LAWN BOWLING

By: A.T. McNamara.

The LAWN BOWLING facilities were probably the best available under the circumstances, but the playing surface was not ideal for this sport. A synthetic surface, as with all bowling greens, must be perfectly true and should conform to the WORLD BOWLING BOARD's regulations.

Despite the problems of which everyone is aware, the blind bowlers from CANADA, HONG KONG, GREAT BRITAIN, SOUTH AFRICA and ISRAEL acquitted themselves very well and the competition for medals was really keen.

One problem - in addition to those already present - was the heat generated from the synthetic surface, which caused quite a lot of physical problems.

In any case, the members of the American Lawn Bowls Federation must be congratulated, as they did a great job as regards the organization.

We must also analyse in greater depth the difficulties that arose during the games themselves. Two major areas could be highlighted: one of them would relate to the lack of a suitable playing surface - as we mentioned above - and the other to the question of unified regulations.

Blind Lawn Bowling is not that different from the sighted game, but there are certain differences that require their own regulations. I attended the IPC Lawn Bowls Assembly as the IBSA and IBBA delegate and, after reaching a workable agreement with that committee, was very distressed and disappointed to be told that no form of Lawn Bowling would be included in future editions of the PARALYMPIC GAMES. The reason given was very weak and it seemed very strange as the next two Paralympics are going to be held in the two strongest lawn bowling countries, namely Australia and South Africa.

I therefore wish to take this opportunity to urge IBSA to make every effort to have this disastrous and incomprehensible ruling overturned.

Finally, I should like to present the final standing of the results table: