Many thanks to those members who took the time to complete a selection feedback form. PNZ received 20 forms in total and one discussion document related to selection.

Next steps

The feedback and comments are currently being considered by PNZ. A review of some selection models, used by other sports is also being undertaken. In particular, PNZ are looking at how these sports manage factors affecting their selection processes that are similar to those experienced in petanque. These factors include:

• Selecting from a small pool of available players

• The commitment expectations to the selection process when players have to self find their attendance to tournaments

• The best way selectors can monitor player's performance given the geographical spread of players across New Zealand

• Team selection compared with individual selection models

Once this information has been considered, PNZ will review the current selection process and policy. Changes to the policy and/or process may be made for 2007 and thus will not affect selection for remaining international tournaments in 2006. The PNZ Executive will meet in November, to review the selection process. It is expected that any revised policy and process will be completed by December. Therefore the closing date for applications for 2007 selection is extended to 31 December 2006.

Summary of key points from surveys

Note that not all respondents commented on all questions.

• 20 responses in total

• 14 from players enrolled in selection, 6 from non-enrolled players

The main themes that emerged from the responses were:

• Selectors must adhere to the process as set out initially

• There needs to be more feedback and explanation from selectors as to

  • What they are looking for

  • Reasons for selection choices

• Use measurable criteria as much as possible, such as tournament results, instead of subjective criteria

• More regional balance

  • Competitions for team selections, with play-offs between the top teams from each region

  • A regional spread in the selection panel

• The need to get selected teams together early and get them to play together as much as possible.

• Need for more coaching and training

Other results:

• 50% found the selection process easy to understand or “about right”

• 11 responses felt the process could be made easier by:

  • Adhering to the selection process

  • Only consider players with proven tournament success and who demonstrate a range of skills

  • Clarifying entry for either Open or Senior grades

  • Define purpose of selection; is it:

    • To build successful petanque representation for NZ or,

    • provide opportunity for all players to compete at international level

• The use of measurable criteria for selection was preferred, such as play off systems rather than non measurable criteria

• Clarity was requested on what is required from an individual

• 16 people commented on the fairness of the selection process. 10 considered it unfair, 3 found it fair, while the others were undecided

• Comments about unfairness included:

  • ensuring that all players should go through the same process and play the same number of games as part of the selection process

  • a play off system (i.e. competition/s for players who enroll in selection) should be established

  • performance (skills) should be the most important measurement for selection

  • rationale about how players are selected or not should be made available to players

  • inform players early on if they are no longer being considered for selection, to avoid further investment of players’ time and money

  • the selection process is not working for petanque and should be replaced by another method

• 14 responses supported criteria for entry into selection. Approximately half felt this should occur at entry point into selection, others felt that a play off should occur with ‘elimination rounds’ for those players who do not meet the criteria. Criteria suggestions included:

  • using seeding points as a measurement

  • previous regional representation as a prerequisite

  • tournament results, for example top 16 finishes at designated tournaments

  • establishing three levels of entry, such as bronze, silver, and gold, with gold being those players selected for the World Championships, for example

  • regional selectors select players into the squad as the first entry point

• Approximately equal numbers favoured either a team or individual selection models

• Some preferred PNZ to put them in team combinations, others preferred to team up with players of their own choice but with other players enrolled in selection

• Some respondents felt that PNZ should provide more coaching and training

• Commitment to a team for the entire season, as part of a player’s contract was muted

• Greater focus on developing players through coaching and training was also suggested

• Greater focus on younger players – in the context of inexperienced “younger” players and chronologically younger players

• Some members felt that a balance of selectors across the country is required to avoid a bias in any one region

• 8 members confirmed that they would put their name down for the 2007 selection process, 7 answered no and 5 are undecided.

PNZ comments

PNZ is very pleased with the response to the survey and acknowledge the constructive and valuable comments made by its members. As noted above, the whole selection process will be reviewed in November, taking into account survey responses and other information, including alternative processes.

• Attending tournaments as part of the selection process

• Having to cover own costs for competing in any tournaments nationally or internationally, related to selection

• The request for PNZ to conduct training, coaching and decide team combinations or finding consistent partners for players who can achieve this alone.

• Female teams competing in international tournaments instead of a second male team

1. Given the small number of dispersed players available for selection in New Zealand, any form of selection will be difficult to achieve in a consistent manner. The attendance at a number of key tournaments is an ideal way to see many players pitched against players from other regions and to gauge an individual/teams level of play.  PNZ will consider how this can be achieved in other ways.

2. Unfortunately PNZ are not in a position to provide any financial assistance to players attending local and national tournaments. Although, in 2006 a number of key tournaments were identified as being the tournaments where selectors would be in attendance, the letter to selected players recommended these tournaments rather than these being stipulated. Identifying ‘recommended tournaments’ as part of the selection process will be reconsidered by PNZ.

3. Coaching and training is dependent on volunteers who are available and capable to carry out these roles in each region. This is an ongoing problem for PNZ as volunteers are not readily available. Interestingly, those players who have benefited from training tend to be self directed, commit to an individual training programme and train two to three times per week as an individual or within a team. Anyone interested in becoming a club coach should contact the PNZ Secretary at: secretary(at)petanquenz.com

4. PNZ policy, as stated by the National Council in both 2005 and 2006, is that there should be equal international representation opportunities for both men and women. Consequently, at New Zealand’s request the team composition for the 2006 Trans Tasman Challenge was 12 men and 12 women, and women’s teams are being sent to Singapore and the World Championships.