If Tredegar don't manage top 4 at the nationals t was a fluke at the open!

[baritastic]

Some areas are weaker Than others. If we shared out the bands from Yorkshire Wales and Lancs amongst the other areas the nationals would be a better contest for sure. All the best bands could Qualify every Year Like flowers and desford Do now.

Couldn't they do that with a po box?

 

[fatcontroler]

if you look at the lower sections (where bands fortunes seem to vary more than higher sections), then you can see that the majority of the runners in the nationals come from the usual areas.

No doubt in yorkshire for example a 5th placed 4th section band would be better than some that have qualified for the nationals, but that is the way the system works.

The best bands in each area deserve to represent where they come from regardless.

 

[baritastic]

I agree in part to the above. However I believe the nationals would be better if the 20 beat bands were there, rather than the 2 beat from each geographic location.

The areas should e judges by the same team, and the 20 best should go through. The areas would take longer, but the consistency in judging would be better and the nationals would be a better contest.

 

[baritastic]

Sorry, couldn't edit in time. What's this 5 minute editing rubbish!!!

 

[astreet83]

baritastic there called REGIONAL qualifiers. It's about finding the best bands in each area.

Haven't read the thread from the begining (can't be bothered), but how I see it is that Baritastic must have far too much time to dream up really unnecessary threads.

Bands change from week to week, practise to practise. How can you judge where a band should be placed!!

B&R haven't won the National Finals since 1998 so is it a fluke Baribadtasteinjumpersic?

 

[baritastic]

I just think the nationals in all sections would be better if the dries from **** areas like London were not there.

The regional idea cones from a time that it suited. We all know the open is a better contest and it's a pity the nationals don't make efforts to compete.

However I'm sure tradition will prevail over improving quality and dwindling audiences will continue.

B&R have been consistently there or there abouts for over 100 years. Great win for them.

 

[astreet83]

Your idea of only what you think are the best bands to play at the finals would see the number of bands and players decrease very very quickly!

 

[brassintheed]

I agree in part to the above. However I believe the nationals would be better if the 20 beat bands were there, rather than the 2 beat from each geographic location.

The areas should e judges by the same team, and the 20 best should go through. The areas would take longer, but the consistency in judging would be better and the nationals would be a better contest.

That's a different contest - it's called the British Open.

 

[Jan H]

Would the Champions League be "better" if it had only teams from Spain, Italy, Germany and England? Maybe. But that just not how the system has been set up.
You could perhaps make an argument for allowing more bands from "stronger" areas. But I suppose this is already covered by letting the top 4 requalify automatically...

 

[ophicliede]

I that the national finals sections other than the Championship section are fairly well matched. In recent years the top six placings in each section have qualified from all areas. The disparity comes in the Championship section where players are not totally representative of that geographical area. With players travelling to play in the leading named bands. Briggus - Alan Morrison, Roger Webster and Mark Winter for instance.

 

[Accidental]

I just think the nationals in all sections would be better if the dries from **** areas like London were not there.

Personally I think thats a load of cr*p - the beauty of the Nationals imo, and what sets it apart from contests like the Open, is the regional qualifying system.

And I'm not sure the 1st section results this year really support your argument...

 

[ophicliede]

You are right Accidental aboutthe 1st section this year and how about the 3rd and 4th Section Finals in 2009!!!

 

[Brenda]

Now that this thread has veered away from its original anti-Tred agenda, is there any chance it will be renamed?

 

[Simon Preshom]

Aveley and Newham in the LSC???
It's surely not that difficult to work out?
As for rubbish areas, have you ever played for any of the top bands in the 'weaker', because I assure you all the bands in the finals are top class.... and just because Cory, Fodens ect.. are better, doesn't mean you should write of other bands as rubbish!?

You speak with such authority Paul but with nothing behind it. What do you term as 'top class'?

I ask because considering that the spread of bands at the RAH went from Cory (1st) to NASUWT Riverside (100th)....that is a lot of bands in the 'top class' bracket

 

[baritastic]

Would the Champions League be "better" if it had only teams from Spain, Italy, Germany and England? Maybe. But that just not how the system has been set up.
You could perhaps make an argument for allowing more bands from "stronger" areas. But I suppose this is already covered by letting the top 4 requalify automatically...

Fair enough. Your right.

The nationals would be a stronger contest if more like the open I suppose but perhaps that's not the point. I conceed.

 

[worzel]

I just think the nationals in all sections would be better if the dries from **** areas like London were not there.

Do you think the Olympics would benefit from not having representatives from all those little tin pot countries? What about the world cup?

I would have thought that people from the heartlands of brass banding would welcome the fact that there are some of us in these **** areas as you put trying to keep brass banding alive nationally (never mind that our band is mostly made up of brass band heartland ex-pats anyway). I don't know what you mean by "better", but if you had your way I would imagine that brass banding would become even more marginalised and inward looking that it is now.

 

[Pav]

Baritastic

You're not thinking big enough here.

Let's scrap the weak areas as you suggest. Then let's scrap the weaker sections (1-4) as well.

With a bit more work I reckon we could get it down to 8 or 9 bands. Just have Dyke, Cory, Fodens, Faireys, Grimey, Brighouse, Leyland and maybe Tredegar & Rothwell.

Contests would be over in a couple of hours and there would be no more freak results.

It's the future.

 

[Brenda]

And the future is ginger

 

[Pav]

No, we've already established there's no room for the Scots in our brave new world.

 

[yorkie19]

Baritastic

You're not thinking big enough here.

Let's scrap the weak areas as you suggest. Then let's scrap the weaker sections (1-4) as well.

With a bit more work I reckon we could get it down to 8 or 9 bands. Just have Dyke, Cory, Fodens, Faireys, Grimey, Brighouse, Leyland and maybe Tredegar & Rothwell.

Contests would be over in a couple of hours and there would be no more freak results.

It's the future.

I like your thinking mate. However, let's go one step further and insist that all bands have an equal distribution of men and women and ethnic minorities. With a little luck, we could be down to a single band, and then we wouldn't have to have pointless prediction threads on here, and every contest would be done before lunch (and no, before anybody says otherwise that isn't a dig at any band or individual!)

Garlic bread anyone