From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Mon Aug 23 11:51:39 1999 Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA00159 for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:48:37 +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 LAA00152 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:48:35 +0100 (BST) From: ian.stebbing@uk.pwcglobal.com Received: from tea.uk.pw.com (tea.uk.pw.com [193.131.169.130]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA14496 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:48:29 +0100 (BST) Received: by tea.uk.pw.com; id LAA03963; Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:45:30 +0100 Received: from olive.uk.pw.com(10.44.240.46) by tea.uk.pw.com via smap (4.1) id xma002573; Mon, 23 Aug 99 11:44:20 +0100 Received: from intleursmtp10.uk.pw.com by olive.uk.pw.com (PMDF V5.1-12 #U3018) with SMTP id <0FGW00MD9Z5YII@olive.uk.pw.com> for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:44:29 +0100 (BST) Received: by intleursmtp10.uk.pw.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v1.2 hotfix6 (702.3 8-27-1998)) id 802567D6.003B1295 ; Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:45:13 +0100 Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:40:08 +0100 Subject: Re: 2000 GB Women To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Message-id: <802567D6.003AA4E4.00@intleursmtp10.uk.pw.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline X-Lotus-FromDomain: C&L GB@C&L INT@INTL Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk I would like to add my congratulations to Bliss for a great performance at WUCC but would like to make a few comments on Sammy's follow up remarks on national club champions representing GB in World Nations tournaments. 1. This has happened in this country before and had resonable success when there were far fewer teams. It the current climate when we are trying to grow the sport I fear that it will lead to the concentration of better, serious players in a few top teams rather than an effort to improve the quality in the country. This is because players are able to play for any team wherever based. This can already be seen with top student players playing for top 5 teams rather than local sides. 2. Would we actually be getting the best team? At WUCC this year in the Open division the reigning National Champions finished 3rd of the 5 GB entered teams (excludes SOUP who had the Scottish entry). 3. Do we try to ensure that the National Champions who won the title are the same team that goes to World Nations? What happens if it is expensive/difficult timing and only half can go? Do we say fine get some other people or sorry we are going to offer it to the second place team? How and who makes this decision? In recent years we have seen clubs sides grow and subside with extra players brought in for major tournaments who then return to their former teams afterwards. I do not know how true this scenario was for the recent WUCC 99 teams, only time will tell. Sammy also said that there were many good quality performances from women players not only on Bliss but also Twin Peaks, from the Co-ed teams and I would add also from Non-Blondes. Are these women to be excluded from the chance to play for their country because they do not play for the top women's only team? I do not believe that a club side that cannot completely form a large enough squad for a World Nations tournament but has to take other players from viable clubs (potentially destroying those teams as a side effect) has any benefits over a squad system made up of all eligable players! Ian Stebbing