Tue 22 May, 2012
|
|
|
|
Canada: Team Announced for 5th Pan American Junior Women's Championship  x45
 |
| FHC Logo |
January 12, 2005 
Field Hockey Canada
> Page Views 4364
Field Hockey Canada is pleased to announce the following athletes have been selected to represent Canada at the 5th Pan American Junior Women's Championship to be held in San Juan, Puerto Rico from March 16 - 27, 2005. The winner of this event automatically qualifies to the 2005 Women's Junior World Cup to be held in Chile in September, 2005.
1. Amanda Stone (goalie), Richmond BC
2. Danielle Wilson (goalie), Calgary AB
3. Jessie Denys, Kelowna, BC
4. Jaime Bawden, Penticton, BC
5. Emma Carbery, Victoria, BC
6. Mary Glen, Vancouver, BC
7. Ali Lee, Victoria, BC
8. Robyn Evans, Penticton, BC
9. Katie Rushton, Victoria, BC
10. Megan Anderson, Duncan, BC
11. Hilary Linton, Vancouver, BC
12. Tyla Flexman, Vancouver, BC
13. Robyn Pendleton, Victoria, BC
14. Tiffany Michaluk, West Vancouver, BC
15. Katie Baker, Argyle Shore, PEI
16. Thea Culley, Rossland, BC 17. Cailie O'Hara, Oakville, ON 18. Karen Mann, Vancouver, BC
Reserves (in alphabetical order)
Niki Baumann, Regina, SK
Patricia Bissett, Vancouver, BC
Lindsay Dold, Oakville, ON
Victoria Lounder, Halifax, NS
Deb Martell (g/k), Victoria, BC
Congratulations to all the athletes.
Your opinion counts.
Rate this article or enter your comments below.
|
Opinions expressed here do not represent the official views of PlanetFieldHockey.com or its staff. Comments will be removed if they are considered offensive or of a personal nature.
Comments on this article
|
fiasco
01-14-2005 12:46 pm
|
Report this post
|
juniors from outside BC
for shame the rest of the country...we can only produce 3 nats from 9 provinces
|
|
anon
01-14-2005 3:37 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
you try playing and being seen by the coaches when it's -20
|
|
Albertan
01-14-2005 5:06 pm
|
Report this post
|
fiasco
What a stupid and inane comment to make about athletes not in BC. This is a common topic in Canadian threads and I still find it amazing that people will say things like that. When you can play outdoors all year long (BC) then it is obvious that people can train more and the outdoor programs will be stronger. That's just the way it is and it is no reflection on the athletes trying to make it coming from other provinces. We'll see what happens at senior indoor nationals and see whether BC is as dominant a force as in outdoor.....
|
|
Eastern
01-14-2005 5:34 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
Congrats to PEI field hockey! Just curious, has their been other PEI-ers to make the Naitonal team, regardless of level?
|
|
Coach Carter
01-14-2005 6:28 pm
|
Report this post
|
Coaching Tips
Who is the coach and assistant coach and manager and video techie? Good lucks gals!
|
|
national-ite
01-14-2005 8:20 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
Hash Kanjee, Sherry Doiron, and hopefully Veronica Planella ..
|
|
Fiasco
01-15-2005 2:31 pm
|
Report this post
|
Alberta Beef
as most alberta beef these days yours is tainted.
Where does it say that I am blaming the athletes? The reason that BC programs are stronger has little to do with the weather. There have been times in Canada when more than half of the NATs came from different regions and as far as I know the weather has not changed in a 1000 years.
The reason BC program is stronger is becasue there program is better, granted they have an advantage with the weather but there are now indoor turf facilities all over canada. The reason that BC cranks out more atheletes is deeper than your petty reasons. They have a powerful infrastructure, better coaches more dedicated volunteers and lots and lots of players. that's why they are better than you not becasue you don't have the facility to train. In Alberta you have huge gyms in Edmonton and Calgary yet your indoor teams cannot compete with Ontario. It has nothing to do with facilities it has to do with the program. That was my point, the programs in the rest of the country have fallen apart, BC is still strong.
Maybe you should join Ralph Klien on his whine and dine tour of the east...
|
|
Can Fan
01-15-2005 3:07 pm
|
Report this post
|
Team Make up
I am sorry that there were not more players from other parts of the country. During the CIS was probably the only opportunity for any standouts other than UBC or UVIC players
with the exceptions noted above.
This is a result of a superior system of coaches / organisation / deep player base and...
yes.. facilities / weather. That is just a reality.... not to be disrespectful of the efforts of the rest of the country.
If you wish to diminish the regional disparity, then up and coming players need to attend school here in BC so that they can participate in outdoor / indoor hockey programs. UVIC / UBC / U21 players each participate in league play and attend a wide variety of high performance programs all year round.
Best of luck to the coaches / staff / players.
|
|
albertan
01-15-2005 5:18 pm
|
Report this post
|
indoor
i think you will find that simba club from calgary is in the top two indoor club teams in the country. So even though the outdoor sux badly in calgary the indoor is very good and i think people will see that at the indoor nats this year
|
|
fiasco
01-16-2005 2:57 pm
|
Report this post
|
more mad cows
Ok Simba is not bad at indoor and I applaud their ability but please "second best in canada?" Nope, maybe second best in the rest of Canada. The indoor in Calgary is NOT very good, its passable, considering that it is probably one of only two or three indoor leagues in the country.
|
|
Badasscndian
01-16-2005 8:56 pm
|
Report this post
|
Program Development
Re: Fiasco, I agree with what you have to say about building a program. Right now in Calgary or Edmonton we do not have a high performance program. The lack of facilities was and continues to be a huge reason for that. About the indoor turf facilities...where would those be located?? There is a big difference between the amount of turf time available in BC compared to here for example and the same is the case in the east as well. Toronto does not have a central, good condition water based turf available. Lamport has fallen apart, and than there is what outside of that. U of T is getting a new turf, which is great, but the facilities make a big difference. The next reason for the lack of high performance athletes has to do with coaching and volunteering. It seems that here in Alberta great coaches get scared off by the different associations and that sucks. Things need to change across the board and right now we are really trying to change that. I don't think the technical ability of coaches in Alberta is high enough to teach the U21 and U18 level to play todays game except for a few say uni. coaches and a few others who have kind of faded from the coaching here in Alberta. That is a huge difference from BC to the rest of the provinces for sure.
The club system in Vancouver alone kicks everyone else's butts, the league runs for like 8 months and they train as a team, have a coach and play more games in a season than we get here in Calgary or most of the country. The outdoor league that I play in runs from April (depending on the snow) until the middle of August, we play once a week. There are no coaches in the 1st division, there is no training as a team let alone practices. Facilities make a big difference, now with the new turf here in Calgary we have double the space and now we can start to create a new high performance part to our program... or at least we should.
Anyway, I think that developing a program, starting at the national level is key, we need someone in that will do that and we will have some one in that position soon I hope, FHC wants to make sure they make the right choice that is what is taking so long to choose a women's national team coach.
Good Luck Girls at the Jr. Pan Am Championship this March, kick some ass...the team will be stronger with the injured crew back in action, Go Canada!!!
And from what I hear BC will not be in the senior national championships for the womens side. Not enough interest?? Anyone know how many teams will be participating at nationals??? for men and the women??
|
|
Canuck
01-16-2005 10:21 pm
|
Report this post
|
Prediction
This team will not qualify for the JWC and will finish behind ARG, Chile, US and Uruguay. You read it here first.
|
|
Predictor
01-17-2005 10:16 am
|
Report this post
|
Canuck
......and hopefully last as well
|
|
|
|
Badasscndian
01-17-2005 1:24 pm
|
Report this post
|
Canuck...
I am in ah every time I read these threads about our Canadian teams, where is the love...why do you think they will do worse. On the last tour the team was without 3 of their best players, now these 3 are back and they will make a huge difference on the field, the girls play very well together and have alot of talent. Canuck, have you ever seen this team play?? Do you know any of the athletes and know of their talents?
I have a feeling that they will come in the top 2 in this tournament. I think the Argies will take it and Canada will be in tough with the US, but not the others.
Should be interesting.
Predictor....hopefully last as well...why??
|
|
fiasco
01-17-2005 2:03 pm
|
Report this post
|
goodasscanadian
I agree with your assesment of the situation. the key is here that the HP programs will go nowhere without a supporting club structure. While some areas have been able to maintain a HP program without a decent club structure for a while the sucess is never long term.
In alberta there was a "golden" era for the men and women in the 90's when there werea lot of talented athletes playing elite competition but this never translated into club success for long. Once the boom was over the players largely disappeared.
The indoor turf facilities have been popping up all over Ontario but as you say there is none dedicated to FH and they are almost all Field Turf rather than astro.
|
|
rickyand julianand bubbles
01-17-2005 2:15 pm
|
Report this post
|
badasscan
Here is the love.
We love our team but like our children we want them to do better
Making a top 2 prediction is going out on a limb. Everyone hopes for a high finish but also knows that it is unlikely.
My question is BAdass have you seen the other teams play?
|
|
Predictor
01-17-2005 2:19 pm
|
Report this post
|
Badasscndian
Because, just as you, I get frustrated by these negative comments.
Both Senior and Junior players should be supported because they suffer from whatever system is, or is not, in place. I believe in these girls, and I'm sure they believe in their team and staff. So should we.....
|
|
musing
01-18-2005 12:22 pm
|
Report this post
|
recover recreational hockey first?
First, congrats to the women who made the jr. team. High performance in underfunded sport at an age when one is going to uni (with increasing financial implications for that too) is an admirable achievement....
Second (and I am sorry to take this back to an Alberta thread... and I'm only talking about men's hockey as the thead as led the discussion that way), having played in numerous leagues, it seems that the success in Vancouver is due, in part, to the numbers playing the sport recreationally. The league is enjoyable to play in, and there is a variety of teams, meaning that players can start in an appropriate level and move up as their ability AND desire allow. Conversely in Calgary (as in Ottawa or Montreal or Halifax, I might point out), there are so few playing that new players seldom find the sport welcoming (*as a sport: I'm not talking about the people). Looking at the indoor example, there are five "1st" division teams. One team is the UofC girls team (yes, in the "men's" league). Another is a jr. team. The remaining three teams have a mixture of skill, which I would classify as good considering the numbers playing in Calgary, or very average relative to what might be available in Europe or elsewhere. Still, the first division, for all its weaknesses, is a wholly inappropriate for new people to the sport. But there is no real feeder system for developing players...
The second division is some jr. development and, otherwise, a co-ed league with very limited skill (but great heart and a good attitude!). Someone with natural ability or a competitive nature is likely to become disillusioned in div 2 and probably not be welcomed on any of the div 1 teams.... except maybe the wanderers or the juniors... maybe.
Joiners either play very weak hockey or play amongst a bunch of guys who have been playing against each other for the past decade. Ultimately, Calgary offers what amounts to indoor field hockey shinny. More depth can only be gained with more players but more players joining seem unlikely given the hockey that's being offered. How do you change it? How do you grow the sport? Without that growth, we'll never realise true High Performance hockey.
Unfortunately, I think Alberta's problem is an amplilfied version of the Canadian problem. There was a time when hockey was doing okay in Alberta. There were leagues in both Calgary and Edmonton and there were "loads" of teams (read: enough teams for variety and so you could find a group of guys you fit in with). However, numbers fell below a critical level (I don't know what it is.... maybe something like 6 outdoor teams in each of two divisions?) and the decay set in.... Since a last gasp wave of athletes hit the jr national program in the early 1990s, Alberta hasn't seen any true high performance athletes in FH (a few very skilled athletes, but not high performance in attitude, training and effort)....
Perhaps that's why Canada also struggles internationally. As a country we've fallen below the critical level of participants from which elite athletes can be developed. To that end, more and more athletes are coming from our one truly healthy league: Vancouver. But we can't expect to compete internationally selecting from just Vancouver when we're going up against countries that have numerous clubs challenging the size of the Vancouver league.... Anyway, I'm suggesting that we should maybe consider the limited funds available ought to go into re-establishing hockey as a recreational sport first? Perhaps through that, we can generate the money and numbers necessary to be more competitive internationally? In the last 15 years, leagues have died or suffered near death in Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa, and Montreal.... it seems like FH has the cancer in Canada. I hope it is reversable. I don't think, however, that a sole league on the west coast is the answer to elite international hockey.....
|
|
Ontario Fan
01-19-2005 2:46 pm
|
Report this post
|
Ontario Whut!?!?
Go team Canada....and way to represent, Ontario!
|
|
puzzled......
01-19-2005 9:36 pm
|
Report this post
|
selection criteria
I feel that the ultimate downfall of Canadian field hockey is the rampant presence of politics that goes into the selection. Why is it that the only player Ontario has to offer, isn't even Ontario's best player? Coming from Ontario, I have seen the talent available, and the coaches dropped the ball on this one.
|
|
Reg
01-20-2005 9:55 am
|
Report this post
|
Musing
I agree with your analysis of the problems in Calgary, Ottawa and other smaller centres. The question is how to reverse the trend and grow hockey in the hinterland. You have suggested diverting dollars from high performance to development. However, I think the first step is to ask ourselves what we need to do to help Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Halifax and the rest. It may be that an effective strategy will require funds to be moved from high performance to the development, but I am not convinced of it.
It seems to me hockey has grown in parts of the country without the benfit of FHC or provincial funding. I believe the key is strong clubs and strong organizations. I don't believe you need lots of money for those things - what you need is strong volunteers. We have volunteers but often they don't know exactly what to do - they know they want to coach, or umpire or help run a league or a club, but they don't know quite how to do it.
I think the role of FHC and the provincial associations is to provide help to those people. Help will cost a bit of money to be sure - there will be books and CDs and mailing costs. You will want a paid administrator to focus some time and energy on it. You may want to pay to have regional workshops and bring people together to share information and plot strategy. This stuff doesn't cost nothing but it is not likely to break the bank either.
This approach may not be sufficient and perhaps people will discover that more needs to be done. One thing for sure, we could do with the debate and some action.
|
|
Yan Huckendubler
01-20-2005 1:09 pm
|
Report this post
|
Where is the love?
To Badasscndian ?Where is the love?
You are mixing two things: support of our National Teams and reality of the international situation.
I think that most people in the Canadian field hockey community wholeheartedly support our National Teams, men and women, junior and senior. There are of course the regular subjective discussions on team selection, but most of us admire the athletes who make it to the top, give them a hand one way or another when possible, cheer unconditionally for them if we have the chance to go to international events and hope that they?ll reach the podium or grab one of the qualifying spots.
That doesn?t mean that we should ignore the reality of the international situation. Remember what even FHC said when the Junior Team came back from Chile: ?Observations from the tournament indicate that Canada?s U21 Team is a group with great potential; however, other countries are improving at a faster rate?.
Argentina is most certainly a few notches above the rest of the continent, but we should not discard ?the others? just because we have historically been better than them...
Recent results (Junior W):
2004 Chile 4-Nations: 2) Chile 3) USA 4) Canada
2001 Junior World Cup: 12) Chile 13) Canada 14) USA
2000 Junior Pan Am: 2) USA 3) Canada 4) Chile
At the 2003 Pan Am Games in Santo Domingo, Uruguay (3rd) and Chile (4th) were ahead of Canada (and rightly so) with young teams, possibly as a result of the ?Umbrella? development project (see the PAHF web site) where the South American nations benefit from the assistance of their big sisters from Argentina.
Best wishes to our Canadian Team in Puerto Rico!
|
|
musing
01-21-2005 12:53 pm
|
Report this post
|
Reg: Reply
Reg,
I think we're on the same page... I don't mean to suggest that we pull all funding from the elite programs, redirecting it towards recreational hockey. I think I meant to say that recreational hockey is often left out of the discussion of developing elite Canadian hockey. To be sure, the initiatives you outline are not onerously costly.
Reflecting on your comments, I think the that the smaller centres lack the adminitrative capability necessary to grow the programs. If too much of the critical work falls to volunteers who must otherwise work and play the sport, then important administrative responsibilities get missed or partially completed. Looking at the more developed and larger administration of the BC office is an indication of success.... I hope not to come across as naive to the fact that they have the numbers (and, therefore $) to support the larger admin, but perhaps some of the 'elite' money could go to regional centres that have large potential for growth (I see, as a first step, Calgary, Ottawa and Montreal)....
The club system works so well in Europe (my exposure was the UK), but I wonder how effective it is in small-centre Canada. I only say this from having the experience of playing the same guys week after week, year after year. How do we diversify our competition when one only plays 3 different teams regularly and the next closest team is a 11 hour drive away?
While I don't want to suggest that money is the only thing holding back development of Canadian hockey, I might suggest a possible route to development:
1. Invest in a couple of professional fund-raisers. One for the East and one for the West. They cost money, but they raise money. Good ones can raise significant amounts.
2. Have a vision for the money collected: use the money to create a tangible 'hockey experience' that includes regional hockey centres. It's not perfect, but something like the CIAU set up. For instance, Calgary, Edmonton and Regina could all field a single team that was relatively competitive. Vancouver could field multiple teams. Victoria 2. Maybe and BC-Interior team. With our funding, use the money to set up a regional league which meets in a series of mini-tournaments over a weekend. A weekend in Vancouver, a weekend in Calgary, a weekend in Edmonton and a weekend in Regina, for example. Each regional association organises the tournament, but the points/scores are collectively considered, leaving your top 3 or 4 Western teams for a National torunament against a set of Eastern teams. This idea seems to have already been picked up for indoor in the East, inlcuding some US cities... This might even be easier in Ontario/Quebec with the closer proximity to one another.
3. This would allow the city to act as the 'Club' (with the exception of Vancouver and T.O.). It would give competitive players something to legitimately strive for and it would an opprortunity for players in these small centres to play with some of the people they so often play against. Vancouver might actually show some interest: it wouldn't affect their main league because it would have to be a summer league (no outdoor in Regina right now!) and they could draft players from any team through a series of Captains.
Still, my suggestion costs money: money for travel, for turf time, and for administration of the regional league. It's only an idea... but it seems were in need of a few of them as well right now....
|
|
Reg
01-23-2005 9:40 am
|
Report this post
|
Musing
Thanks Musing for taking the time to discuss this. I think your idea is a good one and, as you say, that model is already happening in the east with indoor. A couple of thoughts:
1. You will know that this new indoor league is not funded by anyone - as far as I know it is run entirely outside the "system", if you know what I mean. That is neither the clubs, FHO, FHC for USFHA are running it.
2. It is directed at the senior competitive level. In other words, this is something that is for the more competitive players - it is not for juniors, nor recreational players nor is it in support of either the high performance nor the club systems. I would imagine there is a need for some coordination between people trying to run city and provincial programs and the people who want to participate in this Eastern indoor competition. From time to time they will both be trying to draw from the same small pool of players.
3. My preference is to help people to help themselves. Subsidising a particular level of player reminds me of government funding of particular projects - the money gets consumed by a small group of people - they benefit but there are no lasting benefits to the community/sport. I fear that whatever money gets put into those competitive players will benefit them and nobody else. To some extent this is exactly the problem with funding CIAUs, National teams, and Canada Summer Games. A few athletes benefit hugely but very little spin-off accrues to the sport system. Well, I shouldn't say that because it is not entirely true - a lot of athletes coach, play and get involved one way and another and this all benefits the system. But the benefits are unpredictable and not huge from the point of view of strengthening the system.
4. I think what is interesting to ponder is how it was that Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa and Toronto all had leagues and plenty of growth through the 70s and 80's. Somehow the 90's saw a reversal of those trends. In Ottawa's case, you can plot the decline with the failure of our junior programs in the early 80's. Our junior leagues collapsed in the early 80's ( I am talking men here - the women have continued to do well). Our leagues collapsed within about 5 years of that. The writing has been on the wall at my club - Outaouais - since I arrived back in Ottawa in 1984. Various of us have made attempts at resurrecting the junior program but our efforts have not lead to the resurrection of the junior boys league.
5. I think where this all leads me to is the need for the resurrection of junior leagues in all these cities and, at the same time, the resurrection of club and league organizations. I think what your ideas have suggested is that we cannot stop there we need something to keep competitive players.
6. In Ottawa, our competitive ladies don't have much to play in either. I think our clubs need to put together a program for them. We need some inter-city competition for the 22 - ? competitive set. As you say, a subsidized inter-city league might help with that. However, it needs to start at the local level. Club execs and the players themselves have to lead on this. We need enough organizational ability to get players together, organize coaches, a budget, selection and practice times. I think too we have to recognize we are talking about systems. How does an inter-city league fit within club, provincial and national systems? To the extent that an inter-city program undermines local leagues it is not necessarily a grand idea.
7. In Ottawa, we have a number of competitive players who are not playing in the local league because it is not fun for them and there is nothing else on offer so they coach juniors but they don't play. In our case, an inter-city league is just what is needed. I am betting that there are similar potential players in Toronto and the eastern US who are no longer in college or provincial programs but want to play competitive hockey. I really think the clubs and the players themselves have to take the lead on this. It could be a subsidy is in order but I think the first step is organizational.
8. One of these days I need to ask the guys who got that eastern indoor league going how they did it.
|
|
musing
01-24-2005 12:17 pm
|
Report this post
|
My Scrambled Approach
Reg, I think your points are valid. I concede that an inter-city league might be premature, at least in the case of the west. Junior development is surely the first step. If I then go back to my original point (and keep focussed this time....!), maybe the limited funds ought to still go to establishing a core, professional administration. With committed people, whose full-time job is the development of the sport, they could priotise and support junior development (as an excellent example of a first step) where a purely volunteer-based system has failed (or only partially worked).
Money, rather than going to specific groups of athletes, goes to properly fund the organisational staff, who can hopefully resusitate the sport? That could be the development of properly organised and run junior leagues, the establishment of inter-city leagues, etc.
It seems to me that with the continued use of our limited funds (as a national organisation) in status quo methods and priorities, we're unlikely to pull out of our current 'funk'. That said, beyond the discussion ideas, I (personally) really don't know how you go about facilitating institutional/cultural change. I do know that there are people out there who specialise is such things... Begging the question, that if the current leadership is unwilling to undertake a radical change in direction, how do we fight the leaderships' timidness (or complacency?), or even remove the leadership itself?
|
|
ztar
01-24-2005 8:17 pm
|
Report this post
|
reg & musings
Some very interesting and useful points. Allow me to introduce a bit of cynicism: I'm wary of "professional", funded administrations. Professional or not, funded or not, what's needed are one or more "champions" (perhaps what's happened with indoor FH in Toronto). Of course, I'm referring to people who will champion the sport; people who are rabid about it and will work tirelessly to see the sport advanced. I'm not sure the usual recruitment and selection process will find them (if, for example, you were looking to fill some adminstrative positions).
As we know from various clubs in and around Vancouver, it is these "champions" of the sport who make it work. I'd suggest that, if some "adminstrative" infrastructure is needed to support these volunteers (of course it is), this support come in the form of late teens - early twenties players who need jobs/money to further educations.
I'm not suggesting that the enthusiasm needed to carry off the work necessary to establish and sustain healthy programs can't come from an administrative organization. I simply have my doubts about it. Particularly when an organization is in a growth phase, it doesn't need to be overly administered. In early growth phases, it is likely better that an organization be rather "organic", ad hoc, and "seat-of-the-pants". Overly administrative, "mechanistic" or bureaucratic organizational forms will most likely sap the enthusiasm out of volunteers with a plethora of rules and regulations about everything imaginable. Once your club or association has 500+ members, then you might want to think about "funded", adminstrative positions.
An example to illustrate:
The Vancouver Womens FH League has some, apparently long-established, policies about teams having "x" number of qualified umpires if a team is to be permitted to play in the league. I'm sure the rationale for the policy is sound. It appears the policy poses no undue burden on established teams, with veteran players who are also qualified umps, like the Meralomas and the Jokers. However, for teams from the West Vancouver club, which, due to a very successful junior program, has grown from 4 to 8 teams in the league, this bit of bureaucracy is an unnecessary restraint on an obviously enthusiastic group of players and coaches. During periods of growth, organizations ought to waive the "normal" rules that serve them well in more placid times.
I may have gone off on a bit of a tangent, but I suppose the topic has evloved into "how to grow and organize" a FH association.
|
|
musing
01-25-2005 11:51 am
|
Report this post
|
fairplay
ztar...
it's a fair comment. maybe the idea, then, is to use the resources to hire the 'champions'. Obviously, the selection of those persons is subjective, but using the resources to hire those individuals seems more productive then asking them do live and breath fieldhockey after having worked all day to put food on their table and pay their rent.
I like the idea of hiring students and young people, too. I also agree that an established bureaucracy can't hinder development by implementing rules with senseless rigidity.
I'm not advocating over-administration: I think it should be proportional to the size of the local organisation (rather than the current situation of single persons working long hours for little money and still falling short of the necessary level of support for the community) Money should also be earmarked for more admin infrastructure when growth happens. I've seen some of the champions of the sport burn out horribly in Alberta, where they received no support, especially with the ever-increasing burden of mundane organisational tasks like paperwork and policy; whereas, my experience in the UK was that the 'champion' in our club was well supported with an effective admin, allowing him to do what he did best....
Nevertheless, yours is a legitimate concern that admin, in and of itself, has its own potential for failing to achieve stability and growth of the sport.... but surely no more so than is currently the case in our regional hockey communities....
|
|
I
01-25-2005 3:02 pm
|
Report this post
|
Has anyone considered that maybe part of the reason of the success in Canada during the 70?s and 80?s was because of immigration from Europe, Africa and Asia?
Point to ponder. If we all moved to BC and played hockey in the golden city. Can you imagine what will happen to the little funding we already get for FH?
Fiasco, like it or not you and BC needs the rest of Canada to keep the already sinking National program afloat. Hats off to BC for having the best program in the country, but when you have endless access to facilitates, volunteers and the resulting large membership it is difficult to go wrong. The other volunteers and athletes in the rest of Canada are working just as hard with the little they have. This will NOT change, the weather will not change and the government will never fund indoor FH facility, the cost for just heating will be ridicules. I am not making excuse it is just the way it is.
Yes, agreed each province has to clean house and become accountable. But when battling people like Badasscndian who obviously is a supporter of the uni program and not the other local associations, it becomes a difficult task. So what if the HP director has put her needs first and has done little in Alberta to help the players. The membership should demand explanations.
It is easy for Badasscndian to throw rotten tomatoes from the gallery. You want change, then make it happen.
|
|
ztar
01-25-2005 5:45 pm
|
Report this post
|
"I" on immigration
I chuckled when I read "I's" comment about "the reason of the success in Canada during the 70?s and 80?s was because of immigration". It seems, whenever I venture out to a boys' game in West Vancouver, the predominant accent along the sidelines is South African. As "i" suggests: it was ever thus (in soccer as well).
The challenge would then seem to be to retain these groups in the sport.
I don't think, however, the immigration argument carries much weight when it comes to the girls game in the Lower Mainland.
"I" also comments to "Fiasco" re the need to keep a national progam afloat. I'll not dispute that. However, I think we have serious work to do here in BC as well. As I've mentioned in a previous thread, I think there a pockets in the Lower Mainland and on Vancouver Island that have all the pre-conditions for growing the sport (weather being the most obvious and proximity to existing, successful clubs being another).
It remains a mystery to me (perhaps some Van Isl people can relate the history) that just a few miles north of Duncan/Cowichan (surely Canada's capital of FH measured on a per capita basis) in places like Ladysmith and Nanaimo there is no active club system at all (is there even high school FH?). What about the Parksville area? Courtenay/Comox? Or, Langley, Abbottsford and Chilliwack in the Lower Mainland?
My hunch is it ought to be easier to grow the sport in these communities than in more frost-bitten climes. This may seem like an "over focus" on BC, but I'm more inclined to see resources allocated where the payoffs are likely to be greater.
|
|
Peter D'Cruz
01-25-2005 7:53 pm
|
Report this post
|
Concentration works for minor sports
Spain and Korea are two examples where field hockey is not played all over the country and they have successful national team programs.
The challenge at FHC is about having focus. We don't have the financial resources to develop sustainable field hockey programs across Canada. The cross-Canada model has failed over the past thirty plus years but you can be certain that the board and national office still plough ahead in the belief that nothing is wrong. FHC tried to prop up women?s field hockey in NB by investing lots of money in Sherry Doiron as a regional coach but that investment has been proven a failure.
The lower mainland in BC, Vancouver Island and southern Ontario are the three areas in Canada that have the basic foundations in place for field hockey to do well as there are clubs well established including junior programs. Clubs have been the only option for boys programs in Canada and it is proven that club programs have been the foundation for the large numbers of girls playing field hockey in the lower mainland. The high school to university model for women has been a failure over the past thirty years which is evident by the near-death women?s CIS program.
So, will FHC?s leadership accept the fact that field hockey development has to be concentrated as it is in Spain and Korea? This is the question that the membership in BC and ON should be raising with their provincial associations. Sorry to the people in Alberta but it doesn't mean you can't make club programs work as they are in BC and ON.
Also, within BC and ON, field hockey organizers should work hard on developing a high standard for their local league competitions as the best way to provide good players to our national team programs. In Australia, the city of Perth is a small metropolitan area of approx. 1 million people and is far away from other cities in Australia as Vancouver is from Toronto. A very high standard local competition in Perth has been a key to Australian field hockey being amongst the best countries in the world since the 1960s.
|
|
gbraun
01-25-2005 10:27 pm
|
Report this post
|
re:ztar
Just wanted to tell you that there is some hockey in Nanaimo, Courtney, Comox and Port Alberni albeit a small following. We (Cowichan) play in a school league with those schools in those areas. I see a lot of talent up there, but those players can't or won't make the commitment to travel 2-4 hours for more training. Unfortunately, it seems that when those up-Island players graduate, hockey is not their first choice. As well, those communities fight endlessly for cut grass (yes we STILL play on grass mostly in Cowichan and north) and volunteers. Personally, I think with a little help, those communities will be hockey hot-beds.. they actually have some very qualified people who could make waves with support. This is a wee microcosm of our whole country. With some $$ for development, I believe many areas could grow if passionate people are already there.
On a side note, I am quite surprised that there are some out there trying to make money on our sport through "personal coaching" , over-priced equipment, etc...I don't begrudge anyone making a buck in a free market, but I am not certain that our sport can afford to lose athletes because they didn't have the money to get to the top level. Call me old-school, but keep it cheap to continue attracting the general population.
|
|
ztar
01-26-2005 3:25 pm
|
Report this post
|
To D'Cruz and gbraun
gbraun: thanks for your input on the North Island. You say, "I think with a little help, those communities will be hockey hot-beds". As one who lives in the Lower Mainland and frequently travels to the island, I've always wondered where the FH was in the north.
Could we have a minor problem in high school hockey in the fact that there are "island" berths to the AA and AAA provincial tournaments? Could more long-term interest be cultivated if the northern schools on the island stood even a modest chance of advancing beyond the island (with, for example, their own berth or a "back-door" berth?)? Of course that begs the question: are they good enough to compete with the weaker teams that advance to the provincial tournaments? As it stands, I'm sure it will be a very long time (when does hell freeze over?) before any of those northern teams beat out the likes of Cowichan, Brentwood, Lambrick, etc etc. When these teams play Cowichan, are the games competitive or are they blow-outs?
D'Cruz makes a valid point, IMHO. Why not put your resources where they will provide the greatest "bang for your buck." Given what gbraun has stated above, I'd venture to say that $1 invested in Nanaimo will yield manifold what that dollar would get you in Halifax or Ottawa. I believe gbraun when he/she speculates that the north island communities could readily become hotbeds of FH -- clearly the key preconditions are already extant.
|
|
Jason Bremner
01-27-2005 7:46 pm
|
Report this post
|
Investments Require Planning and Balancing Risk and Reward
To make the best of an investment decision requires careful planning of the objective and balancing of the riskiness and potential rewards to get the desired outcome.
The reality of amateur sports in Canada is woeful underfunding from external sources as well as internal ones. Amateur sports are not valued perhaps because people believe they are free or at least should be. Consider that people, even field hockey players, likely think nothing of the $600 per year they spend on a fitness club membership or the $500 they spend to play a few rounds of golf during the summer or the $500-$1000 for the ski weekend at any resort across Canada. Do the math - we're all gleeful to spend money on sports where we are expected to pay. But try to get people to pay $300 per year for field hockey membership and you'll enjoy an exercise in futility. You'll have to entertain questions about where is the money going and justifying the fees. I am dismayed by the fact that West Vancouver Field Hockey Club - one of the most successful in North America - discloses the finances of its mens side on its Web site. While I think that members should have every right to know how, where and why its collective money is being spent, the cynic in me suspects that part of the reason why WV discloses its books is so the executive can deflate any cries for overspending or unhappiness about increasing fees.
Every fh club I have been involved with faces the same problem. As does every league or tournament I have helped organize. And, from what I ascertain about FHC and provincial organizations, they too are in the same position. The costs for providing the service called field hockey have risen dramatically over the years and the rate of growth in cost has outpaced the rate of growth in revenue - from player fees or handouts from sponsors, be they individuals, companies, government, etc.
Where investments have been made - high performance, national tournaments, grassroots programs - it would seem that the return on those investments are mediocre at best.
Do you blame the people making the investments? To some extent: yes. However, when people are untrained or unprepared or unknowing of what is the right investment to make, is it fair to blame them? Do any of the volunteers that foster field hockey in Canada fit the description?
Volunteerism and champions have helped keep the sport alive while 'service' deteriorates. There are too many volunteers and champions to name that support and build the club. At the same time, there are far too few volunteers and champions that can be counted that are helping. Before anyone 'in the know' points any finger at me, allow me to admit that in my last volunteer role in organizing the mens league in Toronto I was horrible. It was not a job that I was suited for but felt obligated to take on just the same. I wonder how many people within the hockey communty are in similar predicaments.
I propose that we need trained people to help us make the right investments. I agree with writers on this thread who propose hiring professional or semi-professional administrators. In some respects we do this already through our provincial and national organizations. But at the same time, I believe we have to hire the right people so they can properly administer. Why not hire students and/or graduates from the many sports business management programs popping up across Canada. They must be interested in finding challenging work in their field. And I cannot think that all graduates from those programs do find challenging work.
Administering at the club/ league/ provincial /national level would probably do wonders for their on the job training before moving on to bigger and brighter jobs in their careers. The jobs from field hockey are bound to be low paying. But I know most new graduates of business management programs are shuttled into low paying jobs anyway with much less responsibility than they might get in a 'professional' job in field hockey. Areas like fundraising, administration, human resources, people management, finance could be learned in a few short years when you're working in such a job. While it would take more than a decade in a more traditional job those graduates are likely to get.
Plus, the field hockey community would benefit because these people have the education on how to make the sports investments and they'll be able to build business plans that fit field hockey and can help it grow. In short, they'll be able to assess and balance the risk and reward of the investment they'll be doing on our behalf. If that means investing in only Toronto and Vancouver from a national perspective, at least I'll believe them.
Just as I am happy to pay $50 extra per season to get better referees or turf times, I'd be happy to pay $50 extra per season to have a professional administrator manage my field hockey service. Even with the extra fees on top of my existing fees, I would still be a long way short of the money I spend on my fitness membership, golf games or ski trips.
And to me, that represents value.
|
|
musing
01-28-2005 11:17 am
|
Report this post
|
it's where i'm coming from
Mr. Bremner says [quote]: "allow me to admit that in my last volunteer role in organizing the mens league in Toronto I was horrible. It was not a job that I was suited for but felt obligated to take on just the same. I wonder how many people within the hockey communty are in similar predicaments."
Apart from applaudable honesty, I feel Bremner speaks of a larger truth. People get cajoled, convinced, even bullied into administrative tasks that they don't have the time, or ability, or desire to do. But it's critical that the job gets done for the success and growth of the sport. The case can be made over and over again in sport, social clubs, etc. It's not unique to FH. In the end, you can't take away from the fact that without these tasks being done well, the whole sport suffers.... I can't think of a better way to resolve this issue than by having someone who is both dedicated (i.e. a full time job) and accountable (i.e. their employment is dependent on a level of success).
As a final thought, I think Mr Bremner makes an excellent suggestion on where to find people FH can reasonably afford. I believe his thread is entirely constructive.... (probably in part because we're on the same page...?)
|
|
Fiasco
01-28-2005 1:46 pm
|
Report this post
|
Bloodless COup
these coments lead me to beleive that we have some very competent, intelligent Canadians concerned about FH. For some reason we have no forum other than this one to exchnage opinions and ideas.....time to change that.
|
|
a parent
02-12-2005 12:05 am
|
Report this post
|
u21team
I a can not beleive the levy for the u 21 team to the Pan American Games in Peurto Rico is 2700.oo - how can these girls afford that as well as university, residency, spending money , no job opportunities as they are in major training - only those with wealthy parents can afford this and we are not in that elite minority!!! My daughter is a carded athlete and her money for the next four months won`t come near to cover her expenses!! I can send her to Peurto Rico on an All - Inclusive Holiday for Half that price - where is the funding for those that haven`t the privelage of the affluent parent!! I`m sorry but I am probably going to have to tell my daughter that her dream is over as the levies are totally unrelistic for a team to represent Canada!! WHERE IS THE FUNDING and who does the travel bookings that these prices are sooo out of the norm!!!!!
|
|
the way it is
02-12-2005 6:04 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
unfortunately this is the way it is in a country where field hockey is no where near the top of the food chain when it comes to sports. no sponsors will touch a sport that has no exposure and no results. every representative team has to pay to play. just look at the bc u18 indoor levy of $600 just to go to calgary. no way does it cost that much to go for a weekend, but when you add up a secure flight, accomodation, coaches' costs, tournament fee, insurance, tax, etc....it is close. this is the same for your daughter. she is not getting any different treatment from the athletes of the past who have had to pay similar levier (ie $3000 to go to JWC Korea 1997). sorry, but that is the way it is. field hockey is a fairly cheap sport to play at the recreational level which is wonderful, but after that you'd better be ready to pay....your daughter may lose her carding if she doesn't play. :(
|
|
musing
02-14-2005 10:51 am
|
Report this post
|
Unfortunate Reality
It is a shame that amateur sport, generally, is not a priority in Canada. There is no doubt that our elite athletes ought to be better funded, and it is true that it creates elitism based increasingly on financial resources.
If your daughter is keen to play elite hockey and has the passion to make the kind of life-style sacrifices for a national program, I would encourage your daughter to look into other elite hockey options other than our junior national program. It sounds like she's playing university hockey... perhaps she could consider an exchange to go somewhere like Australia, Holland or Germany? If, again, that is financially impossible, she could take advantage of her Commonwealth status and work and play hockey in Australia or Britain? It seems a horrible shame to lose a player in our system, but there are other ways to improve your hockey and play 'at the highest levels'. She could then maybe come back to a Sr. National program which is slightly better funded (albeit only slightly). I played with the Jr Men's program many years ago and it was exactly the same situation... eventually precluding me from continuing (that, and I wasn't good enough! :) )
|
|
Hockey Nut
02-14-2005 6:54 pm
|
Report this post
|
To "a parent"
Does the carding not include tuition? That is supposed to free up some funds. Pleased read the previous responses. Not just hockey, by the way, all amateur sport athletes make financial sacrifices. Good comment about previous teams from "the way it is" about $3000 in 1997 for a tour. Translate that to 2005 costs! Until corporate dollars or other outside funding is available, there is only so much money from Sport Canada. To send a properly staffed and equipped team to a two week event is easily over (way over) $60,000.
|
|
Reg
02-15-2005 6:27 am
|
Report this post
|
re parent's questions
It is certainly true that it costs about $60k to send a team overseas. However, parents and athletes have a perfect right to ask for a breakdown of costs and funding for the event and the program.
FHC received about $50k per year specifically for juniors under the La releve program. On top of that the women's program receives about $180k for training, support staff honoraria, tours, equipment, and various overhead - the head coach salary comes out of another pot. Given that the senior team isn't doing much these days, it is worth asking why the bulk of the women's funds are not going to juniors. It is also worth asking why the national coach salary dollars, which are obviously not being used, could not be offsetting some of the juniors costs.
There may be perfectly rational responses to these questions. But there is no harm asking.
|
|
---
02-15-2005 7:44 pm
|
Report this post
|
there are other ways of getting money to go on trips such as these, your daughter is not going to be axed from the team because she cannot afford to go..look into it because there are other ways around this situation
back to the team itself...its too bad that there is such a big fuss about representing canada with this team, i understand it needs to be done however canada could be sending a much better and stronger team had the best players been chosen as opposed to making sure at least one player came from each province...for a few of the girls who made the team, don't think for a second that you would still have been chosen had you lived in bc, some other poor player from your area would have been chosen instead...i guess this leaves the option to good players from bc to move to pei so they can be picked for the team, only because they weren't chosen b/c there was enough representation from bc already.
|
|
lola
02-21-2005 4:26 pm
|
Report this post
|
|
soy atleta de Puerto Rico pero creo que no nos dan la practica adecuada para ganar en los panamericanos de marzo. quiero que a todo el que lea este mensaje me de un consejo tecnicas por favor
|
|
02-28-2005 7:13 pm
|
Report this post
|
.
Katie Baker is an amazing player despite the fact she is from PEI. She has improved durastically and i suggest you watch her play sometime soon, you will be blown away.
|
|
mamun
03-03-2005 9:28 am
|
Report this post
|
wish
sherry
i believe you will be success in future.
|
|
|
|
 |
HOME | FEATURES | CLUBHOUSE | CAMPS | LINKS | ABOUT US | STORE | ADVERTISE
Use of this site is subject to certain Terms & Conditions.
|
|
|
