International Selection

[inkystu]

I had some interesting phone calls to GNAS (yes thats what I'M going to call them) on Friday about Selection.

The questions I put to them was:-
1) Can a self employed person represent GB in Target archery, without being 'funded'

2) What competitions and training would you be expected to attend in GB and overseas.


The answers were first contradicting and secondly very concerning.

I was initially told to question 1 that yes a none funded archer can represent GB up to and including Olympic level. I was told Micheal Peart was not funded and won the first 2 shoot off's and not the third. When I asked if he was 1st reserve then, I was told no. Peter Suk selected the reserve.
I then asked if any of the archers at the olympics were not funded and was told no they were all funded.
So I asked question 1 again and was told the answer to question 2.

Basically there would be a qualifying score to achieve (2580 over 2 days) plus more consistant scores at a lower level then you would be monitored and if you seemed to fit the bill you would be invited to the shoot offs. I was then told, this year the archers attended 15 tournaments abroad for a week and a half at a time, as well as training at Lillishall and other national tournaments. The overseas tournaments were not all compulsory but you would be expected to attend the majority.
I also spoke to someone else, more in the know, and asked the direct question of 'If an archer refused funding and won the shoot offs, would they be selected?'

I was told 'Probably unlikely anyone would do that but probably would'nt be selected as they weren't funded. Sorry but we are funded by Sports UK and they want to see results from their funding. This isn't GNAS decision. Oh by the way, the head coach also has a say in how the team is selected'

All this information drew a straight line to the answer to question 1. 'Can a self employed person shoot for GB un funded?'
Answer.....Unless you are prepared to go bankrupt then find a job after you lose funding then NO, you wont be shooting for GB at the next olympics.

Is this 1) predjuditial? 2) Open to all? 3)An organisation I want to subscribe to?


It then raised the question 'What are our archers who have just come back from the olympics going to do if their funding is now not there?

This information was in telephone conversations to the relevant people at GNAS. This is not my representation of third hand conversations. This is what I was told.

[timfatheroftom]

(A) Mike Peart is a funded archer
(B) the olympic squad did not attend 15 tournaments abroad this last summer

just to clarify things!

[Furface]

Who are these "more in the know" and "relevant" people? Names would clarify what you are saying. And, (sorry) is this a transcript of the full conversations, or your interpretation of what was said?

[inkystu]

Originally Posted by timfatheroftom

(A) Mike Peart is a funded archer
(B) the olympic squad did not attend 15 tournaments abroad this last summer

just to clarify things!

(A) I was told by GNAS he wasn't funded.
(B) I didn't say summer. I said this year but meant to say in the last year. And not olympic squad but the funded archers and obviously not all attended all 15.


Furface. I wil PM you the names and this is extracts of the conversation I had with these people. And I didn't ask this just once I got them to clarify all the points in question.

This left me with the conclusion I could never shoot for GB under this selection process.

[Watch_Man]

Speaking to Mike at the Norfolk FITA Star he did mention his funding in the conversation. Also if you look at http://www.sportfocus.com/reguser/dy...m?number=12580 page 5, Mike is listed.

[wanshu]

Inkystu, we had a discussion about this very subject in the thread started by Old bloke. Having a system that makes in more or less impossible for normal people to achieve a dream.....No matter who they are is wrong.
Jumping through hoops over the last few years gained us how many medals?
Things didn#t work out and the past is there to learn form and reflect on.

Due to their own policy of equality they should ensure that the system is open to all.
Hypathetical situation, an archer who shoots very well consistantly, attends just enough of the main tournaments in this country and qualifies to be on the team by beating all those around them, inc current & ex GB archers. Should they be offered a team place, having proven their worth each time they shoot. I say to be fair to them and having a sytem that recognises the best not just those who can drop everything. Very unfair.

Who gets to represent the nation? The best or the odd 2nd best.

[WhitehartFB]

A very interesting question that raises many other points.

What I think you are asking is: can I go it alone, do my own thing, train the way I want to and still be accepted in to the squad and once there still do it your way.

Initially I think no because eventually you will end up in the current system.

The go it alone bit will eventually get you in to the squad if all goes well, but from then on the structure of top level sport takes over whether you like it or not as you do not have any control over being selected.

Did this not happen to Steve Hallard????? in the 90's where he wanted to stay out of the centralised system or only partake in some of it and to prove it when not selected that he should have been he would shoot a local WRS and consistantly put in higher scores than any of the selected archers.

This does raise a fundamental question though, Archery GB (aside from not being asked I prefere it) does not have a structure or path to follow and monitor an archer from beginner, club regional shoots, county squad, regional squad, Country Team (say England) to GBR.

What we have is a give up everything else find some good coaching get these scores and wait for an invite. How soon the invite comes probably depends on how embarrasing (i.e your scores and tournament record against those in the squad) your exclusion from the GB Squad is. In many ways less cumbersome than the structured approach but many will be lost along the way who may be with the structured development would have made it.

You also have the question of finance as I think grants are awarded annually to an archer so like England cricket team and central contracts - I could be wrong

[inkystu]

Yes Watch man Micheal is listed as funded for 2008. I'm lead to believe (Not from GNAS) fully funded archers have 3 years funding approx £75000 for the three years. DONT SHOOT ME ON THIS. THIS IS WHAT I'M LEAD TO BELIEVE FROM A THIRD PARTY. IF PEOPLE KNOW DIFFERENT PLEASE TELL ME.

The point I am trying to make is that archery should be a sport for all. For all archers to be able to strive for top status should they so wish to not at the detriment of their life/family/businesses/future.

Also, who are the people running our sport? Archers or accountants?

I am looking for guidance from the forum as to what to do. Look to prepare for top flight archery, internationally, or just to look to shoot head turning scores at our club and maybe local tournaments.

[wanshu]

From 1 stu to another, it depends on how determined you are?
Do whats right for you....if you make the grade and they decide to leave the better archer behind...if that happens...more fool them.
Just enjoy competing and reaching each of your goals...You never know what the future has in store. Go for it if you have an itch..... Scratch it.

Originally Posted by inkystu

Yes Watch man Micheal is listed as funded for 2008. I'm lead to believe (Not from GNAS) fully funded archers have 3 years funding approx £75000 for the three years. DONT SHOOT ME ON THIS. THIS IS WHAT I'M LEAD TO BELIEVE FROM A THIRD PARTY. IF PEOPLE KNOW DIFFERENT PLEASE TELL ME.

The point I am trying to make is that archery should be a sport for all. For all archers to be able to strive for top status should they so wish to not at the detriment of their life/family/businesses/future.

Also, who are the people running our sport? Archers or accountants?

I am looking for guidance from the forum as to what to do. Look to prepare for top flight archery, internationally, or just to look to shoot head turning scores at our club and maybe local tournaments.

[Toxophilus_Archer]

ll not state this as gospel but it seems as though the system has changed. I always thought it unfair that certain archers were named archers and received funding based on previous scores but if they did not attain the scores required for specific tournaments e.g. Olympics/paralympics then those that did took their place but did not get any funding. I hope I have explained this correctly. It seems that now a selection is made and funding given and it does not matter what you do the selection is written in stone. Why was there always a lot of problems over self funding for archers going to tournaments or is this something different? I believe that you should not lose out if you shoot for your country but I also believe that you should be selected on performance and get funding, i.e. the people that come through the selection process should be funded and get the spot for the team.