• Home
• Blog
• Lessons
• Ask The Coach
• Analysis
• About Us
• Contact Us
• Store

Read some similar posts

• Massive Defeat
• It’s not over till the fat lady sings
• Don’t Change Your Bat During a Match

123 comments so far

1. bob tucket

   commented on April 8th, 2008 at 10:07 am

   Why Simon Gerada is playing for Malta!

   by Bob Tuckett

   A blog by Jeff Plumb on 3 December 2007 on the website Ping Skills has given an account as to why Simon Gerada is no longer playing for Australia. As I was the Head Coach of the National Team when Simon’s dispute with Table Tennis Australia (TTA) occurred, I believe I am in a position to give a more complete account of the matter .

   Simon returned to Australia from Poland sometime in January 2001. I accidentally met Simon at the Melbourne Sports and Aquatic Centre on 20 January and he asked me about training. I advised him if I was appointed Coach of the National Team, the training requirement would be 5×2 hour sessions per week. Simon replied to me that he was clearly the number one player in Australia, that the other players were not up to his level and that he would only practise twice a week because if he practised with them more than that, his game would suffer.

   In late January 2001 I accepted the appointment as Head Coach for the National Team for the Commonwealth Championships and World Championships to be held in April - May 2001. I set a training requirement of 5×2 hour training sessions per week for players selected in the National Squad. This training requirement was approved by the TTA Board of Management. The training requirement represented an attempt by the TTA Board and myself to adopt a more disciplined approach to the training of our National players with the aim of having the players optimally prepared for the occasions on which they were to represent Australia. I considered the 10 hour training requirement to be a minimum and I expected the players to be training in the vicinity of 15-20 hours per week. The Melbourne based players were required to train under my supervision.

   On or about 6 February Simon agreed to join the National Training Squad under the terms detailed in a letter sent to him by TTA on 12 January, which included the following term: “TTA requires you to undergo such coaching and training at such times and venues as is required by the National Coaches appointed by the Board”. Simon signed the acceptance form attached to this letter and returned it to TTA.

   On various occasions between 20 January 2001 and 11 February 2001, Simon gave me the following reasons for not being able to train 5×2 hour sessions per week:
   the players were not up to his level;
   he had a back injury;
   he had study commitments;
   he was starting a technology business;
   he had coaching commitments.

   Simon requested a meeting with Wenda Donaldson, (the VIS Co-ordinator, Athlete Career and Education Program), and myself, which was subsequently held on 15 February . At this meeting Simon stated he could not train 5×2 hour sessions per week as he was mentally tired. This was the first time Simon had mentioned to me that he was mentally tired. I was dumbfounded by this as Simon had previously given 5 different reasons for being unable to fulfil the training requirement and none of these reasons involved mental tiredness.

   At the meeting on 15 February, it was agreed that Simon would attend 3×2 hour “on table” training sessions a week and attend 2×2 hour mental training sessions a week with a VIS sport psychologist.

   Simon attended the first on table training session (after the February 15 meeting) on 17 February. He did not attend the next training session on 18 February and I was advised by his father Joe that Simon would not be attending any more training sessions and that Simon only wanted to train for 2-3 weeks immediately prior to the Commonwealth and World Championships due to mental tiredness. I advised Joe that Simon could not remain in the National Squad on that basis and that if Simon was not in the National Squad he could not be considered for selection in the National Team for the Commonwealth and World Championships. Joe’s response was that the Selectors would not do that. On 19 February I spoke to Wenda Donaldson (VIS), who advised that Simon had informed her that he had withdrawn from the National Squad.

   The National Selectors announced the National Team for the 2001 Commonwealth and World Championships during the week commencing 19 February . Simon was not considered for selection in the Team as he had withdrawn from the National Training Squad and, therefore, was ineligible for selection.

   Simon attended the TTA Annual General Meeting on 25 February in an attempt to gain inclusion in the National Team. Simon stated that he was mentally tired and was having a month’s break and would train for the two weeks prior to the Commonwealth and World Championships. Simon also stated that he intended to play in three tournaments during his month’s break. The TTA Board agreed to hold a Board meeting immediately after the conclusion of the AGM to give Simon the opportunity to put his case for inclusion in the National Team. A Board meeting was convened and Simon presented his case to the Board.

   In a letter dated 12 March 2001, TTA President Brian Lauri advised Simon that the Board had unanimously resolved that no changes should be made to the National Team which had previously been selected.

   Yes, Simon could still be playing for Australia. It is detrimental to Australia and probably sad for Simon that he is not. However, this situation was not brought about by the intransigence of TTA or the National Coach. Simon breached a signed agreement with TTA and a verbal agreement with the National Coach and Wenda Donaldson (VIS). If, upon his return to Australia, Simon had immediately informed the National Coach or TTA of his mental tiredness, this situation would have been averted and Simon would have represented Australia at the 2001 Commonwealth and World Championships. Despite this, Simon could have played for Australia at any time after the 2001 Commonwealth and World Championships if he had not chosen to play for Malta. Jian Fang Lay also withdrew from the National Squad in 2001 and, consequently, was ineligible for selection in the Australian team. Jian has subsequently represented Australia by adhering to the relevant eligibility criteria as stipulated by TTA. Simon, in contrast, has chosen to represent Malta - he has not been forced out by TTA.

   Why is Simon Gerada playing for Malta? The reason is quite simple: it was a matter of choice - Simon’s choice.

2. bob tucket

   commented on April 8th, 2008 at 10:30 am

   Issues raised by Jeff

   Jeff stated that “…Simon came back from a hard slog in Europe and was burnt out and needed a rest”. As an experienced international player who has represented Australia on 120 occasions at 7 World Championships, 7 Commonwealth Championships and 5 Asian Championships, I understand the importance of players planning their season and taking appropriate breaks to ensure they remain fresh, motivated and avoid burnout. As Head Coach of the 2000 Olympic team I counselled Simon on this very issue at a training camp in Ballarat immediately prior to the Olympic Games - advice which Simon dismissed as unnecessary. At this same training camp Simon was also advised by the experienced New Zealand international Peter Jackson of the importance of planning his year to include rest breaks. As an experienced international player I find it incomprehensible that a player who is mentally tired would choose to play in tournaments while in that condition. Simon played in tournaments on 27/28 January, 3/4 February, 11 March, 25 March and 31 March/1 April. He did not need to play in any of these tournaments to satisfy TTA’s eligibility requirements for National selection.

   Jeff also stated that “Other sports recognise that players can get burnt out. In fact the Australian cricket team started the rotation policy under Steve Waugh to assist players in their recovery”. The Australian cricket team’s rotation policy rests players from competition, while they continue to train, ensuring they maintain freshness and motivation while also maintaining their skill level and fitness through training. Simon by contrast wished to rest from training and continue to participate in competition - a reversal of the cricket team’s approach.

   Jeff further stated in his blog that “… he was dropped from the National Team”. This is not true. Simon was not considered for selection in the team, as he had withdrawn from the National Training Squad and, therefore, was ineligible for selection.

   Jeff also stated: “It is not a light decision to switch countries as you must take 3 years out of international competition”. While this is a true statement of the ITTF’s requirements, it did not happen in Simon’s case. Simon did not take 3 years out of international competition. He represented Australia at the 2000 Olympic Games and then represented Malta at the 2001 Games of the Small States of Europe, at the 2002 European Championships, at the 2003 Games of the Small States of Europe, at the 2004 World Team Championships, at the 2005 World Individual Championships, at the 2005 Games of the Small States of Europe, at the 2006 Commonwealth Games and at the 2007 Games of the Small States of Europe.

   Jeff further stated that “…to switch back to Australia he would require another 3 years out, and so this is certainly not going to happen now”. That was the case when the blog was posted on 3 December 2007. However a subsequent decision by the ITTF at the 2008 World Team Championships in China means that Simon can only play for Malta in World Title events. World Title events include the World Individual Championships, the World Team Championships, the World Team Cup and the World Cup. This new rule does not apply to Olympic or Commonwealth Games.

   Jeff also stated in his blog : “With some careful management, both TTA and Simon Gerada could have come to an effective agreement”. That is exactly what TTA, the National Coach and Simon in liaison with Wenda Donaldson (VIS) did. It was Simon who subsequently breached this agreement.

   Jeff also stated: “The problem was that officials simply did not understand the pressures and burnout that Simon Gerada was facing. In fact a Victorian Institute of Sport official and sports psychologist had met with Simon and given him their support but TTA would not alter their stance”. When apprised of the situation of Simon’s “mental tiredness” at the meeting on 15 February, the National Coach and TTA were prepared to be flexible and modified their training requirements to accommodate Simon. It was Simon who subsequently showed he was not prepared to be flexible.

   It is worth noting that Simon had returned to Australia by 20 January 2001 (I do not know the exact date of his return to Australia) and attended the first National Squad training session on 12 February. This provided a minimum break of some 23 days if it had been utilised. In fact, Simon played two tournaments during this period.

3. Jeff Plumb

   commented on April 8th, 2008 at 10:02 pm

   Thanks for the interesting perspective Bob! Unfortunately I have to disagree with a lot of what you have said.

   Firstly you state that Simon did not need to play the tournaments he played to qualify for the Australian side. How did Simon go in these tournaments? Or do results not matter to Australian selectors?

   What were the training conditions that you were providing Simon like? What standard of players would he be practicing with at these sessions?

   You state that it was not true that Simon was dropped - this is just a play on words. TTA made the criteria that made Simon ineligible and therefore is still responsible for him not being in the team. I’m sure TTA had the powers to change this criteria if it thought it beneficial to Australian Table Tennis.

   You state that TTA, yourself and Simon came to an effective agreement. Well judging by the results, you and I have a different opinion on an effective agreement. Based on the results it certainly was not an ideal outcome.

   I do agree that it was a difficult situation and that Simon played his part in this saga. And you are right the end decision to play for Malta was one Simon made. However you miss the main point of the article.

   TTA invested time and money in Simon Gerada and had one of the most promising 18 year olds we have ever had and let him choose to play for Malta because Malta had a better offer. That’s right, Malta had a better offer. They were not concerned by all the points you raise. It is TTA that lost out on this deal not Simon Gerada. TTA is the loser. At the recent World Championships the Australian men finished 43rd. Although no one can predict exactly what would have happened, I would bet a lot of money that with Simon Gerada in the team, Australia would have finished considerably higher. A strong result at the Worlds is important for TTA.

   So please understand that all these poor decisions hurt TTA and not Simon Gerada. It is interesting to note that it is now Simon who is trying to help out TTA. He takes the coaching a couple of nights a week in Melbourne where the majority of our National Team train. An interesting turn of events.

4. bob tuckett

   commented on April 10th, 2008 at 6:20 pm

   Jeff, my “interesting perspective” as you put it is actually the truth. Are there any untruths or inaccuracies in any statements of fact I made? If yes, please point them out. If no, please acknowledge that there are no untruths or inaccuracies in any statements of fact I made. Truth and accuracy are important to me. I do not understand how you disagree with a lot of what I have said. The overwhelming majority of what I said are statements of fact - of which I have proof.

   You stated “TTA invested time and money in Simon Gerada and had one of the most promising 18 year olds we have ever had and let him choose to play for Malta because Malta had a better offer”. That is inaccurate. Simon was born on the 20/03/1981 and was almost 20 years old in the period January/February 2001. As to whether TTA let him choose to play for Malta because Malta had a better offer, I suggest you take that up with TTA. I do not speak on behalf of TTA.

   Simon was aware of the composition of the National Training Squad and the training conditions when he made the verbal agreement on 15 February 2001 - 3 days before he reneged on that agreement.

   You misquoted me when you said “Firstly you state that Simon did not need to play the tournaments he played to qualify for the Australian side”. I actually said: “He did not need to play in any of these tournaments to satisfy TTA’s eligibility requirements for National selection”. There is a difference! To be eligible for selection a player must satisfy the eligibility requirements. When a player is eligible for selection then relevant performances are considered for selection purposes. As Simon did not satisfy the eligibility requirements, he was ineligible for selection and was not considered for selection. His performances in these tournaments therefore had no bearing on the selection process.

   An agreement - effective or otherwise - ceases to be an agreement when a party to the agreement reneges on the terms of the agreement. If Simon had kept his word, it would have been an effective agreement. Simon reneged on two agreements. You judge the reasonableness of an agreement by examining its terms, not by seeing whether the parties have complied with those terms.

   I did not miss the main point of your article. Your main point is that Australia would have had a better team at the 2008 World Championships if Simon had been available. I said in my response that “Yes, Simon could still be playing for Australia. It is detrimental to Australia and probably sad for Simon that he is not”. I agree that with Simon in the team, Australia may have finished a few positions higher, but I think a bit of short term pain to achieve some long term gain by requiring a professional approach to training is beneficial for Australian table tennis.

   Jeff, Australia will always have its “best players”, but if they choose not to train their standard will be lower and their international achievements will also be lower. If the players have a professional/disciplined approach and prepare to their optimum then the Australian standard will improve and international results will be better. This is what TTA and myself as the National Coach were trying to achieve in 2001. From my understanding the younger brigade of players have this approach and Australia will be better for it.

   The reason I responded to your blog was that you gave an inaccurate account as to why Simon was not in the 2001 World and Commonwealth Championships team. Truth and accuracy are important - at least to me.

5. Jeff Plumb

   commented on April 10th, 2008 at 8:43 pm

   Unfortunately what you and TTA were trying to achieve failed. You were trying to achieve a professional and disciplined approach to training but now I cannot name 10 players in the whole of Australia that train more than 10 hours per week. Can you? The environment is completely different from when I first moved to Melbourne in 1993. There is absolutely no comparison. TTA should be concentrating on providing the best training facilities and getting the best players training on a regular basis with a professional and disciplined approach. By doing this I’m sure they will get players training. By stamping their authority and forcing players to meet eligibility criteria they actually discourage it. People generally don’t like o be forced to do something. Make it available and there will be plenty of players who want to do it. Then you will have great professional players and they will be better than the likes of Simon if he is not as professional. Things will take care of themselves.

   You state Australia will always have it’s best players but that is inaccurate. If that is true we would have had Simon in the team and recently at the 2008 Worlds we would have had Stephanie Sang in the team. I disagree with your approach to selecting the National Team. I agree with your approach that players should be professional and disciplined. And I agree that in the long run the players that are professional and disciplined will generally be the ones who get the best results and therefore will be picked in the teams. Everyone wins. However by picking a player who cannot beat opponents who may not be training achieves nothing. It does not help the sport. It actually hurts the player picked. If you have to earn a spot on a team you respect that so much more. Who was the player that replaced Simon at the worlds? How have they progressed?

   I stated Simon was one the most promising 18 year olds Australia has had. I did not state he was 18 at the time. But just keep on thinking that you are accurate.

   I still don’t see how I misquoted you about the tournaments. From my understanding Simon did not need to play those tournaments for selection purposes. I asked how Simon went in those tournaments because I was interested in whether you thought results were important for selection. Do you believe results are important for selection? Or should we just keep a chart and pick the person who trains the most hours? The sport is about results. Let TTA set up the best environment possible so that people can get results. Then simply pick the players with the best results.

   The Ocenaia Olympic qualification tournament that was just played was a perfect way to select a team. Whoever wins goes. There can be no interference from selectors and no excuses from the players. Just as it should be.

   So although you don’t think so, I believe you still miss my point. I think the best team based on results should be picked for the World Championships. I am happy for younger talented players to be picked for some smaller tournaments but for the main ones, pick our best team and achieve the best results possible. I believe that getting good results at the important tournaments is very helpful for the sport. I believe that Simon Gerada should have been picked for the 2001 Worlds. I don’t believe you helped Table Tennis in Australia by not picking him. In fact I think Table Tennis in Australia would be better today if he had played. That is even after reading all the “accurate facts” you have provided. They still don’t change my mind.

   However I do agree with a lot of what you say. We should attempt to have the most professional and disciplined training available to our best players.

6. Bob Tuckett

   commented on April 11th, 2008 at 9:24 pm

   Jeff, I do not wish to enter a debate about team selection policy - it is obvious we have different views on this matter. I am happy to let history and other people judge whether TTA made the correct decision in 2001, but to do that they need to know the full story - they now have a much more complete picture of what happened than from your original blog.

   I will make just a few points about your latest comments. Simon may have been “…one of the most promising 18 year olds we have ever had …” but he was 20 when he went and played for Malta. Your statement was misleading as the inference could be drawn by those who did not know Simon’s age that Simon was 18 when he decided to play for Malta. In relation to results counting for selection you seem to misinterpret what I said. I said and I quote “When a player is eligible for selection then relevant performances are considered for selection purposes”. So, of course results do count - and are important - for team selection but only when a player is eligible for selection. Simon was not eligible for selection, therefore his results were not considered.

   I have not been involved in table tennis for over two years other than for playing one hour per week at a suburban club, so I have no idea how many hours players are training. If there are not 10 players training more than 10 hours per week then table tennis in Australia is in very poor shape. When I said “Australia will always have its “best players”, what I meant was: no matter what the standard is in Australia there will always be players who are ranked #1, #2,#3, #4 etc in Australia. The aim is to get that standard as high as possible and without a disciplined and professional approach this will not be achieved.

   If your point was that “the best team based on results should be picked for the World Championships” then I think - and this is my opinion - that point could have been better highlighted by discussing the contemporary issue of why Stephanie Sang was not included in the team for the 2008 World Team Championships, rather than inaccurately discussing a situation from 2001. If you had posted a blog about Stephanie Sang I would not have commented because I do not know the circumstances of that situation.

   I only responded to your blog because you were inaccurate in what you said. Yes Jeff, my facts are accurate and as you have not disputed any of them I can only assume that you also know that my statements of fact are accurate. I have no interest in debating the philosophy of team selection with you, but I can assure you that when any inaccurate statements are made about why Simon Gerada was not in the 2001 World and Commonwealth Championships team I will correct them. It is important that people can judge for themselves the merits of the situation, but to do this they need to know the facts - I have provided readers with the facts. They can make up their own minds.

   Jeff, I have appreciated the opportunity to present the facts as to why Simon Gerada was not a member of the Australian team for the 2001 World and Commonwealth Championships.

7. Jeff Plumb

   commented on April 12th, 2008 at 2:43 pm

   Thanks for putting up your facts on the matter. I believe they actually support my point of view. Now people can clearly see how Simon should have been picked for the team and that since that time the state of Table Tennis in Australia has not improved.

   Some of the reasons you gave for my initial post being inaccruate are not true. I said “Simon came back from a hard slog in Europe and was burnt out and needed a rest”. That statement is true regardless of whether you had previously tried to advise Simon on the matter. And even if you find it hard to believe that someone who is burnt out would play a tournament that just shows you don’t understand that different people have different needs.

   I stated “Other sports recognise that players can get burnt out. In fact the Australian cricket team started the rotation policy under Steve Waugh to assist players in their recovery.” That statement is true and players do not always continue to train. They often go home to their families.

   I also stated “With some careful management, both TTA and Simon Gerada could have come to an effective agreement”. That statement is true also. I know you disagree with me on that one but we’ll just have to let other people make up their mind.

   I also stated “he was dropped from the National Team”. This is a true statement. Simon was previously in the National Team and was not selected for this team. In the general public this means he was dropped. Thanks for taking the time to point out the reason he was dropped was because you and TTA set criteria which he did not meet. Under you thinking this means no one would ever be “dropped”. They would simply not meet the selection criteria.

   But thanks for putting up your “facts”. I agree they will help everyone judge the “merits of the situation” themselves.

8. Jeff Plumb

   commented on April 12th, 2008 at 2:52 pm

   Hi Bob,

   Who was the professional disciplined player that was selected because of Simon’s ineligibility? Who was the professional player that dedicated their lives to Table Tennis? Let me know because I sincerely doubt that they would have trained half the hours that Simon had to that point in their lives. Did they keep going afterwards and really take a disciplined approach to training?

   The eligibility requirements were harmful to Table Tennis in Australia.

   Who was the player Bob?

9. Charles

   commented on April 13th, 2008 at 6:01 pm

   Jeff,

   there are rules that apply to every sport. Rules that should not be disregarded to advantage any single player because they are presumed ’special’.

   The issue here is not that table tennis Australia did not accommodate Simon Gerada’s needs. In fact, Table Tennis Australia clearly made an effective agreement with Simon twice.

   The issue is that he refused to act in accordance to their effective agreement. If one party fails to act on the terms detailed in by contact. He is in breach of the contract. He should face the consequences of breach. Not get immunity because of his special status.

   Tian Liang is a famous Olympic gold medalist in diving for China. He achieved superstar status and posed as a figurehead for many advertisements. He was under agreement under the general administration of sport to dedicate sufficient time to preparation for the Athens Games. He breached this by taking part in too many civil outings. As a consequence he was demoted from the national team with no option of returning.

   Not long afterwards a famous sports official Li Hua was quoted saying “We hope the administration of the team can be strengthened through this case, especially the administration of excellent and top athletes.”

   Simon Gerada is no doubt a good player, however as with any good player, they must be disciplined at the very least to abide by the rules set by the governing sports committee. In fact many athletes do not have the privilege to negotiate about special rules that may apply to them.

   Overall Jeff, your argument rests on the fact there is no player at the moment that may replace Simon in skill. This is a problem that exists because of human resource capital, not a problem with administration. There is no link stating that these rules deter good players from entering the national team. Your comments about listing another person are therefore irrelevent to this argument.

   Simon, breached the rules set out in a very effective agreement which he completely agreed to and signed. He chose by his own will to not abide by the terms, he therefore chose on his own, not to be selected. This is identical to the fact that you cannot qualify for the pro tour grand finals unless you have competed in at least a certain number of events, regardless of whether you are the world champion.

   In the worst case, I think of the demotion of Simon Gerada as having a positive message and giving good precedent in future cases.

10. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 13th, 2008 at 8:00 pm

    Thanks for the input Charles. Unfortunately Bob has given an incomplete account of what happened. He would like to give an accurate and complete account so that people can make up their own mind. Without stating the player that replaced Simon the account is incomplete. And apparently an incomplete account is something Bob does not want. So let us all have the facts.

    Who was the disciplined professional player that replaced Simon? How many hours per week did they train. What was the great disciplined approach they took to the sport that made them so worthy of your praise. How were they going to improve the sport and teach us all a lesson?

    Unfortunately they never were going to. And by not picking Simon it just confirmed that you did not need to put in much hard work to make the Australian team. This decision was definitely detrimental to Australian Table Tennis. Just look at how we have progressed since. The results speak for themselves.

    But regardless, Bob, would you please provide the missing details to your accurate facts. At the moment you have given an incomplete account and apparently that is something you do not like. After all the truth is important to you at least. I am looking forward to you providing the missing details so people can make up their own mind.

11. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 14th, 2008 at 8:59 am

    Hi Charles,

    I do not want special rules for talented players. I want sensible rules for all players.

    You state: “This is identical to the fact that you cannot qualify for the pro tour grand finals unless you have competed in at least a certain number of events, regardless of whether you are the world champion.”

    That is a sensible rule. Why do you think the criteria wasn’t “You must train at least 10 hours to qualify?”.

    The problem was with the eligibility requirements. They allowed a person to be selected who showed a lot less dedication to Table Tennis than Simon Gerada. Where is the person who got selected ahead of Simon now? Simon is still helping Table Tennis in Australia today!

    And Charles, you seem to have a lot of knowledge about the situation, why don’t you provide your full name or real name and how you are involved with Table Tennis?

    In the meantime I am still waiting for Bob to clarify the situation and provide the missing details along with his accurate facts.

12. Bob Tuckett

    commented on April 14th, 2008 at 3:51 pm

    My intention was to present THE facts as to why Simon Gerada was not in the 2001 World and Commonwealth Championships team. They are not my facts Jeff - they are THE facts. Who was selected in the team has no bearing on why Simon was not in the team, as Simon was INELIGIBLE for selection. You don’t seem to understand that fact Jeff. I will repeat it for your benefit. Simon was ineligible for selection. For the benefit of the readers Jeff - I am sure you know who the team was - the team selected was William Henzell, Trevor Brown, Kiet Tran and John Tawadrous. Kiet Tran subsequently withdrew and was replaced by Alex Swanson. I will repeat myself again and state the obvious; Simon was ineligible and was not considered as a replacement for Kiet Tran. The players involved are irrelevant as to why Simon was not in the team - if you cannot understand that then I cannot help you, and continuing this dialogue is pointless.

    The statements of fact in my comments posted at 10.07 AM on 8/4/2008 are true and accurate. Jeff, you still have not pointed out anything that is untrue or inaccurate in those facts.

    Your blog posted on 3 December 2007 is inaccurate. It was inaccurate when you stated “…..he was dropped from the National team”. For a player to be dropped from a team, a player must first be considered for selection for the team. A player who is injured, suspended or retired is not considered for selection, is not selected but is not dropped. Simon was ineligible for selection, he was not considered for selection, was not selected but was not dropped. I cannot put it more clearly than that. There is an important distinction between being ineligible for selection and being dropped - a player’s performances are only relevant to the issue of being dropped.

    You were also inaccurate when you said “”It is not a light decision to switch countries as you must take 3 years out of international competition”. While this is a true statement of the ITTF’s requirements, it did not happen in Simon’s case. Simon did not take 3 years out of international competition. He represented Australia at the 2000 Olympic Games and then represented Malta at the 2001 Games of the Small States of Europe, at the 2002 European Championships, at the 2003 Games of the Small States of Europe, at the 2004 World Team Championships, at the 2005 World Individual Championships, at the 2005 Games of the Small States of Europe, at the 2006 Commonwealth Games and at the 2007 Games of the Small States of Europe.

    Your blog of 3 December 2007 is also inaccurate by its omissions. You did not mention that:

    Simon reneged on 2 agreements. You also did not mention that Simon told TTA and the National Coach of 5 reasons why he could not train more than twice a week before he informed TTA and the National Coach that he was mentally tired.

    It may be true that “Simon came back from a hard slog in Europe and was burnt out and needed a rest”. I did not say it wasn’t true. I merely pointed out that I had counselled Simon on this very issue at a training camp in Ballarat and that Simon had dismissed the advice as unnecessary. I also gave my opinion based on considerable international experience that “I find it incomprehensible that a player who is mentally tired would choose to play in tournaments while in that condition”. It should be noted that Simon played in tournaments on 27/28 January, 3/4 February, 11 March, 25 March and 31 March/1 April.

    If it is true that Simon “was burnt out and needed a rest” when he returned to Australia, then readers of this blog should be asking the following questions:

    Why didn’t Simon advise me that he was mentally tired when we spoke on 20 January 2001?
    Why did it take Simon at least 26 days to advise TTA and/or the National Coach that he was mentally tired?
    Why did Simon give TTA and the National coach 5 other reasons for not being able to train more than twice a week before he informed TTA and the National coach he was mentally tired?

    Simon reneged on 2 agreements, one after the training component had been changed to accommodate his mental tiredness. An effective agreement cannot be fulfilled when one party reneges on the terms of the agreement.

    This is becoming repetitive, and in my opinion it is pointless continuing this dialogue. So Jeff, unless you or someone else can point out something that is untrue or inaccurate in my statements of fact in the comments posted at 10.07 AM on 8/4/2008, I will not be responding to any more of your or anyone else’s comments posted on this blog. I have appreciated the opportunity to present THE facts as to why Simon Gerada was not in the team for the 2001 World and Commonwealth Championships. Let the readers of this blog judge for themselves. The statements of fact in my comments posted at 10.07 am on 8/4/2008 are:

    Simon returned to Australia from Poland sometime in January 2001. I accidentally met Simon at the Melbourne Sports and Aquatic Centre on 20 January and he asked me about training. I advised him if I was appointed Coach of the National Team, the training requirement would be 5×2 hour sessions per week. Simon replied to me that he was clearly the number one player in Australia, that the other players were not up to his level and that he would only practise twice a week because if he practised with them more than that, his game would suffer.

    In late January 2001 I accepted the appointment as Head Coach for the National Team for the Commonwealth Championships and World Championships to be held in April - May 2001. I set a training requirement of 5×2 hour training sessions per week for players selected in the National Squad. This training requirement was approved by the TTA Board of Management. The Melbourne based players were required to train under my supervision.

    On or about 6 February Simon agreed to join the National Training Squad under the terms detailed in a letter sent to him by TTA on 12 January, which included the following term: “TTA requires you to undergo such coaching and training at such times and venues as is required by the National Coaches appointed by the Board”. Simon signed the acceptance form attached to this letter and returned it to TTA.

    On various occasions between 20 January 2001 and 11 February 2001, Simon gave me the following reasons for not being able to train 5×2 hour sessions per week:
    the players were not up to his level;
    he had a back injury;
    he had study commitments;
    he was starting a technology business;
    he had coaching commitments.

    Simon requested a meeting with Wenda Donaldson, (the VIS Co-ordinator, Athlete Career and Education Program), and myself, which was subsequently held on 15 February . At this meeting Simon stated he could not train 5×2 hour sessions per week as he was mentally tired. This was the first time Simon had mentioned to me that he was mentally tired. I was dumbfounded by this as Simon had previously given 5 different reasons for being unable to fulfil the training requirement and none of these reasons involved mental tiredness.

    At the meeting on 15 February, it was agreed that Simon would attend 3×2 hour “on table” training sessions a week and attend 2×2 hour mental training sessions a week with a VIS sport psychologist.

    Simon attended the first on table training session (after the February 15 meeting) on 17 February. He did not attend the next training session on 18 February and I was advised by his father Joe that Simon would not be attending any more training sessions and that Simon only wanted to train for 2-3 weeks immediately prior to the Commonwealth and World Championships due to mental tiredness. I advised Joe that Simon could not remain in the National Squad on that basis and that if Simon was not in the National Squad he could not be considered for selection in the National Team for the Commonwealth and World Championships. Joe’s response was that the Selectors would not do that. On 19 February I spoke to Wenda Donaldson (VIS), who advised that Simon had informed her that he had withdrawn from the National Squad.

    The National Selectors announced the National Team for the 2001 Commonwealth and World Championships during the week commencing 19 February . Simon was not considered for selection in the Team as he had withdrawn from the National Training Squad and, therefore, was ineligible for selection.

    Simon attended the TTA Annual General Meeting on 25 February in an attempt to gain inclusion in the National Team. Simon stated that he was mentally tired and was having a month’s break and would train for the two weeks prior to the Commonwealth and World Championships. Simon also stated that he intended to play in three tournaments during his month’s break. The TTA Board agreed to hold a Board meeting immediately after the conclusion of the AGM to give Simon the opportunity to put his case for inclusion in the National Team. A Board meeting was convened and Simon presented his case to the Board.
    In a letter dated 12 March 2001, TTA President Brian Lauri advised Simon that the Board had unanimously resolved that no changes should be made to the National Team which had previously been selected

13. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 14th, 2008 at 9:13 pm

    Hi Bob,

    I understand what you are saying, it is just that I disagree and that is why you can’t help me. It was harmful to Table Tennis in Australia that Simon Gerada was not picked for the 2001 Worlds team. It is that simple. The decision was the wrong one. The criteria for making Simon ineligible was the problem. TTA could have and should have had different criteria. Like “Charles” pointed out, the ITTF has some requirements to be eligible for making the grand finals but they do not include training a minimum number of hours per week.

    The reason that naming the players who were selected is important is because it shows how bad the eligibility criteria was. It shows how it was obviously not in the best interests of Table Tennis in Australia.

    If a player has shown dedication and commitment for a number of years and then is not training for a few months, aren’t they still more professional than someone who might train 10 hours per week over a small period of time just to meet some eligibility requirements?

    Your facts, whilst a highly interesting read, don’t make any difference to the fact that the eligibility criteria was wrong. I am not trying to find an inaccuracy in your facts - they simply don’t matter.

    I admit that it is not good that Simon didn’t meet the requirements of the agreement he signed. Now I have not talked with Simon about this and so the following is just my opinion and my opinion only. Why do you think Simon signed the initial agreement? Because he wanted to play for Australia and if he didn’t sign it he wouldn’t be playing. So in a way his hand was forced. He could either not represent Australia or he could sign the agreement and see if he could get through the period of the agreement and go to the Worlds. He obviously didn’t feel he could talk to you and TTA open and honestly about this without being dropped (”sorry made ineligible” - apparently it is an important distinction). Isn’t this a more woryying sign? Shouldn’t a coach and TTA be approachable? Have you ever thought that your attitude may have had something to do with it? I don’t know but perhaps you could give it some thought. Everyone can learn something out of a situation. It is hardly ever that only one party is to blame.

    You stated “I think a bit of short term pain to achieve some long term gain by requiring a professional approach to training is beneficial for Australian table tennis.” Did you really believe back then and do you still believe that the team you picked helped to promote a professional attitude? Simon would have trained more professionally over a number of years than some of the other team members.

    Simon did himself no favours but it was TTA that was the loser in this situation - no one else. Simon got to play for Malta, earned some money and TTA did not end up developing a more professional approach. TTA should have tried harder to understand the problems Simon was facing. I know you will say they did everything they could, but I disagree. It was TTA who stood to lose the most here and that is what you don’t understand and that is why I can’t help you. The results clearly show that the decision to not include Simon in the team was the wrong one.

    Now I know you said you weren’t going to respond anymore but come on Bob, don’t let me down, the conversation is only just getting started.

14. Charles

    commented on April 14th, 2008 at 11:01 pm

    Jeff,

    many sports have strict training criteria that are compulsary on their players. I have mentioned the example of diving above.

    Simon Gerada could not meet the qualification criteria that was necessary.

    Therefore whose fault is it? TTA that gave Simon the chance to be heard and accomodate his needs by giving him a modified contract?

    Or Simon who could not dedicate six hours a week to train with the Australian team?

15. Richard Lee

    commented on April 15th, 2008 at 2:31 am

    An interesting debate.
    One area I would like to comment on is the mental tiredness
    and the approach taken by Simon Gerada regarding it.
    I find it inconceivable that a player would play in that number of tournaments (5 or 6?) -if he didn’t have to,which I take was the case-if he was mentally tired.
    The nature of table tennis which is neurophysiological demands that a player be alert,quick and precise to play anywhere near their highest standard .If someone is genuinely mentally tired,stale or whatever words are used to describe it they simply could not play to their highest standard.For a player in this state ,match play is the worst possible scenario for them to regain their enthisiasm,zeat,love of playing-call it what you may-as they will play below their expectations which would exacerbate their mental staleness and confidence and make the solution of the problem even more difficult.
    And if they can play to their highest standard the only inference would be that they are not mentally tired.
    A far more sensible solution would be for a player in such a state to have a short break,and gradually increase their training load until reaching the required levels where they can regain their peak form and hopefully build on it.
    For a player of Simon’s standard I think this is the approach he should have taken rather than playing a tournament a week or so after returning from overseas.
    I would imagine if this had been stated clearly from the word go-his first meeting with the board or selectors- this unseemly situation could have been resolved without too much fuss.But playing a raft of tournaments while mentally tired and stale is certainly completely contrary to good peaking/periodisation practice.

16. Mary LeGassick

    commented on April 15th, 2008 at 5:17 pm

    Jeff, it appears to be your opinion that Simon felt he could not talk to Bob or TTA “open and honestly” about his mental tiredness. In my opinion Bob is open and honest as well as being reasonable and approachable. He demonstrated his reasonableness by reducing the training requirement for Simon to 6 hours per week when informed of Simon’s mental tiredness. If Simon had been up-front about his mental tiredness when he returned to Australia, I am sure a simple solution would have been found and this situation averted.

17. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 15th, 2008 at 9:58 pm

    Hi Mary,

    Thanks for joining the discussion. Look, I agree that Simon made the situation worse for himself. And I must admit that I found Bob very approachable when he was my coach at the Sydney 2000 Olympics. As Bob has represented Australia over 100 times, it is clear that his opinion should be heard and listened to. That is why I am glad he has responded to my article and put across his point. I mostly agree with Bob’s approach to Table Tennis and training. Of course it makes sense that we should promote a professional disciplined attitude. However I do disagree with the eligibility requirements that were set. The other problem was that we did not have highly disciplined professional players to replace Simon so it made even less sense to make him ineligible and pick him with someone who would later withdraw. Do you still honestly think that was the right decision. Did that promote the National Team as a disciplined professional unit? Or did it make it look like any Tom, Dick or Harry could just walk up and represent Australia?

18. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 15th, 2008 at 10:09 pm

    Charles,

    I think if you take a look at the training conditions, Simon was not in fact training with the National Team as you state. Perhaps Bob can help me out here. Bob, was there one other member of the eventual team that was picked present at these training sessions?

    Firstly William Henzell was most likely overseas, Trevor Brown may have been overseas at the time or he may have been at the sessions, Kiet Tran and John Tawadrous were both from NSW. Alex Swanson was from South Australia. Bob I know you are a guru with facts so would you please enlighten us to who was training at these sessions and how often?

    It is my understanding that most of these people were far below the National Team standard of the players at the 2000 Olympics. It has been made out throughout this debate that the training conditions that Simon was to attend were ideal but the truth is they were far from ideal. This is not a criticism of Bob here, as you can only work with what you’ve got - but it is important to remember that if you are trying to make out like you are a professional disciplined unit, you should be able to back it up with an environment that is such.

19. Charles

    commented on April 16th, 2008 at 2:18 am

    Jeff,

    I would like to ask you a hypothetical question:

    If a better player replaced Simon and met eligibility criteria, would that have made a difference in your opinion of the rules in place?

20. Richard Lee

    commented on April 16th, 2008 at 6:24 am

    I think the last comment by Charles is at the heart of the matter.
    Deductive thinking versus inductive thinking.
    If you keep changing rules/criteria depoending on specific cases there is really no point in having the criteria in the first place.Whether one agrees or disagrees with the criteira in place at least they are concrete and players know what they have to do. Once decided upon criteria should only be altered with very clear evidence they are wrong or don’t work.One case does not support a view they are wrong.
    From an outsiders point of view it would seem Simon should have fufilled the ( adapted ) criteria and if he thought they were completely wrong given his reasons and logic for that to be discussed after the World Championships -in particular the factors regarding his specific circumstances.
    In my opinion throwing out the baby with the bathwater very seldom,if ever, works and it does appear every opportunity was given to Simon to meet those criteria including fine-tuning them for him regarding the minimum he had to train to fufill criteria necassary to be eligible for selection.

21. Simon

    commented on April 16th, 2008 at 9:18 am

    I was 19 years old, an inexperienced age as a professional athlete. Although my results were of the most experienced players in Australia. I was training as hard as I could for 10 years, left Australia at 14 to live in China for 5 months at 14 years old, on my own and did not return till I was 24. Mr Tuckett, as National Coach of Australia you had a responsibility to get the best out of your team and you failed. I left the country after your tenor as coach. Facts are facts, if it was me in your position, I would not be defending my position. By the sounds of it, you would do the exact same thing again giving the same situation. Now I know why the sport is still in the same position if not worse for the last 15 years.
    By the way, I am still playing and winning, as an experianced coach such as your self, just imagine if you had of worked with me rather than kick me out because I did not want to train with any Tom, Dick or Harry.
    Well done mate.. well done to a job well done haha

22. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 16th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

    Excellent discussion.
    After just reading everything since conversation started, i’ll have my say.
    1. Given the rules/criteria for the Aust. Team in 2001 and with what occurred (as Bob stated) then Simon could not have made the Team.
    2. As a result of the criteria, the Aust. TT Team was, and still is, worse off - especially as Simon is still competing in t’ments and proving he is of Aust. Team standard (clearly no. 2, so it’s not like it’s a boarder line case).
    Let’s move onto another aspect now;
    3. Yes, we need rules/criteria in place but the sport in this country is in such a sad state of affairs (re: player numbers) that the rules/criteria need to be quite relaxed because we cannot afford to lose any top players. As a result of so few good/top players competiting, i believe we (the sport) are in a situation where the players are more important than the sport - this should never happen but the decision makers (National, State and Club) have let this occur.
    Using the current Aust. Men’s Team as an example, if we lose the no. 1 player (William Henzell) then the Team is much much weaker. This is the case due to lack of players playing over many years and has created less depth. Our Men’s Team results will drop dramatically if Henzell is not in the Team therefore he is more important to the sport than the sport is to him. If the approach is to drop (short term pain for long term gain) Henzell due to (hyperthetically) not abiding by whatever criteria is in place then it may never recover as he (in my mind) has made the most sacrifices of any player in Aust. TT history - living overseas for 12 years from age of 14 to improve his skills/standard. Keep in mind, Henzell has only reached a best world ranking of 120-130. He has done a great job but what is it going to take to become Top 100 or dare i say, Top 20. Most likely it will never happen unless we buy a proven international player but we don’t have that type of money so everyone please don’t worry about trying to become the best in the world; let’s try and keep the best in Aust. playing for as long as possible, make criteria easy to abide by and increase the amount of players playing.
    I’m happy to discuss this topic with anyone interested.

    I say the sports no. 1 priority should be about getting more players (mainly younger) competiting and hopefully training and in a situation where they can eary money which is at least equivalent to a part-time job.

23. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 16th, 2008 at 5:22 pm

    I could not agree more with you Mark. You have hit the nail on the head. Finally some common sense.

24. Greg Linwood

    commented on April 16th, 2008 at 11:36 pm

    Australian Table Tennis won’t improve until you guys (the generation of recently retired players) get more involved in decision making committees. We all know that the sport has been run for far too long by bureaucratic committee members who have lacked the vision & passion necessary to make progress but nothing will change until new faces breath fresh ideas into the sport.

    I also disagreed strongly with Bob’s handling of the national squad at the time (too rigid & inflexible to the various needs of players) but I have always pointed out in discussions on thiis topic that he at least got involved & tried in his own way to improve things.

    In my opinion, the most unfortunate part of this whole affair was the lost opportunity. Bob started out widely respected by players & might have used that position to motivate the players into participation. Instead, he went down the dictatorial route & tried threatening players into action with oppressive rules & legal letters. You can still see this attitude today in his obsession with “facts” rather than questioning why no-one wanted to be involved in his squad. It could have been so much better if he had just focussed on putting together a high quality squad that players *wanted* to be a part of.

    Compare this with the squad run by Zhou Lan Sun in the ’90s. Sure there were rules imposed in Mr Zhou’s squad & players had the extra motivation of the Sydney Olympics but Mr Zhou’s training was always strongly attended because players WANTED to be there. Players admired their coach & even looked forward to the hard training. Table Tennis Australia / Victoria need to find their way back to this situation again somehow & it won’t be through authoritarian rule-making. Motivation is the crucial ingredient & it needs to be applied to more than the national squad.

    Again, I say you guys should try running for committees & start breathing new life into the sport. I’m sure many current committee members see themselves as care-takers to some degree & would welcome your involvement & make room for new blood. You’d be far more effective leading at the committee level than in blog discussions. Nothing will change until you guys make it happen.

25. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 17th, 2008 at 11:54 am

    Good comments Greg.
    For the last 2 yrs I have provided document after document to Board of Vic. and some to Board of Aust. TT but they usually fall of deaf ears as my proposals usually step on some people’s personal agendas; or if aspects of my proposals get implemented then they are manipulated to suit some decision makers.
    The most recent document I’ve done (Feb. 08) was a 9 page dicussion paper to Aust. TT Board re: National training programs and dealing with elite players. Anyone interested in reading it, then ask me.
    Last year I advised Victoria TT (TTV) that I’m available to assist where possible and couple months ago offered my services to Aust. TT (TTA) to help out where possible - all voluntarily. I’m yet to hear from them so I gather they think the sport has enough resources to get the job done in all areas.
    As i coach 7 days a week (mostly night times) I’m unable to sit on any National/State Board of Management.
    I’m doing what i can to assist the decision makers but unfortunatley there are some people who will do whatever they can to keep someone like myself away from Boards (and Board decisions) due to thier own agendas.
    I, along with 7-8 other well respected people within the sport have produced and submitted a discussion paper to TTV around 2 months ago but they are not in a hurry to have meetings and discuss the many issues we have raised as we may get the sport moving foward if proposals in our document were implemented - shame on TTV.
    If any readers here are willing to join me and keep trying to help then let me know, otherwise (as Greg has pointed out) nothing will change.

26. Richard Lee

    commented on April 18th, 2008 at 9:37 am

    Just a couple of points .
    -(1).From what has been written it would seem the main reason Simon didn’t want to train was mainly the standard of the training partners ,rather than mental tiredness.or have I interpreted this incorrectly?
    -(2)While it is off the subject I think Mark is absolutely correct about the number of players been the main concern in Australia.In opponent -based sports ,like table tennis ,playing numbers are absolutely critical to improve the playing standard -more than any other factor.
    Movement automation in an open-kinetic chain,non-cyclic sport like table tennis reaches a maximum of 40% wheras in sports like rowing,swimmimg etc it gets up to 95%.Thus the opponent is everything.Added to this you cannot train by yourself-basically-and it is impossible to quantify and compare your standard to the rest of the world unlike sports which are measurable by time etc. and the problem to reach world-class level becomes huge.
    it would seem that table tennis in countries like Australia ans N.Z. should concentrate on getting numbers as high as possible as this is the best way to narrow the gap in standard between players reaching the highest level they can in those countries and then going to live/play in Europe/Asia and make the transistion less of a shock to the system.

27. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 18th, 2008 at 12:54 pm

    Yes, agree with Richard’s comments.
    We (this region of the TT world) are so far away from the strength of the world that it makes it unrealistic to think we can produce world class players with such few players participating in t’ments and playing in general.
    Having more players playing will create more depth and in turn create a higher standard at the top.
    It’s up to the administrators to do this. It’s very sad to see that our State (Vic) and National (Aust) bodies not seeing this area as a priority.
    This week the Aust. Under 21 C’ships is being played and the Men’s draw has a pitifull 28 players and Women’s an disastrous 15. Remember this is a National C’ships.
    Is this the same problem in NZ? Or other countries?
    I coach about 22 players (20 juniors) on an individual basis each week that play State T’ments. Most likely 12-15 of those juniors will qualify for Vic. Teams (about 10 in “A” Teams) this year and there are only a maximum 36 spots available. I think it’s an embarrassment to the sport that an individual coach can produce so many players to make a State Team - i think 5-8 is acceptable for the best coaches. Shame on the decision makers who govern the sport.

28. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 18th, 2008 at 6:23 pm

    Would like to clarity something. When i said “5-8 players is acceptable for the best coaches” i should add that is for the coaches who are doing it on regular basis and make a living from it.
    I have gone off track from the original statement “Aust. needs Simon Gerada”. The answer is YES.
    Maybe another statement/question can be formed and discussed, such as, what can be done to improve the sport (mainly elite but can be all levels) in this part of the world?

29. Dennis

    commented on April 18th, 2008 at 7:30 pm

    I have only one question?? Who is Charles??

30. Simon

    commented on April 21st, 2008 at 12:43 pm

    Charles?

31. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 21st, 2008 at 2:16 pm

    Hello Charles. Where and who are you?

32. Dennis

    commented on April 21st, 2008 at 7:11 pm

    Charles….. Wuvanich?? or Charles and the chocolate factory??

33. Charles

    commented on April 22nd, 2008 at 12:56 am

    Hi Dennis, I don’t usually like to divulge my personal details on the internet. But since you only have ONE question, I’ll make an exception.

    My full name is Charles Ma, and I come from Shanghai. Who are you Dennis?

34. Mary LeGassick

    commented on April 22nd, 2008 at 8:53 am

    It is sad that such a great debate has deteriorated into this.
    Not sure what the interest was in who people are, surely it is what they say.
    Let’s get back to the topic!

35. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 22nd, 2008 at 1:00 pm

    Yes, let’s get back to the topic.
    The reason why Aust. needs Simon is due to the lack of good players around. If Aust. had another 3-6 players of Simon’s standard then if a player such as Simon doesn’t abide by whatever criteria is in place then he shall not be considered for selection. If a player of Simon’s standard is selected in a Team then (after Team is selected) does not abide by the training and/or competition regime put in place then he/she should be withdrawn for the Team, regardless of how good the player is.
    I say this again, as the decision makers have neglected this area (player numbers and abilitly to earn reasonable money within the sport) for up to 10 years (or more), we are now in a situation where there a so few top players around that the those top players have become more important to the sport compared to the sport is more important to those top players.
    As previously mentioned, Simon is clearly the no. 2 player in Aust and as he continues to play t’ments he is also assisting the 2nd and 3rd tier players to improve their standard.
    This fact is for the readers who don’t understand the situation in Aust.; for t’ments, entry fees have gone up around 200-300% over the last 10 years (which is acceptable) but prizemoney has generally decreased by 50%. As a former top player, i say this is totally unacceptable and must change otherwise the sport will continue to struggle to attract players. I am one who’s career (stopped playing most t’ments in 2002) would’ve been extended if there was more money to be earned so god help the players now and in future.
    In today’s world where time and money is much more important/valueable than it used to be, there will be less people willing to make as many sacrifices (re: time and money) as past generations. I’m sure in China if top players could not earn as much money (directly or inderectly) then i’m very confident they would not be as dominant as they, have been, are, and will be.

36. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 22nd, 2008 at 1:06 pm

    Further to my comments, if the sport has an abundance of good/top players then the criteria can be more strict but if the sport doesn’t then the criteria must be very relaxed and easy to abide by.
    I say, let all players be eligible for Team selection (not just the National Squad members which is currently the case) and see who is the best via competition.

37. Dennis

    commented on April 22nd, 2008 at 8:09 pm

    Sorry Charles if I have offended you in any way.With all the “heat” generating from this topic,I thought I’d cool things off by adding some silly and childish humour to it before all the parties involved start abusing each other..
    I’m Dennis from Australia and I used to be in the national team for ten years and I personally know the parties involved here.
    Anyway going back to a more serious note,I’d like to express my opinion about this topic.I’d just like to state that even though I know Bob and Simon very well,I have never discussed this with them whatsoever.So my opinion is very unbiased and have assessed this situation based on the facts that have been submitted here.
    Where do I start?? Firstly with Simon..I think what’s happened is that at the time,Simon was no 1 in Aus,if not top 3 at least I presume.Coming back from overseas and knowing that you are the best player in the country,you’d feel invincible..meaning you would think you would get your own way with everything back here in Aus because you feel you have earned it from doing all the hard work.So Simon comes back and faces Bob who is the current coach at the time.I know Bob quite well that he is “old school” meaning it doesn’t matter whether you are the world champion,or no 30 in Victoria,he would expect any player under him to practise like everyone else.He’s always believed in hard work ethics.Now if Simon was smart,instead of telling Bob exactly what he thought of the situation(i.e. no one is good enough here to practise with me) he should have just told Bob that he was mentally tired.No one has to know the real reason why he didn’t want to spend 15 hrs a week practising with the other players in the squad.As an elite player myself,I could see where Simon was coming from and he did have a point.He just went about it the wrong way because every player/person is different.When I was no 1 in Australia for about four years,I still practised with every player in the academy under Mr Zhou.For those who knew me,I never ever forfeited or backed out of a tournament because I was scared to “lose my points”..The only way for me to go was down the rankings however there was no point practising hard when I’m gonna be scared to lose to this player,or lose this tournament,so I played everytime I had the opportunity to..Basically If I was Simon,I would have just “lied” to Bob and say that I was mentally tired and adjust the program to suit my preference of practise hours.Every top player has some arrogance in them.Simon,Russell,Haberl,Pinkewich,maybe me at times,even Henzell and somehow this arrogance comes out in different ways.Simon’s came out in his attitude towards practising with the current squad players at the time.Bob saw this as unacceptable which is fair enough because if he made exceptions for Simon,he’d have to make exceptions for other players in the future squads and it wouldn’t be right.If Mr Zhou was the coach at the time and not Bob,maybe Simon would have got away with his intentions.Mr Zhou didn’t create a fuss if a player practised 5 or 15 hours a week.He just expected the workrate from the players.But like I said,everyone is different.Bob is completely different from Mr Zhou.If I was the coach,I don’t know how I would have handled the situation either.
    I guess how I assess the topic is that Simon was at the “wrong place at the wrong time”..or the reverse where Bob was also at “the wrong place at the wrong time”.There was definitely a clash of personalities,motives and intention for the good of the sport.There was definitely no winners,just a loser.And that is the status of the Australian mens team..

38. matt

    commented on April 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 pm

    okay, im not a top player or anything,
    but can we use PARAGRAPHS!

39. Richard Lee

    commented on April 22nd, 2008 at 10:33 pm

    One point I don’t quite understand is why Simon felt it necessary to change countries because he was not deemed eligible for the World Champs in 2001.
    Presumably that was the only tournament he was going to miss?-It is not like he was not going to be able to play for Australia for either a set ot indefinite period of time.
    Many elite players in the history of table tennis-or any sport for that matter-have missed important championships for reasons such as the one being discussed here and have come back to play for their country.
    The most famous of these players would be the famous Hungarian player,Tibor Klampar,who was suspended,for amongst other things,disparaging his coach and behaving disgracefully during preparations many times and missed at least 2 world championships and 1,possibly 2 European championships but still had a tremendous career lasting over 20 years.
    I can also recall players being sent home from World and European Championships for a variety of reasons often which may have seemed trivial to observers but ,again,those players came back to represent their country.
    It has been pointed out that Simon was young and inexperienced at the time.While he may have been young I would dispute that he was inexperienced.I have just checked the iTTF website and he had participated in 2 previous World Champs,and Olympic Games and an Oceania Champs for Australia amongst others.To me,that is not inexperienced.

40. Phil Boyle

    commented on April 22nd, 2008 at 10:49 pm

    What an interesting discussion………….’tis all sad, since the outcome has been so detrimental on so many fronts and obviously continues to be quite divisive.

    The bottom line has to be that Jeff is right - Australia needs and has needed Simon Gerada. The discussion above seems to focus on whether Bob was ‘right’ or Simon was ‘right’. Shouldn’t the discussion take out the personalities and focus on the question of whether the process or requirements were “right”?

    We should also give Simon credit for assisting & mentoring juniors of late, and giving back to the sport.

    Denis is right about Mr. Zhou (a personal hero of mine) and the academy (which he let me train in for 2 years) - it was a pretty unstructured and flexible environment. I suspect he had decided it was up to the players to choose if they wanted to work hard.

    I like the recent Olympic Qualification process. Cut throat competition and the best players getting through. Pick the best team and hang the rest, I say.

    And can anyone RATIONALLY explain how Stephanie didn’t get selected in the worlds team?

    PB

41. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 22nd, 2008 at 11:41 pm

    Great comments Phil.

    I too would love to hear from anyone who can RATIONALLY explain how Stephanie did not get selected in the worlds team!

42. Charles

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 1:33 am

    Jeff,

    did you see the question I had posted for you earlier? It’s repeated again for your reference. I’d appreciate it if you gave me a reply regarding your answer.

    The question was:

    If a better player replaced Simon and met eligibility criteria, would that have made a difference in your opinion of the rules in place?

43. Richard Lee

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 8:17 am

    Perhaps this discussion would be more relevant if the topic was why wasn’t Stephanie Sang selected for the world championships.
    The topic been debated is about 7 years too late and really seems irrelevant now.

44. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 9:47 am

    Hi Charles,

    I believe the best players should be selected based on their results not on the amount of time they train. I think the eligibility requirements should have been relaxed. So with regards to your question, if there was a player that was better than Simon, then I believe they should be selected above Simon. However as was the case, Simon’s results clearly indicated (based on results), he should have been in the team. I don’t believe anyone is arguing that. It is just that he was not eligible for selection which I think was wrong.

    That is why I like the Olympic Qualification tournament. Whoever is good enough to win the matches makes the team. Perfect!

45. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 9:50 am

    Hi Richard,

    Great idea. In the next few weeks I’ll try and find out some more information about why Stephanie Sang was not selected for the Worlds team and put together another post.

    In the meantime, I encourage people to read Mark Smythe’s discussion paper on a National Training Table Tennis Program and leave a comment to indicate their opinions on the matter. Mark submitted this document to Table Tennis Australia but has not received a reply. You would think some kind of reply would be warranted?

46. Richard Lee

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 12:20 pm

    While i agree qualifying tournaments results can’t be argued with and and lead no room for conjecture,they too have potential pitfalls.
    -What if easily the best player in the region fell sick or got injured while the tournament was on? What then?I seeem to remember the Australian selectors in swimming doing a backflip on this very subject -maybe last olympics-with Ian Thorpe failing to qualify for some reason in an event.
    Imagine if that happened to an Australian in table tennis who was clearly the best player.Worse still if he/she was a medal prospect.
    Though this scenario may not have happened yet it is only a matter of time till it does happen.
    Would the system seem so good then?
    - In an interview with former Chinese player Ching YinHua ,who is now resident in the United States,he climed that the same type of qualifying tournament system that the U.S.A. have used in table tennis was holding back their chance of developing and improving their world standing and results.He suggested a similar system to the Chinese selection policy for world champs whereby 3 places-or 2 in a 4 player team-are determined by selection tournament and 2 by the selectors.
    I will try and find the article.

47. Richard Lee

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 12:23 pm

    It was an article in the 2005 edition of USATT Magazine july/August 2005 between larry Hodges and Ching Ying hua-I spelt his name incorrectly in the last post.
    The website is masatenisi.org

48. Charles ma

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 2:46 pm

    Hi Jeff,

    the topic addressed in your article does not directly deal with national team selection policy. It deals with disputable facts that you have expressed in a biased manner about Simon not being able to qualify for the national team.

    Bob has given a clear account of why Simon could not qualify for the team. He also expressed how reasonable he was to accomodate Simon under the rules in place at the time.

    I don’t think Bob intended to discuss national team selection criteria with you. After all, this is a seperate topic which is far too complex to deal with in one or two comments.

49. Charles ma

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 2:49 pm

    In professional analysis, you have to consider two things:

    1.) Whether a particular decision was justified under the rules in place.

    2.) Whether these rules should be amended, if they are ineffective.

    This article deals with 1, why don’t you mention 2 in another article?

50. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 5:09 pm

    I agree with Charles’s comments when he says you have to consider the 2 points he mentioned.
    1. The correct decison was made by Bob to not consider Simon for selection - given the rules/crieteria at the time. Bad for Aust. TT but correct decison made!
    I was once withdrawn from a National Team (after being selected)for the same reason and this was the correct decision at the time (as a player i was not happy but had to live with it) so next time (6 months later) i abided by the same criteria and represented Aust. at the 1997 World and C’wealth C’ships.

    2. This (rules/criteria) is where the biggest problem is. I have discussed this issue in my discussion paper to our National Body which is posted on this website.

    Also, i have made mentioned Stephanie Sang’s non selection in my discussion paper and added some extra thoughts under the article in the “comments” area.

51. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 5:34 pm

    Hi Charles,

    I think you have missed the point once again (and when are you going to provide your real name? - no one else is afraid to). The point and title of the article is Australia Needs Simon Gerada. So it does deal with your point 2. In fact it does not really deal with point 1. I don’t care whether the decision was justified under the rules in place. I care the wrong decision was made to benefit Table Tennis.

    Bob mentioned he did not want to discuss National Selection but that is his decision. It doesn’t mean the article doesn’t hint that the eligibility requirements were wrong. And it doesn’t mean I can’t state that they were wrong and that they were harmful to Table Tennis in Australia.

52. Greg Linwood

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 5:47 pm

    The point of competing at world championships is to try & win the championships, not show how hard players have been training immediately proceeding championships.

    Given the objective, any un-biased, rationale line of reasoning should lead to the obvious - that players should be selected based on their recent results, not how many hours they put into training at the last minute prior to selection.

53. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 5:47 pm

    Hi Richard,

    Interesting feedback about the qualifying tournaments. I quite like the idea of having some places for selection and the remaining places up for grabs in a qualifying tournament. I also don’t think all events should be selected this way but for the Worlds and Olympics I think you want your best team. For smaller tournaments you may want to include a younger up and coming player for experience?

    With regards to a player being sick at a qualifying tournament, this could also happen at the actual event itself, so I admit it does pose a problem but I still like the system.

54. Charles Ma

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 7:02 pm

    Jeff,

    we have established that my name isn’t important in this discussion. In fact, if you read just less than ten posts back, I have already told you who I am. Why are you still enquiring about this? Do you also want my date of birth and my mothers maiden name?

55. Charles Ma

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 7:12 pm

    Jeff,

    it may be true that Australia needs new rules to amend existing ones. This is a matter you need to discuss with Table Tennis Australia.

    The issue that Bob had was whether your article was in fact giving the correct depiction of events. The stance in your article seems to direct most of the blame on Table Tennis Australia which seemed unfair given the leniency Simon was given under the rules in place.

56. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 23rd, 2008 at 11:15 pm

    Does Charles’s real name start with B?

57. Dennis

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 1:15 am

    C’mon guys!Leave Charles alone now and get back to the original topic.!!!He already told us he’s Charles from Shanghai!

58. Richard Lee

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 4:46 am

    With respect to some of the comments made by Jeff in his opening statement on this subject it was mentioned that Australia with simon could be a formidable force.
    With respect to Simon’s playing ability I think this is coming off the long run.
    At the 2000 World champs Australia ,with Simon,finished 45th.
    Without him,at the 2001 World Champs,Australia finished 45th also.
    I then worked out where Australi would be ranked in the world, , with Simon ,compared to their current world ranking of 48th and where they finished at the last world teams champs which was 43rd.
    With Simon added to the team they would be rated 41st splitting Turkey and Israel.Even allowing an exceptional performance they would be hard pressed to be higher than 36th or 37th.
    That is hardly a formidable force at world level.
    Of course,I believe that every effort should be made to finish as high as possible at major tournaments but the reality is,as the examples above show,that it would make little difference .
    Which really is only of interest to those people all-ready playing table tennis in Australia-and perhhaps to only a small percentage of those as is certainly the case in N.Z.
    I doubt if finishing 35/36 in thw world ,which would be Australi’s optimal performance,would have the media falling over themselves with praise and the general public taking up the game and following it in droves.
    Again I use the case of one of the most talented players ever in Tibor Klampar missing many major tournaments ,with
    his ill-discipline been at the core of his droppings.
    Hungary were a real force in World/European Championships and these droppings may have cost them and Klampar medals at these tournaments.
    However eventually the method paid dividends with Hungary dominating The 1978 European mens Championships and winning the 1979 World teams .
    Former players on this discussion have also made mention of
    themselves been dropped for similar reasons as Simon-but then playing again for Australia shortly afterwards.
    It would appear to me ,admittingly as an outsider and not knowing the full circumstances and not being there at the time,that perhaps Simon either got bad advice at the time or wasn’t thinking the long-term consequences when he made the decision to play for Malta.
    But that is the reason why he in’t playing for Australia -because he can’t .Not with the new rules that have come into place.
    The last thing I would mention is the implication that a player knows best what is good for their game.-particularly an international player.
    As an ex-International player and a coach for over 30 years I’m afraid I have to disagree with that line of thought.What a player wants and what a player needs are often 2 different things.Particularly a ‘young and inexperienced one’ as simon was described at the time.
    In table tennis ,as in any sport, the most successful nations/players are the ones that train the hardest and the least successful ones are the ones that train the least.
    The only way a country/player is going to give themselves a starter’s chance of being a formidable world force is to follow that line of thought.

59. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 10:54 am

    Yes there are some flaws in Jeff’s original statements such as Aust. would be a formidable force on the World scene (as Richard pointed out) but i believe the overall message was that Aust. would’ve been better off with Simon in the Team.

    To me, it’s a no brainer, off course the National Team is better off.
    It’s the administrators (plus the coach if he has input to the rules/criteria) of the time that allowed this to occur with the rules/criteria that were in place. Unfortunately the administrators have not allowed the best Teams to represented the country for nearly 40 years so it appears they will never learn and actually truly respect the players. I believe the same issues have occured in NZ as well.

    It’s fine to have a great set of rules that may seem fair and reasonable, but when the sport has so few players around and absolutely no depth then the rules MUST be very relaxed for players to be considered for Team selection.

    The sport is in such a bad state at the moment! This is due to many years of the administrators neglecting the player numbers and finding ways to attract (via money) players to become better and extending their careers once they have reached the top in the country.

    Could Charles initials be BL?

60. Mary LeGassick

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 1:52 pm

    Jeff/Mark
    Really annoying that you guys have this fixation with who Charles is. He has stated who he is. Leave him alone but read well what he says.
    The person I know as BL has the guts to write under his own name.

61. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 2:40 pm

    If Charles who is says he is then no problem with me.

    Wondering if any reader disputes my comments or disagrees with what i think are the main problems with the sport in this country? I believe this is where the real issue is and why someone like Simon may have chosen to play for another country. Am i correct Simon or was it something else?

62. Simon

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 3:09 pm

    “Criticism is necessary and useful; it is often indispensable; but it can never take the place of action, or be even a poor substitute for it. The function of the mere critic is of very subordinate usefulness. It is the doer of deeds who actually counts in the battle for life, and not the man who looks on and says how the fight ought to be fought, without himself sharing the stress and the danger.”

    I was taught to win, TTA should of let me keep winning.

    Simon

63. Danny Semmler

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 4:37 pm

    Thanks Theodore.

64. Dennis

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 5:13 pm

    If they change the rules where the best players will be picked in national teams regardless of how many hours they train,I might seriously make a “proper” comeback to the sport considering I beat 6 of the top ten players last year in various tournaments…after taking 11 years off competition!!!

65. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 5:17 pm

    Well quoted Simon but you didn’t answer the question.

66. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 5:27 pm

    If more players did what Dennis has mentioned then we would have a stronger National Team as this would create more depth and competitive to make a Team. A win win situation for the players (more of them have opportuntiy to make a Team if they wish to try) and the sport.
    At the moment there is hardly any competition re:amount of players, around to make a Team plus the rules are such that only a handful of players can make a Team as only National Squad members can make a Team - this is OK in an ideal world but as i have pointed out we are far from an ideal tt world in this country.
    Someone get Henzell in on this discussion or maybe some decison makers/selectors of our National Body.

67. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 24th, 2008 at 10:51 pm

    Dennis, I think your point shows that the rules must be changed. I agree with Mark, if more players like yourself were pushing for National selection, it would push other players to become even better!

68. Dennis

    commented on April 25th, 2008 at 10:45 am

    Just read an update from TTV website re the national team having to pay their own costs for the upcoming Oceania Championships in Tahiti in June.This is actually sad now for the national players to pay to represent their own country..!!I’m glad that I played in a decade (in the 90’s) where all our trips were paid for while representing Australia.I retired at the right time!

69. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 25th, 2008 at 2:12 pm

    On most occasions it comes down to money as the reason why the sport is in the sad state that it is and has been for years.

    Solution is simple, get more players playing! This creates more revenue for the sport so the financial pie becomes larger. End result for the elite players is free trips when representing the country and playing for more prizemoney at t’ments - this is best way to attract players to keep competing and training.

    I say this again, shame on the current and past (10-15 yrs ago)administrators from National to State and Club level.

70. Charles

    commented on April 25th, 2008 at 8:09 pm

    Mark and Jeff,

    rather than confront the issue that I have brought forward about the content of the article, you accuse me of being some mysterious person named BL.

    Next you are continuing the debate about national team selection policy in the wrong forum.

    If you are keen on discussing selection policy, please post another article about this discussing justification. Include not just the benefits but the downfalls of such a policy and how it will promote a stronger team. I will be happy to share my views on the situation.

71. Charles

    commented on April 25th, 2008 at 8:22 pm

    Jeff and Mark, the basis of your argument is that there are not enough good players to fill the national team. And that we should promote player sovereignty as opposed to having a uniform and standardised set of rules to promote training.

    And with a hint of sarcasm, may I add, you guys seem to believe a rule that promotes training will reduce Australia’s performance in the long run. Which I find confusing and contradictory to common sense.

72. Charles

    commented on April 25th, 2008 at 8:31 pm

    Now, this argument is flawed on so many facets, I don’t even know where to begin. The approach you have to selection policy is too superficial and simplistic. I’m trying to refrain on commenting on selection policy here as it not relevent to this article. However some of the comments made are so incomprehensibly inconsistent to logic, its hard not to comment.

73. Charles

    commented on April 25th, 2008 at 9:19 pm

    I presume that Marks main argument is how to promote table tennis in Australia in the long term.

    That is only possible by increasing training requirements not by reducing it.

    As Richard mentioned, even if Simon was playing for Australia, the marginal benefit is of negligible value.

    However the overall effect the qualifying rules have enforced is to promote training ethic. Which is much more important in the long run.

74. Mark Smythe

    commented on April 26th, 2008 at 12:17 am

    Hi Charles
    I have previously mentioned that there are some flaws in Jeff’s article but it’s the overall message that needs to be observed.
    I agree when you say this is not the right foorum/article to discuss selection policy so i’ll transfer this chat to my discussion paper (it deals with selection policy and other related matters) and debate there.
    I’m happy to discuss this with you as Charles from Shanghai even though i’m not fully convinced, but let’s not let that get in the way of a healthy debate.

75. dennis

    commented on April 26th, 2008 at 12:29 pm

    extremely funny stuff everyone- good entertainment !!!!!

76. Dennis

    commented on April 26th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

    Who’s this dennis??!!! are u impersonating me or do u just have the same first name??!

77. Jeff Plumb

    commented on April 26th, 2008 at 11:26 pm

    Charles,

    Firstly this is simply a blog and as such the comments can lead from the topic of the article on to a related topic - that is OK. And I have the authority to say it is OK because it is my website. But I am also happy to move onto the other blog as Mark has done because I would like for people to comment on Mark’s discussion paper.

    Mark has asked you a question on the new blog entry about China’s eligibility requirements as this would be helpful to the discussion.

    And I would also like to point out here and I will re-iterate on the new blog entry how I am not saying that players shouldn’t train. The point is that players enter different stages of their careers. If you read the new blog entry you will see that Mark had his best international results when his training was reduced. He had previously trained very hard and without that previous training he could not have produced the results. But this shows that at a particular point in time - more is not necessarily better.

    I believe we should create the best possible environment where players will want to train. Then the results will look after themselves. However imposing rules on eligibility requirements in a country like Australia where Table Tennis is not professional does not work. History has proved that to be the case.

    So the administrators should stop wasting their time on these eligibility requirements and start focusing on getting more players involved and setting up a National Training Program which players want to be a part of. Right now in Australia it would be difficult to practice 15 hours a week because of the lack of players.

    It is great to see you showing so much enthusiasm for the topic and Table Tennis in Australia Charles.

78. Charles

    commented on April 27th, 2008 at 1:23 pm

    Thanks Jeff, I’m passionate about many things. Table Tennis is one of them. It’s good you have these ideas about trying to improve policy. I’m sure if you provided enough evidence to support your case, you may be able to influence future rule changes. As I said, I don’t have a problem discussing selection policy but not here. I will post in the other forum about these issues.

79. Charles

    commented on April 27th, 2008 at 2:04 pm

    As far as this article goes however, I found it to be a disingenuous attempt to discredit Table Tennis Australia without giving the full facts of the matter. On a personal opinion, Australia does not need Simon Gerada anymore than Simon wants to be in the Australian team. This is why rules in any field can be enforced; that is both parties have interests to with. In this case, Simon believed that he was of such importance to the team, that rules need not apply to him. This in my own PERSONAL opinion based on what I would perceive after reading the facts. I think this is the true reason he is not playing for Australia. I also believe on personal grounds that 6 hours a week is a bare minimum any player should commit to a sport, even a hobby. Now leaving personal opinion aside for a second and being objective, this article still does not live up to it’s name. Australia does not need Simon Gerada, the reason why Australia needs or does not need Simon Gerada has also no direct correlation to whether Australia needs a rule change. However, as you and Mark point out, you believe there should be some rule changes. This is an issue worth debating, and given the time, I will comment in the other article that you have published.

80. Andrew Gilbert

    commented on April 28th, 2008 at 2:23 pm

    I’ve been following this blog for a while. My 2 cents worth….

    *** The players that replaced Simon in the 2001 Worlds team were not training 10 hours a week and if the purpose of that decision (and a similar one to exclude Stefanie Sang) is to make more people train harder than I think it has clearly failed - There would not be 15 players in the country who would be training 10 hours a week today.

    *** I’m not against training hard - any little success I ever had in the sport only came because I put many hours in but the point both Jeff and Mark have made is that people have different stages of their career where training for an arbitrary, mandated period of time is at best not necessary and at worst leads to disharmony and weaker team selection.
    Obviously the work has to be done at some point but

    - Mark has illustrated how his best results occurred while he was training once a week.
    - Brett Clarke was National champion in 1997 and to the best of my knowledge did not train for the best part of a year.
    - Russell Lavale had excellent results in the last third of his career (winning his third National title and an Oceania Singles title) and was not training even 5 hours a week…(Happy to be corrected on all of these observations if I am wrong)

    The point is that if a player is good enough or talented enough to achieve top results with limited or even no training than so be it.

    With all due respect to Dennis (who was a great player and still plays a good game) the fact that he has beaten 6 out of the top 10 players in the last year says more about the sorry state of the sport then anything else…

    In summary when Simon was not considered for the 2001 Worlds the fact that he was not training over a 3 month period before the championships is in my opinion irrelevant as he was in the top 3 players in the country (as his tournament results indicated).

    How long will it be until William Henzell (Our greatest ever player? - Another BLOG entry Jeff!?) is told he must train 10 hours a week to qualify for a team (even though he has spent the last 14 ye