to 8. Then a knockout from 8 – 4 - 2 teams.

 

Those teams not making the top 32 were in the coup de nations, and were joined in the 2nd round by those eliminated from 17- 32 overall.

 

Other than the top 16, final placings in the Worlds are based on their finishing place after the first round of pool play, and totally disregards performances in the Coup de Nations.

 

In our pool we were drawn with Tunisia, Italy, Argentina, Portugal, Singapore, San Marino. We felt this was a hard draw, with us needing to beat at least two teams ranked higher than us to progress.

 

A note on the Assessing

As I did in 2004, I used the game assessment sheets for every game, and believe it is a fair and accurate way of recording individual and team performances. Attached to this report is a more detailed summary of players and team assessment scores.

 

The assessments show the bare facts of what level the team and each player performed at. However there are other important factors that must also be taken into account before a complete picture of a player’s contribution to a team can be known. These factors include:

  • Quality of communication with other players and coaches – particularly listening skills and clear expressions of opinion

  • Confidence and anxiety levels

  • Support shown to teammates

  • Leadership, Adaptability and resilience

What I report below are the team statistics, as I believe this is the most important. As a coach my aim is to get a team playing at the highest standard possible

 

The Games

  1. New Zealand v San Marino. Result: Won 13 - 9

    New Zealand Team: Richard, David, Chris

    Sub: Christian subbed on for Richard at 9 - 8. Richard asked to be subbed.

    Game comments:

    A good game to start and I felt we built some confidence through the game. San Marino pointer had trouble adjusting to the terrain, but they were shooting quite well. The game was won on the strength of our more consistent pointing, and shooting well when we had to. Christian pointed very well when subbed on.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 50%; Shooting: 72.7%; Team Overall: 54.3%

     

  2. New Zealand v Singapore. Result: Lost 10 - 13

    New Zealand Team: Christian, Richard, Chris

    Sub: David subbed on for Richard at 5 - 8

    Game comments:

    The Singapore team was very weak at the start of the game, and after 3 ends NZ led 4 - 2, but we should have been up by at least 6 - 0 and we didn’t take advantage. Singapore became more confident and their shooting improved as the game progressed.

    David pointed well after being subbed on, Chris shot well but we never shot following on from Chris. Other than Chris the team shot 0 from 6 attempts. The team was all disappointed to lose knowing we didn’t play to the standard we can.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 49%; Shooting: 53.7%; Team Overall: 50.64%

     

  3. New Zealand v Italy. Result: Lost 4 - 13

    New Zealand Team: Christian, David, Chris

    Game comments:

    Italy was one of the seeded teams in our pool. They had a slow start and we began playing well.

    NZ leading 3 - 0 after 2 ends. Then Italy changed tactics and started shooting more frequently, with good effect. Italy shot 25 times, hit 20, with 9 carreaux.

    Our team played well, but the Italians had too much firepower. While disappointed to lose, our team were quite upbeat afterwards because they knew they played to a good standard and had made the opposition play very well to win.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 69.7%; Shooting: 56.7%; Team Overall: 65.6%

     

  4. New Zealand v Argentina. Result: Lost 0 - 13

    New Zealand Team: Christian, David, Chris

    Game comments:

    A very disappointing performance to finish our first day. Poor pointing meant we couldn’t build a foothold in the game. Our confidence dropped and this probably led to a few tactical errors that cost us more. Argentina played well, but we never took the game to them and we made it quite easy for them. Unfortunately no highlights for our team in this game.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 39%; Shooting: 53.1%; Team Overall: 43%

     

  5. New Zealand v Tunisa. Result: Lost 3 - 13

    New Zealand Team: Richard, David, Chris

    Game comments:

    A similar story to the Italy game, where we raised our standard, played well, but lost to a team with excellent individual skills and great team experience.

    Richard had a much better game to start day 2 after really struggling for form on day 1. Excellent performances from David and Chris. We pretty much did what we could with the skills and experience we have. Our team was full of respect for the Tunisian team afterwards, which has great skill, experience and tactical nous.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 63.2%; Shooting: 66.7%; Team Overall: 64.3%

     

  6. New Zealand v Portugal. Result: Lost 9 - 13

    New Zealand Team: Christian, Richard, Chris

    Game comments:

    A very close game that could have gone either way. We knew they were strong, but they seemed tentative and unsure of themselves. They were probably under pressure themselves to win and qualify for the next round.

    However our pointing was a bit erratic and a number of ends we didn’t capitalize when we had a boule advantage. We fought back from 3 - 9 after 4 ends to 9 - 10 after 8 ends.

    But the final end was poor from us, with us not contributing much with our 6 balls. How often are games lost through one bad or loose end? Disappointed afterwards knowing we had a fair chance to beat a good team.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 47.1%; Shooting: 63.2%; Team Overall: 52.78%

     

  7. New Zealand v Slovakia. Result: Won 13 - 1

    New Zealand Team: Christian, David, Chris

    Game comments:

    Still on day 2, beginning of the Coup de Nations. A very strong performance against a weaker team. But we executed our shots very well. Won in 5 ends. Chris shot 7 from 7.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 68.2%; Shooting: 100%; Team overall: 75.8%

  8. New Zealand v Great Britain. Result: Lost 10 - 13

    New Zealand Team: Christian, David, Chris

    Sub: Richard. He was chosen for this game, but relinquished his place for David to play against his old countryman.

    Game comments:

    A close game, with some luck going their way. We had a shaky start  0 - 7 down after 3 ends. Then we started on a roll, especially our shooting, with Chris shooting 90%.

    There were some really interesting ends. 8th end we had a chance to point to 12, but came up short but still 10 - 8 up. Next end the GB team shoot 3 of our boules to take 4 points.

    Final end, and playing our 6th boule we need something big from Christian. They held game with a boule on the side of the cochonnet and they are out of boules. As planned Christian drags the cochonnet towards our 2 back boules, but agonizingly the coch goes a little too far. They hold and have game. We were just a few centimeters from holding game ourselves! One day we’ll beat the old country at this......

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 46.1%; Shooting: 78.6%; Team Overall: 57.5%

  9. New Zealand v Slovakia. Result: Won 13 - 4

    New Zealand Team: Christian, Richard, Chris

    Game comments:

    Still going on Day 2, it seems like the longest day ever. This game starts at 9.35pm. So begins one of the most boring games of Petanque.

    It appears that since we last played them and beat them 13 - 1 that they are under instructions from their coach to play as slow as possible, to frustrate us. Unfortunately they succeed.

    I think Chris’s arm is coming off at the shoulder. He’s had to shoot so many boules today, and he finally looks tired. By 11pm it’s 8 - 2 to us. We only seem to be able to take 1 point an end. They are playing long and very slow. I time 2 boules being played by them – 2 mins 30, then 2 mins 15. I talk to Christian and decide to talk to an arbitre. Arbitre lets it go for quite a long time. They still never play a single ball within a minute. Finally an arbitre talks to them and we can move on at a slightly faster pace. 11.42pm we finish the game 13 - 4 to the cheers of an empty stadium. Our players had stuck to their task though, and the focus remained through the game. By the time we get back to the hotel the players are not resting until after 12.30am. They need to be up at 6.30am for an 8am first game. It’s tough being an international sports-star.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 52%; Shooting: 44.7%; Team Overall: 50.7%

  10. New Zealand v Hungry. Result: Lost 4 - 13

    New Zealand Team: Christian, Richard, Chris

    Game comments:

    After beating Slovakia late last night, we go to the 2nd round of the Coup de Nations in a pool of 4 with Hungary, Tunisia and Guinee.

    The team seemed very tired after such a big day yesterday. Tried to warm up well.

    However once the game starts the players are obviously quite flat. 0 - 7 down after 4 ends. A little bit of a fightback for a few ends, then they go flat again and the team contributes very little in the last two ends. A similar feeling afterwards to the Singapore game. We performed poorly, our lowest of the tournament, and an average team took advantage of it.

    Hungary was better than the team we beat last year, but were quite beatable if we’d played well.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 41.9%; Shooting: 35.3%; Team Overall: 39.6%

  11. New Zealand v Tunisa. Result: Lost 9 - 13

    New Zealand Team: Christian, David, Chris

    Game comments:

    What was Tunisia doing in the Coup de Nations? Well unfortunately they lost to France twice in the top 32 pools.

    First 3 ends and everything goes our way – we’re 9 - 0 up. On the 3rd end we carreau 3 times for 6 points. They then substitute to bring on more pointing strength, change tactics to point alot to make us shoot, drag down our shooters’ boules. They come back slowly and it’s 9 - 8 to us.

    Final end and we miss 2 shots. Now they attack, they take out two of our balls with one shot., they shoot another ball of ours, they roll one more in, and then promote a front ball for 6 points.

    Very upsetting to lose from the advantage we had, but they did play brilliantly, especially the last end. Our pointing had dropped off a bit towards the end.

    New Zealand Team statistics: Pointing: 48%; Shooting: 84.8%; Team Overall: 65.6%

Tournament Summary

The loss to Tunisia in the Coup de Nations completed our Worlds tournament. The preparation was long and at times challenging, it really seemed like a `campaign’ as used in old military terms and to describe early rugby tours.

 

As I have previously reported I believe the Worlds is a very difficult tournament for NZ to perform well at. The main reasons for this is:

  • Out of season for us

  • Very small pool of competitive players

  • Lack of genuine competition for our elite players

  • High cost of traveling and competing in Europe

These are problems that will remain with us for some time. But the Worlds are a very powerful experience for the team, and it’s the pinnacle of our game to compete. I note in most players having been there, a fierce determination to get back to the Worlds again.

 

We were finally placed in 50th spot, which I know must be accepted, but I also know is unfair. We were ranked lower than teams who never won a game. The statistics that really count are those from 32nd upwards. The rankings from 33rd down are a lottery. In one pool 3 teams were tied on the same wins and very close on points. However while they were very close in ability and results, they ended up ranked 33rd, 41st & 50th.

 

Team Performance Summary

This NZ team had very good potential, but it was never consistently reached. Our performances were too variable and we played poorly 2 or 3 times against weaker opposition. Chris as 1st shooter was our best performer at the tournament, but we often struggled in the middle playing position, and sometimes pointing. We clearly struggled to shoot carrying on from Chris.

 

However our play was to a better standard than in Grenoble 2004 and this is born out with the game assessments. I did feel that progress was made. But as I discussed with the Australian coach, while we both know our teams have made progress, it appears other countries are improving faster.

 

In training games the team played at 64% effectiveness, and through the worlds we performed at 55.3% effective, a nearly 14% drop. This was a similar drop off rate as the 2004 team. Individually the players ranged from a 6% to 30% reduced effectiveness. The coaching challenge is to reduce or eliminate this drop off between playing in NZ conditions and the World Championships.

 

Chris shot an average of 69.2% through the tournament, and as I’ve already said this was a very good effort. But in the 11 games we played, our opponents averaged 73% shooting.  So at all levels of our game our playing skills can and must be improved for us to be competitive at the Worlds.

 

Amongst the challenges facing me is that at the Worlds my coaching role changes and is unfamiliar. It is the only tournament where I am truly a sideline coach. Trans Tasman and Oceania are bigger squads and I’m not on the side of every game. The players generally control the games themselves in these tournaments, so my focus has been on preparing them before the tournament.