Calling ALL English coaches.... (yes, that includes YOU!)

[Garrick]

Hello all,

Great to see some interest in Team England here, I'm passionate about the team and love it when people show even a passing curiosity. Unfortunately it would be remiss of me to ignore the elephant in the room.

Joe, sometimes the elephant in the room is a symptom of deeper ills other times it is just a Hippo out of water.

[straume]

Hi all, another foreigner butting in, but I guess if you can live with the Scots interfering, then a mere Norwegian shouldn`t be a problem

TL:DR - Go French.

First: I agree with Joe that using ELO, or Golden Gauntlet, could trigger some problems in the community with "gaming the system" and "powergaming ftw."

For larger countries with a larger player base I think the French system is really interesting.

The system there is that the Captain selects his squad before the vote. So that you get multiple teams to vote for. Single players may be selected for several teams if the different Captains feel like it. This opens up for all sorts of different focus on the teams. Last year they put forward, among others, "Team Community" (my parapharasing) where the team members were people seen to contribute to the BB-scene. There was also "Team Win" (again; my paraphrasing) with some really strong players (in the end the latter won the vote).

The genius of the "vote on the team"-model is that everyone accepts and get behind the winning team. After all; the team has won the vote from the community. The model (more common all over Europe as Pipey has shown) with selecting a Captain from former players and then the Captain picks his players is more vulnerable for moaning about the "same core players being picked anyways", or "Captain picks his mates" or "there is no transparency in selection policy."
(quick disclaimer: I am not saying all of the above applies to TE).

These systemic problems with giving the Captain the power would/could create a disinterest in the team, and a feeling of it being pointless to put your name forward. I believe Phil (somewhere) wrote something about how good the French are at engaging/supporting each other and backing the team. I would guess the daring democratic way (democracy is daring, because all of a sudden some idiot team wins the vote, right?) is a great idea to trigger participation and investment in the team. Also note: In theory a BB-legend such as Lycos/Dave could be picked for every team on the ballot! I would also assume that a team including EB-royalty such as (among others!) Jim, Joe, Paul and Phil would be firm favorites to win a vote held for TE.

So:
Downside: Uncertainty.
Upside: Glorious demcracy and a team backed by the English BB-players

[TheDoc]

Thanks for your feedback Joe. I think all of us appreciate having a past captain give their opinion on how it works from the inside. I'd agree that anyone who speaks with you knows your love for the team and for the most points you have brought up I think your perspective is very clarifying.

My only point is that without any change the team won't feel more inclusive to a wider audience. The comment below does not give the appearance that the team wants to include new prospective coaches:

As a framing comment I would repeat something said here already: "If it ain't broke don't fix it".

I would be the first to say that TE has done spectacularly well under various captains and that is all down to the level of players we have in the team: Lycos, PGoo, Yourself, Jim, Geggster etc but even Lycos has said it's a bit of an old boys club. Now, I'm not saying rip the team down and start again. That'd be folly, but couldn't we tweak it? Why couldn't coaches be selected (top 3) on results throughout a set period of time between events (an English Championship? or Race to Eurobowl?) if done correctly this surely will be more inclusive or at least give a set of players who are in line for the rookie cap(s). The results could be done in a way to show results as a percentage of tournaments attended and you could weight the tournaments dependent on difficulty of opponents. Though I also like the Team France way as well described earlier as it is inclusive of the community.

Also in light of Pipey's comment of practice sessions/days. Could that be opened up to help coaches wanting to learn the dark arts of better play such as DeeferDan suggested? It could solve issues you have stated:

(1) You'd identify people who are interested by their attendance.
(2) The level of their play can be assessed and seen if they are of TE quality or need improvement.
(3) It'd spread the word further and open up the TE group to the EurOpen teams or more English coaches.

I suspect that the answer lies in "What do we want TE to accomplish?" if it is only to win EuroBowl and World Cups then there is no point in changing it. You're doing great. If it is more than this, then tweaking the system needs to be done or it could be TE may just be sidelined by the majority of players and I think that all of us who support the team wouldn't want that to happen.

[Pipey]

@straume: I agree with pretty well all of that.

(and FWIW "outside" perspectives are really valuable imo so please keep em coming Scots, Norwegians and the rest!)

If Team England is going to have the wider support of the English community then full democracy is the only way. A team picked in a completely inclusive way, like in France, will have earned the support of the community.

Otherwise it's less Team England and more "Team Invitational Club from England" whom we trust to manage things well.

The French community is the gold standard. This is routinely cited by many, especially those who have travelled there to play. The English community has grown enormously, with some of the biggest events worldwide, several tournaments on every weekend of the year. Our systems (communications, captaincy rules, selection system, inclusivity) are stuck in the past. NAF, EB rules on consensus are clearly not met.

This is an opportunity for Team England to be something the whole community cares about and engages with. I hope we take it. We should remember that ownership of Team England lies with the English community, not the guys who have previously played.

[mubo]

Hi all,
I'll try to make my points consisely.

1. TE forum is not useful. I think in hindsight it has been a bit of a barrier to entry, having a totally different forum. I *really* don't see why flight/hotel discussion should be open. Solution, move TE discussion to TFF/Tacklezone.

2. I think the role of captain might be too broad. It's too much emphasis on one person, who has to drum up interest, decide on team selection criteria where it's unclear, approach players, make public posts for social media etc. We should more clearly define the role.

3. I agree that we should open up the captaincy election, now we have the "must have played in 1 tournament in last 12 months to vote" rule. Maybe limit to English coach with 50 NAF games?

4. Any auto qualification is extremely difficult and prone to gaming. I favour selection (in some form). I won the NAFC in my (3rd?) ever tournament. I absolutely should not have gone to EB that year.

5. I'd really like to hear from AndyDavo, and what stopped him from knocking on the TE door. I think maybe our habit of picking a team late has meant we've lost a top player. Maybe picking a squad, then deciding on the 8 + 3 could fix this?

[speedingbullet]

From a flick through previous posts, there seem to be two main schools of thought around selection:

First method: Pick a captain and then the captain selects the team using "soft" selection principles; or
Second method: Use some sort of "objective" ranking system to pick the team.

Neither method is perfect as highlighted on other posts. Using "soft" principles could be construed as allowing an old boys club to dominate. On the other hand, there are good reasons why it is not ideal to base selection on a ranking system. The reality of course is that there is no perfect method. Selection methods are a bit like "democracy is the least worst form of government"! A combination of both methods would work well IMO. Something along the lines of:

1. The Eurobowl captain is chosen by community vote. It must be someone who has already played for Team England in a EuroBowl unless no candidates with that qualification put their names forward.
2. The top ranked English player at the NAF Championship is automatically offered a spot. If this player declines the invitation then the second ranked English player at the NAF Championship is offered the spot. If the second ranked player also declines then this spot becomes the Captain's choice.
3. The top two ranked English players in the Golden Gauntlet are automatically offered spots. If one or more of these players decline then the offer is extended to the 3rd and if necessary 4th ranked English players in the Golden Gauntlet. If the two Golden Gauntlet spots still haven't been filled at this point then the unfilled spot or spots become the Captain's choice.
4. The Captain chooses the other 4 players. One of those must be a newcomer to the EuroBowl but only if a newcomer has not already been chosen as part of points 1, 2 and 3 above. The Captain must briefly explain the thinking behind their selections on a forum popular with English Blood Bowl coaches.
5. All coaches put forward for Team England must have played 5 NAF approved tournaments in the 12 months prior to the selection date.

[KFoged]

5. I'd really like to hear from AndyDavo, and what stopped him from knocking on the TE door. I think maybe our habit of picking a team late has meant we've lost a top player. Maybe picking a squad, then deciding on the 8 + 3 could fix this?

According to he's (NAF) Coach Page he is Walsh

I've really find the France approach to this very interesting (even if it means that they may not always be playing with the strickly 8 best players). It do seem to be a more inclusive way to pick the team from a community view.

[Wulfyn]

Some things to note via the comparisons to France (some good, some bad). Firstly that the French have 200+ coaches voting is a real sign we could be doing better in engagement. The French guys do have a dedicated french forum where they all hang. This hasn't worked for England, where (I agree with mubo) it is more a barrier to entry it seems. It would be good to understand from guys like Owen, Deeferdan, Besters, and others why they didn't participate there (is it that you didn't know about it, or it felt unwelcoming, or what?).

But here's the important point about France. And I say this with love and no disrespect to them even tho it is going to sound harsh. It is easy to have a policy of voting on 5 captains and changing the team every year when you keep losing. I was amazed that Simon was not in the French team for Portugal. I've played a lot of great french coaches and he is among the very best players in the world for me. When I asked why, he replied that it was someone else's turn to try. France don't have a core team because they don't have a core winning team. England do.

I don't think that changing the system of how TE is picked is going to help matters. Until an uncapped player cannot get into the team whilst being in most people's opinions better than those already in the team I don't think we have a selection problem. Width, inclusivity, and a roadmap for getting in is therefore the better direction to take. I really like Pipey's idea of a TE camp where we can go somewhere and discuss the game with each other and help improve those interested in getting in. I also think it is great to have an England EO team (although may be a little late this year?), but that requires the interest of those who are putting themselves forward for TE but didn't make the first 8 to be put into a team of 9-11, 12-14, etc. rather than going with their mates. That way when the captain (or whoever) picks the squad those players don't drop out because they are disappointed to not make the top cut.

Is that a demand we can make of each other?

[Joemanji]

A few additional points:

@Pipey: I believe we have voted on the selection document several times now; democracy doesn't mean we just keep having votes until Brendan gets what he wants.

I've seen the phrase 'old boys' club' come up a few times now, implying that TE is somehow elitist or not meritocratic. Is that what people really think about the core five that have been in the team for a while? That there are better coaches out there? That there are coaches that contribute more? That there are coaches who travel more?

The French model is certainly interesting. Although it should be noted that they seem to change their system all the time, and that it is not without controversy of its own within the French community. You can't please all of the people all of the time.

Lastly here, engagement works both ways. The English community has long had a toxic regard for people who try to play well and find enjoyment in Blood Bowl as a contest. The coaches on TE can't make people care, and believe me they have tried.

[speedingbullet]

This is a complicated topic and difficult to formulate, never mind express, my views. I wish my reasons for not putting myself forward more were as simple as Joe stated. Certainly travel, more particularly the extra time for european events played a part, my estimate of my game level another, whilst my belief that european experience is required was a further element. There are probably several more!

I might be in a minority, but historically, I don't think a lot has been wrong, the England team has good results and a variety of coaches around a solid core. I have been aware of the requirements and had discussons about selection policy on a general and personal basis. It's unfortunate that there seems to be a repeated issue around how the process works.

Moving on I would agree that the idea of including europen teams in wider team england seems to be a good one, both with a specific team and making available team shirts, if wanted. I would also suggest embedding conversation in this forum and other widely used media rather than a separate website is the way to go, although not sure how multiple locations can be co-ordinated.

The bloodbowl world is changing, new players arriving, we need to be as inclusive as possible. Perception is important.

I'd like to highlight this post from Besters as I think it contains a lot of wisdom.

[Itchen Masack]

The English community has long had a toxic regard for people who try to play well and find enjoyment in Blood Bowl as a contest.

Have heard this a few times, but have never seen any evidence myself. Maybe lucky to be isolated in the local tourneys I can afford to attend, or perhaps I'm just blind

Kfoged and AndyDavo to pick 2 names off the top of my head. Both great coaches, both well liked and both (mostly) play to win.

[Boneless]

5. I'd really like to hear from AndyDavo, and what stopped him from knocking on the TE door. I think maybe our habit of picking a team late has meant we've lost a top player. Maybe picking a squad, then deciding on the 8 + 3 could fix this?

According to he's (NAF) Coach Page he is Walsh

.

This. Many in the UK qualify for more than 1 nation. Lycos for example qualifys for Wales. I qualify for Scotland and England also.

This does not mean one nation can claim but more a coach should choose. Like Vinpola choose to play for England dispite growing up in the Valleys of Wales.

We in Wales are having change for similar reasons or before it gets to an issue stage

[deeferdan]

A few additional points:

I've seen the phrase 'old boys' club' come up a few times now, implying that TE is somehow elitist or not meritocratic. Is that what people really think about the core five that have been in the team for a while? That there are better coaches out there? That there are coaches that contribute more? That there are coaches who travel more?

Lastly here, engagement works both ways. The English community has long had a toxic regard for people who try to play well and find enjoyment in Blood Bowl as a contest. The coaches on TE can't make people care, and believe me they have tried.

Just to be clear from my perspective, I think this is a really useful appraisal of the situation, not a personal attack! Though I can totally see how that may come across that way! Having said that I haven't seen anyone explicitly say they don't want the current crop of England players representing England.

I for one would only want to see people in the England team on merit, I would only every want to be there on merit, and I'm not proposing major changes (personally). I do however, really like the idea of informal inclusivity through EurOpen involvement and such informal "training" events at that proposed by Pipey.

[mubo]

This. Many in the UK qualify for more than 1 nation. Lycos for example qualifys for Wales. I qualify for Scotland and England also.
This does not mean one nation can claim but more a coach should choose. Like Vinpola choose to play for England dispite growing up in the Valleys of Wales.
We in Wales are having change for similar reasons or before it gets to an issue stage

I didn't realise there were qualifying criteria- news to me! Not trying to poach...
I thought of AD as a coach that would be difficult not to select on merit. My understanding was that he is English, and was originally a freebooter for Wales, rather than self-identifying as Welsh.
I was just wondering if there was something about the TE setup that stopped him from getting involved... thought it could be useful feedback.

[Boneless]

I think this issue is not unique to TE. I know of others facing the same issue.