Hmmmm, Just finished the university trials for badminton. Spotting the good players wasn't too difficult. I watched for shot quality, technique and footwork. What do you look at when trying to spot a good player? Well there were a few good players who came along, a few county players too, but even though they were county i wouldn't say that they were brillant, more like the same standard as the second team from last year, or maybe better. But i have a bit of a problem now. Last years 2nd team are now 1st team players, this is by default, i personally don't agree with that, since some of the new players who came in could probably runs rings around the existing players. What should i do then? I'm not the one who gets to pick in the end, but if i could i would probably make both the new and old players play for their spot in the 1st and 2nd teams. After all when it comes down to it, we are talking about the players who have the skills, not about who has been playing longer for the university. Would you agree? Should i set up a ladder system whereby everybody plays are the top players on the ladder gets to play for 1st team and so on? I'll have to run this by "El Capitano", but i hope he agrees with me otherwise we would possibly lose some really good players. Have you have any similar experiences? What did you do?
Agreed. The 1st team should always consists of the top talented players and it should be regardless of how long they have been playing for the university. You should find out more about why the current system is being used. Was it implemented because of problems in the past, etc. As for spotting good players. One thing to keep in mind is the potential that the player has. For example, you might have a player who is technically sound and plays his/her shots well but has no mental understanding of the game (i.e. just as mechanical as a robot) but you have a player who has a very good understanding of the game but need work on his/her techniques/shots/footwork, etc. Your suggestion of a ladder system is pretty good and would work if you are able to swap players in and out of the two teams (but this creates a problem of consistency). If you are planning to use it to evaluate and pick the team members, then you need to be fair and ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to show what they can do. Good luck.
I'm not sure why the current system is the way it is, i've just known that it is that way. Bad really. I agree with you about the mechanical robot, some of the 2nd team players only know how to defend, they have never been able to turn defence into attack, which IMO is a problem. They just seem to lack experience really, hopefully time can teach them. Footwork, shot techniques etc can been practice during training sessions. I would like to bring the ladder system in for a try out, i know that it may cause inconsistency too, but not everyone can play consistently week in week out. We've all had bad games at one time or another. Well if i have any problems, i know i can get advice from the experts here in the forums.
Ladder system is a good idea, back in high school we basically had a ladder system for the tennis team and the team members are basically ranked and you can challenge up to two spots above you and you can only challenge once per week and if you lose the challenge, you'd forfeit the next week's challenge. It was a pretty good system. Keep everyone on their toes and playing their best.
