IOM in ISAF

Discuss IOM design, building an IOM, information on suppliers, tuning an IOM, results of recent events, etc

Moderators: GaryBoell, Pedro Egea

RoyL
Posts: 705
Joined: 15 Dec 2003, 21:03

Post by RoyL » 14 Aug 2009, 00:07

To the extent ISAF requirements for running international r/c sailing events mandate high costs, event complexity and extra staff, it is a very relevant part of any discussion of the pros and cons of an affiliation with ISAF.

Fact is R/C sailing is different from other forms of sailing. It certainly doesn't cost as much as bigger boats. It often attracts older sailors. It has a "hobby" aspect that other forms of sailing don't. It doesn't require organized crews and major financial commitments to participate. R/C sailors (to state the obvious) also aren't on the boats or on the water which dramatically changes the nature of judging and sailing r/c regattas.

From what I'm gathering from Jan and Alfonso and Robert, none of these differences appear to matter to ISAF or are a major concern to our Exec. It would seem that our choice is to join up, live by what ever rules ISAF dictates and hope that by making "submissions" to the powers that be we will be granted some unspecified dispensation from "within" the ISAF organization.

I have to admit I hate the concept of "submission". I think it speaks volumes about what our relationship would be like with ISAF. Also, in light of some of ISAF's recent behavior and secret deal making in the America's Cup world, I have to also admit that I feel uncomfortable simply trusting ISAF to do right by r/c sailing. I would be much happier if there was more give and take in this process and a sense that ISAF was listening to our concerns and showing a willingness to address them.

However, I've been called paranoid in the past so who knows. Being a part of international sailing seems like a good thing to me in principal; I just wish this wasn't turning into a "take it or leave it" and do it "now or else" kind of situation.

Also, it is going to do us no good to have another "We know best" relationship between the Executive and the Class. Open discussions are a good thing and different viewpoints should be encouraged.

valpro
Posts: 119
Joined: 26 Sep 2004, 12:14
Location: GBR1511

Post by valpro » 14 Aug 2009, 12:18

Its been interesting reading all the input on this thread over a couple of weeks and I have kept very quiet.
The postings are clearly in two camps. One the one hand we join, get a say in our affairs with ISAF and negotiate for our idiosyncracies, which we quite clearly have. On the other hand there is a very clear distrust and possibly fear of joining and then finding that the 'one size fits all' approach will not allow us to get the variations that we clearly need.
I have been in my time a very strong advocate of being in ISAF - having a level playing field. But in the last couple of years I have become less sure. Quite clearly one size doesnt fit all when you compare model sailing with the full sized thing and ISAF needs to recognise that to be the case before we commit our future to them. In the particular instance of Juries, we should at least have to be certain that the proposed Jury Members are experienced in our brand of sailing and will not be using our events to go up the learning curve, only to forget it all before the next opportunity comes along.
As for the rules, I stick with what I have always said, namely that the best and most practical rules are written by Measurers. It isn't really a 'Technical' job in the sense of needing professional qualifications, much more a question of using common sense and simple language.
And finally the matter of the Sticker Fee. It was never going to be an option to pay some pennies for one because you built your own boat and it cost you nothing. These stickers represent a steady income for ISAF and so must cover the Admin costs as well as trickling some money into the bank. So it would be £5.20 GBP. That's just about the cost of a single Hales Pulley block, or a handful of assorted bowsies, screws etc, or a bit of deck covering and I dont hear any complaints about that. In the overall context of what even a home built boat costs you to put on the water, its peanuts and there are much more important questions to be answered than that.
Val

jandejmo
Posts: 64
Joined: 25 Nov 2003, 07:47

Post by jandejmo » 14 Aug 2009, 14:08

RoyL wrote:Fact is R/C sailing is different from other forms of sailing.
And so are all other special disciplines of sailing and this is reflected by the RRS Appendices of which Appendix E is one. As I see it kite surfing could be regarded as the most different discipline.
RoyL wrote:R/C sailors (to state the obvious) also aren't on the boats or on the water which dramatically changes the nature of judging and sailing r/c regattas.
And that is reflected in RRS Appendix E.
RoyL wrote:From what I'm gathering from Jan and Alfonso and Robert, none of these differences appear to matter to ISAF ... I think it speaks volumes about what our relationship would be like with ISAF.
If IOMICA's members share your views the One Metre class should of course go independent of ISAF.
RoyL wrote:Also, in light of some of ISAF's recent behavior and secret deal making in the America's Cup world, I have to also admit that I feel uncomfortable simply trusting ISAF to do right by r/c sailing.
America's Cup is a slightly different game compared with other disciplines of sailing :-)
RoyL wrote:Being a part of international sailing seems like a good thing to me in principal; I just wish this wasn't turning into a "take it or leave it" and do it "now or else" kind of situation.
The relation with ISAF will of course not be a "take it or leave it" and I think ISAF has clearly shown that by for example awarding ISAF world championships and publishing RRS Appendix E without even a single radio sailing class being an ISAF class. Probably unprecedented.

Where you and I seem to differ is whether ISAF should have to make changes to things like the racing rules and the regulations before, and as a condition of, a radio sailing class to affiliate. Not something I have seen when other disciplines of sailing has joined ISAF.
Last edited by jandejmo on 14 Aug 2009, 20:55, edited 1 time in total.

Robert Grubisa
Posts: 116
Joined: 29 Nov 2003, 22:15
Location: CRO 16
Contact:

Post by Robert Grubisa » 14 Aug 2009, 14:53

valpro wrote:But in the last couple of years I have become less sure. Quite clearly one size doesnt fit all when you compare model sailing with the full sized thing and ISAF needs to recognise that to be the case before we commit our future to them. In the particular instance of Juries, we should at least have to be certain that the proposed Jury Members are experienced in our brand of sailing and will not be using our events to go up the learning curve, only to forget it all before the next opportunity comes along.
Val,

Organizing authority (Club hosting the World Championship) is responsible for nominating Jury members not ISAF! I fully agree with you that we don't need Jury members just to be there and to use our events to go up the learning curve, only to forget it all before the next opportunity . This is something which our IOM ICA Events Committee must sort out.

I see following tasks on IOM ICA "to do list":

- Make sure that a majority of the umpire/judges have radio controlled experience.
- Include umpire/judges who are developing their expertise with radio controlled boats, to ensure sustainability of umpiring in the future.
- Encourage RC sailors to become umpires. This will involve them in umpiring full-size boats. However, it would also be useful for sailors to try to umpire less major races so that they can understand the challenges of umpiring.
- Sort out a list of judges and umpires who have worked well at events with the class, to recruit for future events.

Author of above mentioned suggestions is Jury Chairman on Barbados Worlds. So, once again, please let me know where is a problem with ISAF regarding the above mentioned? Could you Val, and others of course, help in sorting out above mentioned tasks. They will be there with or without ISAF.
Robert Grubisa

Brig North
Posts: 26
Joined: 22 May 2005, 04:35

Post by Brig North » 14 Aug 2009, 15:48

I really don't see any significant downside to IOM's affiliation with ISAF. It is waiving our entry fee of 1,000 GBP, the annual fee for the whole class is equivalent to the purchase of one RMG winch in USD, and the one time tax on a new boat is, in Val's terms, the cost of a small pulley (or a 24 pack of Cokes -- can't do without my caffeine).

Mr. Dejmo points out that once you're at the ISAF table you can request special dispensations such as fewer umpires to accomodate our style of sailing as well as what is most worrisome for me, the economics of our type of sailing. Trying to get that assurance before you have bellied up to the bar is going to be, in my opinion, pretty tough. It comes down to the standard question in negotiation, who needs whom more?

I don't think we are in a position to dictate a bunch of conditions to ISAF before we join, ie I think we need them more than they need us. But what if it turns out that joining ISAF is a big mistake? What will we have lost if we affiliate and then quit because things aren't going in the direction we as a class either want or thought they would go? Monetarily, practically nothing.

What do we potentially gain by affiliating? The opportunity to get those dispensations and influence on Appendix E.

I hope we move forward as a class and affiliate.

Brig North

valpro
Posts: 119
Joined: 26 Sep 2004, 12:14
Location: GBR1511

Post by valpro » 14 Aug 2009, 21:08

Robert, I do know how the process works, after all I have been involved, one way and another with the 505 and Tempest classes from 1978 to 1995 as well as the creation of the 2.4m class in UK. I have always found that the organising committee of regattas (apart from venues such as Medemblik, Kiel and similar large and regular ones) tend to get a bit overawed about the judges and having appointed a Chairman of the Jury, tend to follow his or her recommendations. I agree that the experience of model sailing should be something that appears on the individual judges CV and that we should certainly ask for such experience before agreeing to their appointment. That's one thing that needs to happen. We dont need 5 judges but three with two national/regional or lay persons of suitable experience (a sort of 'grow your own judges 'strategy).
But ISAF needs to understand fully the economics of our sort of sailing. We aren't ever going to be in the Melges24/Int dragon/TP52, Americas Cup league financially and that in itself brings a need for adaptations to the regulations that will affect us. I know boats are a fantasy world, whatever their size but our fantasies are as limited as our budgets and I do believe that, given ISAF's workload, our needs and limitations may not be seen in their true light, which would then mean a lot of work for our Officers, to get things sorted out. It's hard enough to find willing volunteers at the best of times but lets be sure that we arent going to give them a crippling workload from the outset.
Val

Lester
Posts: 611
Joined: 14 Oct 2004, 22:29
Location: GBR 105
Contact:

Post by Lester » 15 Aug 2009, 01:48

Robert Grubisa wrote:Organizing authority (Club hosting the World Championship) is responsible for nominating Jury members not ISAF!
Robert's message made me realise that some folks may be unfamiliar with the rules about International Juries. Here they are.

The first rule, as Robert says, is that the organising authority (the club hosting the event) shall appoint a protest committee and umpires as needed:
RRS wrote:89.2 Notice of Race; Appointment of Race Officials
(b) The organizing authority shall appoint a race committee and, when appropriate, appoint a protest committee and umpires. However, the race committee, an international jury and umpires may be appointed by the ISAF as provided in the ISAF regulations.
This rule says that ISAF may appoint an International Jury as per its Regulations, but when we go and look through the ISAF Regulations, we see that International Juries are appointed by ISAF for things like the Olympic games, Grade 1 Match Races, etc etc etc. ISAF does not normally appoint International Juries for World Championships of International Classes, unless such a class asks for this or unless ISAF has some reason to want to do it.

Then, the next rule explains what kind of protest committee is needed:
RRS wrote:91 PROTEST COMMITTEE
A protest committee shall be
(a) a committee appointed by the organizing authority or race committee, or
(b) an international jury appointed by the organizing authority or as prescribed in the ISAF regulations and meeting the requirements of Appendix N. A national authority may prescribe that its approval is required for the appointment of international juries for races within its jurisdiction, except ISAF events or when international juries are appointed by the ISAF under rule 89.2(b).
Here we see that the organising authority (club hosting the event) can chose whether it wants to appoint an International Jury. There is nothing here, or in the ISAF Regulations, which says it must appoint an International Jury for World Championships.

So where does the requirement for International Juries come from for IOM International (World and Continental) Championships? It started here:
RSD Regulations wrote:To maintain its ISAF-RSD designation an International, Recognised or Classic Class shall:
13.7 Appoint an International Jury for the World Championships unless otherwise agreed with the ISAF-RSD.
... and in turn, when IOMICA was recognised by RSD, the IOMICA own Class Championship Regulations provided
IOMICA CCR wrote:6. OBLIGATIONS OF THE ORGANISING AUTHORITY
6.4. For World and Continental Championships, the Organising Authority shall appoint an International Jury according to the provisions of Appendix N of the RRS.
Ah. When the IOM becomes a recognised ISAF class, it can (if it wishes!) delete clause 6.4 from its CCRs, and ISAF would have absolutely no problem with that...

If we assume, though, that something like an International Jury is in fact a 'good thing' when it comes to the World Championships and perhaps CCR 6.4 could be changed to refer only to the Worlds, Appendix N gives the rules.
RRS wrote:N1.2 The jury shall consist of a chairman, a vice chairman if desired, and other members for a total of at least five. A majority shall be International Judges.
An International Jury 'shall' consist of five members, of which at least three shall be IJs. But the appendix is curiously permissive of smaller Juries. It has quite a few things to say about a 'minimum' Jury being three members, of which two shall be IJs:
RRS wrote:N1.5 When a full jury, or a panel, has fewer than five members, because of illness or emergency, and no qualified replacements are available, it remains properly constituted if it consists of at least three members and if at least two of them are International Judges.

N1.7 If the jury or a panel acts while not properly constituted, its decisions may be appealed.

N3.2 When it is considered desirable that some members not participate in discussing and deciding a protest or request for redress, and no qualified replacements are available, the jury or panel remains properly constituted if at least three members remain and at least two of them are International Judges.
Those are all the rules I could find that apply.

What have we learned? If the IOM became an ISAF class, ISAF would not be forcing the IOM class to have International Juries. It is up to the class. Accepting that an International Jury is a 'good thing', it turns out it needs only to have three (3) IJs, or even just two (2) in an, erm, emergency... All the other requirements for (a large number of) umpires can be fulfilled by national officials.
Lester Gilbert
http://www.onemetre.net/

Robert Grubisa
Posts: 116
Joined: 29 Nov 2003, 22:15
Location: CRO 16
Contact:

Post by Robert Grubisa » 15 Aug 2009, 09:29

Lester wrote: What have we learned? If the IOM became an ISAF class, ISAF would not be forcing the IOM class to have International Juries. It is up to the class. Accepting that an International Jury is a 'good thing', it turns out it needs only to have three (3) IJs, or even just two (2) in an, erm, emergency... All the other requirements for (a large number of) umpires can be fulfilled by national officials.
I hope that many have learned that it is nice to check rule book before starting the discussion about ISAF and costs of our events, etc;-)

Just to be clear, my personal opinion is that IOM Worlds MUST:
- be umpired on the water
- have International Jury
- have enough umpires to allow them to work efficiently.

It seems that Olivier and his team will have a lot of job (with or without ISAF) but I am sure that he will do the right thing!

I think that the discussion about the IJ, umpires and ISAF responsibility for costs of our Championships may be closed.

NCA representatives, skippers, owners, let us know if there are any other problems related to the possible IOM class affiliation to ISAF.
Robert Grubisa

Robert Grubisa
Posts: 116
Joined: 29 Nov 2003, 22:15
Location: CRO 16
Contact:

Post by Robert Grubisa » 15 Aug 2009, 09:43

Roy648 wrote:Just a simple minded overview of the current situation/debate.

IOMICA presses ahead with joining ISAF in the current timeframe and is subsequently unable negotiate concessions in respect to costs and officials. As a result NCAs in some countries respond that they no longer consider the cost / benefits are worthwhile and resign from IOMICA.

IOMICA is then left with representation in only 2 continents and no longer qualifies as an international class. OUCH.

Maybe, just maybe, it is worth while knowing what we are letting ourselves in for to preclude such an embarrassment.
Roy,

Before thinking about resign from IOM ICA, please let us know, item by item, what is the NZL NCA problem with possible direct IOM ICA affiliation to the ISAF? The only purpose of the question is to find solutions for your problems, if any.

Regarding costs of the Championships related to the race officials,I hope that the situation about juries, umpires and ISAF is now clear. Currently, ISAF is not responsible for composition of race officials on our Worlds and my opinion is that same situation needs to be in the future.

So, please, before starting to count NCAs and continents, let us know current problems or expected problems in the future to see if they are problems affecting many others NCAs or it is something local which may be sorted out without affecting other NCAs.
Robert Grubisa

RoyL
Posts: 705
Joined: 15 Dec 2003, 21:03

Post by RoyL » 16 Aug 2009, 01:20

Robert: Best I can tell, Lester Gilbert's post is simply his opinion of what ISAF will or will not require for an IOMICA sanctioned world championship based on his personal interpretation of what he thinks are the relevant ISAF rules.

Unless Lester is now authorized to speak on behalf of ISAF, his views are merely his views and are not the official position of ISAF.

It would therfore seem thst this discussion is far from closed.

I would also like to respectfully suggest that perhaps it might be a good idea to try to build consensus among the many different opinions being expressed here rather than to demand that NCA's supply you with their objections to an immediate affiliation with ISAF.

I think its important to keep in mind that the job of the IOMICA Executive is to represent the interests of the class members and to serve their needs, not the other way around.

Alfonso
IOMICA Chairman
Posts: 229
Joined: 04 Nov 2004, 15:11
Location: ESP 50

Post by Alfonso » 16 Aug 2009, 08:20

Hi RoyL,

Please as I have said in a previous post the jury issue does not add anything to the question whether IOM should join ISAF, because if we stay in RSD the “problemâ€

Robert Grubisa
Posts: 116
Joined: 29 Nov 2003, 22:15
Location: CRO 16
Contact:

Post by Robert Grubisa » 16 Aug 2009, 08:27

RoyL wrote:Robert: Best I can tell, Lester Gilbert's post is simply his opinion of what ISAF will or will not require for an IOMICA sanctioned world championship based on his personal interpretation of what he thinks are the relevant ISAF rules.

Unless Lester is now authorized to speak on behalf of ISAF, his views are merely his views and are not the official position of ISAF.

It would therfore seem thst this discussion is far from closed.
Roy

I kindly ask you to stop immediately any "Lester vs Roy discussion" because it is something that we don't need at the moment.

I have posted few days ago a post as follows (it is a long one, so I am copying here only a part dealing with judges:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Judges and juries at major radio sailing events

According to the Appendix N of the RRS (N.1.3), the minimum number of Jury members is five. Majority of them shall be International Judges i.e. 3. No more than two members (three, in group M, N and Q) shall be from the same national authority. So, what you want to discuss with ISAF? That you need only one IJ? Or somebody thinks that they are not required at all?

IOM ICA has their own document http://www.iomclass.org/events/Appendix ... 005Feb.pdf and it is subject to the implementation in Sailing Instructions. The number of umpires (they don't need to be IJ !) is stated as "at least one umpire for every four boats racing".
This is done by the Class not by ISAF!!! The reason for that is to allow umpires to do their job correctly. The job of IOM ICA Events Subcommittee is to deal with it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

and the other post:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organizing authority (Club hosting the World Championship) is responsible for nominating Jury members not ISAF! I fully agree with you that we don't need Jury members just to be there and to use our events to go up the learning curve, only to forget it all before the next opportunity . This is something which our IOM ICA Events Committee must sort out.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not talking on behalf of ISAF, I am just reading documents relevant for the issue. So, please let me know what you think it is wrong here and what you want to be clarified.

RoyL wrote: I would also like to respectfully suggest that perhaps it might be a good idea to try to build consensus among the many different opinions being expressed here rather than to demand that NCA's supply you with their objections to an immediate affiliation with ISAF.

I think its important to keep in mind that the job of the IOMICA Executive is to represent the interests of the class members and to serve their needs, not the other way around.
Agree. In order to build consensus we have to see what is the differences, if any. So, once again I kindly ask NCAs representatives, owner, builders and others to let us know their objections in order to see how to proceed. As an example, after Ole's post we know that "In fact if IOMICA choose to not be an ISAF class the class will die in Norway. "
Robert Grubisa

RoyL
Posts: 705
Joined: 15 Dec 2003, 21:03

Post by RoyL » 16 Aug 2009, 17:50

Robert: No "Roy vs. Lester" issues going on here.

Read you own posts. You have stated that you believe discussions (such as judges at major r/c races) "may be closed". You have virtually demanded that you be told "problems" that NCAs may have with immediate ISAF affiliation. You have lectured us for not first reading the rule book before posting here. And both you (and Lester Gilbert) have cited what you think are relevant existing rules that you believe apply at major r/c sailing events and therefore suggest they preclude any attempts to modify those rules as part of ISAF affiliation and end all discussions here.

Robert, the current IOMICA leadership was elected without the support of some major NCAs and with split support from others. You might consider trying to be more sensitive to the clear differences of opinion being expressed here. As I stated earlier I think it would be a good thing for the IOMICA executive to attempt to find agreement and build consensus.

Robert Grubisa
Posts: 116
Joined: 29 Nov 2003, 22:15
Location: CRO 16
Contact:

Post by Robert Grubisa » 16 Aug 2009, 18:46

RoyL wrote:Robert: No "Roy vs. Lester" issues going on here.

Read you own posts. You have stated that you believe discussions (such as judges at major r/c races) "may be closed". You have virtually demanded that you be told "problems" that NCAs may have with immediate ISAF affiliation. You have lectured us for not first reading the rule book before posting here. And both you (and Lester Gilbert) have cited what you think are relevant existing rules that you believe apply at major r/c sailing events and therefore suggest they preclude any attempts to modify those rules as part of ISAF affiliation and end all discussions here.

Robert, the current IOMICA leadership was elected without the support of some major NCAs and with split support from others. You might consider trying to be more sensitive to the clear differences of opinion being expressed here. As I stated earlier I think it would be a good thing for the IOMICA executive to attempt to find agreement and build consensus.
Roy,

The only purpose of all my post is to present facts/arguments based on the best of my knowledge for something which I beleive is good for class.

If you, or others, know some other facts/documents/regulations which are different from those I have presented and which may be useful for making proper decision, please let us know.

I have nothing new to add but I am ready to hear facts from others.

Roy, do you know some other relevant documents which leads to conclusion that ISAF (today and in the future) will dictate IOM ICA umpiring system/Jury composition, etc...

I will not comment your words that "current IOMICA leadership was elected without the support of some major NCAs and with split support from others. "
Robert Grubisa

Roy648
Posts: 41
Joined: 13 Feb 2008, 00:01
Location: New Zealand

Post by Roy648 » 17 Aug 2009, 10:03

Robert,

The more I view this thread the more uncertain I become.

The RRS have been quoted as allowing a class such as IOM to organise the jury / umpires as it sees fit.

However, the RRS are the final stage of conducting a Worlds. Before any boat gets on the water the contractural requirements must be met.

Yes, the contract a class enters into when joining ISAF.
ISAF regs:
18.12.10 ISAF shall have the right to approve and/or appoint the International Jury or the International Umpires when deemed necessary for the following events otherwise not covered by the Regulations above:
.
.
World Championships of non-Olympic ISAF Classes, when agreed with the ISAF as detailed in Regulation 26.9

26.9 Obtain the approval of the Member National Authority governing the proposed venue of its ensuing World Championships.

26.10 Appoint an International Jury for the World Championships unless otherwise agreed with ISAF.
It is clear that 18.12.10 incorrectly refers to 26.9 and it is equally clear that it should refer to 26.10.

This compilation error does not invalidate the intent as in contractural law, as opposed to criminal law, intent carries a higher weighting.

Reading 18.12.10 and 26.10 together it is clear that these are in fact circular references. If the class, in 26.10 decides it wants ISAF to make the appointment and ISAF agrees then ISAF is bound to make such an appointment. On the other hand, if there is no such agreement the Class is bound to make the appointment. As 26.10 is silent on the issue of Umpires this then leaves ISAF with the right to appoint International Umpires. Nothing the class can do can take that right away from ISAF.

So, where does that leave us.
A. An international Jury appointed either by the Class or ISAF
B. Umpires may or may not be appointed and may or may not need to be International Umpires except
C. International Umpires may be appointed at the whim of ISAF.

Sorry Robert, but I do not think the topic is done and dusted. In fact, the interpretation above would appear to be exactly the opposite as there is no certainty either way as far as Umpires are concerned.

I have deliberately not gone into the other requirements for other ISAF Officials during the planning stages etc.
Roy Granich

Alfonso
IOMICA Chairman
Posts: 229
Joined: 04 Nov 2004, 15:11
Location: ESP 50

Post by Alfonso » 19 Aug 2009, 23:22

Dear Roy648,

We passed your doubts to ISAF and below this lines I copy you the answers of the Technical Co-Ordinator:

[quote]A. An international Jury appointed either by the Class or ISAF?
As per the current situation it is the organising authority responsibility to appoint the Jury in accordance with RRS Appendix “Nâ€

RoyL
Posts: 705
Joined: 15 Dec 2003, 21:03

Post by RoyL » 20 Aug 2009, 01:45

Alfonso: It would be very helpful if the Executive makes available on the open board to the entire membership the full letter sent and the entire reply received from ISAF. It also would be nice to know the name of the person who responded to us.

I think this is important, because unfortunately I believe the wrong question was asked to ISAF. The issue is not if ISAF or a class appoints the judges for an international regatta. As I understand it the answer to that question has pretty much always been what you got back-- ISAF has the right to pick the judges, however it hardly ever does so and allows the class to do it.

The appropriate question (and the basis of concern here) is the number and nature of judges required by ISAF to be present at an international regatta. My shorthand understanding of the ISAF rules is that an international regatta must have an international jury that contains at least five ISAF judges and not all can be from the host country. If there is a smaller or different panel, the right to appeal any decisions made by the judges is allowed and therefore renders decisions at the regatta open until the appeals process is concluded. Effectively, in the real world, this means that you need (and have to pay for) a minimum of five ISAF judges at an international regatta.

It is this issue that is at the heart of the escalating costs for our major regattas. It is this issue that I think needs to be fully understood and addressed before we rush into a formal ISAF affiliation. Unfortunately, I believe we may have already received a "no" answer to this question in that ISAF has apparently told you that there is no negotiation of any ISAF rules or regulations for model sailing.

A final suggestion--if the class has the ability to submit questions to ISAF, why not allow members and NCAs to post their questions and concerns here on this forum; pass the posts directly to ISAF; and then publish the answers supplied by ISAF.

Ken Dobbie
Posts: 173
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 21:01
Location: Hobart, Tasmania. AUS950

Post by Ken Dobbie » 20 Aug 2009, 05:50

[quote]Quote:
A. An international Jury appointed either by the Class or ISAF?
As per the current situation it is the organising authority responsibility to appoint the Jury in accordance with RRS Appendix “Nâ€

Bruce Andersen
USA NCA Officer
Posts: 760
Joined: 25 Nov 2003, 00:06
Sail number: USA 16
Club: Famous Potatoes Sailin Club
Location: USA 16

Post by Bruce Andersen » 20 Aug 2009, 06:44

Ken

As far as I know, the Class Championship Regulations were composed by the originators of the class along with the Constitution and Regulations and thus were "in place" when we came into being. Occasional amendments to them have been voted upon by the membership.

Again, to my knowledge, Appendix Q has never been voted upon by the class and dates back to when Lester Gilbert was Chairman.
Bruce Andersen - USA 16

Alfonso
IOMICA Chairman
Posts: 229
Joined: 04 Nov 2004, 15:11
Location: ESP 50

Post by Alfonso » 20 Aug 2009, 10:56

RoyL,

I do not think it is necessary to publish the e mail because it is as simple as the two paragraphs I quoted you and there is no possibility of any kind of mistakes because as you can see I quoted the question and the answer. I gave you the position of the person who answers us, but if you want to know the name is Henry Thorpe.

Regarding the IJ issue I still don’t know why this question has been raised in this thread, because as far as I know there has been an IJ in every World or Continental Championship held by the class, at least since Omisalj, and while we stay under the umbrella of ISAF, either as an international class or through RSD, we will need an IJ if we want that their decisions were final and not be able to be appealed.

The question of the IJ would make sense if we were planning or proposing to leave the umbrella of ISAF because we consider that we can not held a WC due to the costs of the IJ, but that is not the proposal of the Exec neither any NCA.

I agree that the cost of the jury is an important item in the budget of any WC, but we should open a new debate about that issue, because for example I think we all agree that if there is a funding problem we do not need so many IJ or NJ as we had in BAR (that was amazing :shock: ), also I am sure that not many owners know that sometimes is cheaper to bring an IJ instead of a NJ, also many clubs don’t know that some MNAs have a program to share IJ where you can get an IJ almost without any cost…With all above mentioned what I want to say is that the debate about IJ is not as simple as if it is enough one, two or three members to form the jury for a WC of the IOM class.

Finally regarding your suggestion, I don’t think it is necessary to report every doubt to ISAF, because in many cases the Exec can answer those questions, but of course every owner and NCA can post here their questions and if we have any doubt we will pass them through ISAF.

Robert Grubisa
Posts: 116
Joined: 29 Nov 2003, 22:15
Location: CRO 16
Contact:

Post by Robert Grubisa » 20 Aug 2009, 12:42

Bruce Andersen wrote:Ken

As far as I know, the Class Championship Regulations were composed by the originators of the class along with the Constitution and Regulations and thus were "in place" when we came into being. Occasional amendments to them have been voted upon by the membership.

Again, to my knowledge, Appendix Q has never been voted upon by the class and dates back to when Lester Gilbert was Chairman.
Bruce,

Last version of the Appendix Q is dated May 2005:
http://www.iomclass.org/events/IOMICA_e ... 5may05.pdf

So, it seems that it is done after Lester era :wink:

Regards
Robert Grubisa

RoyL
Posts: 705
Joined: 15 Dec 2003, 21:03

Post by RoyL » 20 Aug 2009, 17:02

Robert: The fact is that Appendix Q has never been voted on or officially adopted by the class.

The last date on which Appendix Q was worked on wasn't the issue or the point.

RoyL
Posts: 705
Joined: 15 Dec 2003, 21:03

Post by RoyL » 20 Aug 2009, 21:59

Alfonso: I just reviewed the ISAF website. According to that site, all ISAF decisions are made by volunteer committees of the organization usually as part of an annual general assembly. The site also states that there is a small staff of paid employees who are described as answering member questions and providing communications functions.

According to the ISAF website the representative you quoted, Henry Thorpe, is not a member of any ISAF governing committee, but rather a paid employee of the private corporation ISAF(UK) (i.e the ISAF secretariat) working on staff in the technical committee department. His title of "Co-Ordinator" appears on the org. chart to be at the lower end of the spectrum.

This now seems even more confusing to me. Could you please explain how the process of IOMICA's proposed affiliation with ISAF is supposed to work? What groups/committees do we apply to? Is this a matter governed by paid staff or volunteer committees? Do we deal with committee heads or staffers?

In light of these questions, I do think it is important that we have the chance to see the entire recent letter sent to and received from ISAF. Was the letter sent directly to Mr. Thorpe or referred to him? Further, the additional provision of his letter quoted by you whereby Mr. Thorpe has said that negotiations with ISAF and IOMICA are not possible must have been prompted by something. It would be good to know.

The executive is asking for quick and extra-ordinary actions on the part of the class on a major issue. I really think that it is important that we have as much information and as many facts as possible.

Roy648
Posts: 41
Joined: 13 Feb 2008, 00:01
Location: New Zealand

Post by Roy648 » 26 Aug 2009, 23:18

Alfonso,

In view of the comments by Mr Thorpe
.......so there is no change to the current situation.

and

.....The regulations were not written with radio sailing in mind were the use of observers etc. during in a regatta is common place.
So that a comprehensive summary of the issues can be read in the one place could you please detail in the one post the following:

A: The driving factors behind IOM Class Affiliation with ISAF.
B: The positive factors (advantages) of such.
C: The negative factors (disadvantages) of such.
D: The associated risks
Roy Granich

Antonio Espada
Posts: 55
Joined: 25 May 2008, 12:37
Sail number: ESP 3
Club: NAUTICO VILANOVA
Design: ICEPICK
Location: BARCELONA-SPAIN

Post by Antonio Espada » 28 Aug 2009, 00:14

Back from my hollidays I see this discussion of ISAF YES ...ISAF NO ...

RoylL: Can I ask for what your interest is in not in ISAF, and especially the reasons for it?

What is the universe you contemplate outside ISAF?.

In the time it has been Technical VC, do you know what is the eligibility?

Regards.
Antonio Espada
SCIRA CHIEF MEASURER
ESP 03

RoyL
Posts: 705
Joined: 15 Dec 2003, 21:03

Post by RoyL » 28 Aug 2009, 04:26

I believe that in order to make an informed decision it is important to know all of the terms and conditions of the proposed affiliation of IOMICA with ISAF. It would also be nice to hear the positives and negatives of this proposed agreement in the view of our class leaders as asked on this forum.

Hopefully, some of the many questions being asked about this important issue will soon be answered by the Executive.

As to my personal opinion on this issue, it is presently unformed awaiting further information.

Antonio Espada
Posts: 55
Joined: 25 May 2008, 12:37
Sail number: ESP 3
Club: NAUTICO VILANOVA
Design: ICEPICK
Location: BARCELONA-SPAIN

Post by Antonio Espada » 28 Aug 2009, 07:29

In my post, had specific questions.
Your reply "ethereal" says nothing.
Can you make a positive or negative contribution?
Antonio Espada
SCIRA CHIEF MEASURER
ESP 03

jandejmo
Posts: 64
Joined: 25 Nov 2003, 07:47

Post by jandejmo » 28 Aug 2009, 14:31

An attempt to a relatively short post explaining how ISAF works and how an application for ISAF Class status is processed.

The main ISAF members are the National Sailing Federations (the Member National Authorities) and the Classes represented by International Class Associations.

There are two main committees handling the sport side of the work done in ISAF. These committees have their names from the terminology used by the International Olympic Committee:

The Events Committee handles issues relating to different types and different levels of events. Although not formally a sub-committee the Racing Rules Committee is closely liked to the Events Committee through its work with the Racing Rules of Sailing.

The Equipment Committee handles technical issues relating to boats, boat equipment and competitor equipment. This committee has two subcommittees:

The Equipment Control Sub-committee which works with the Equipment Rules of Sailing, the Standard Class Rules, Guides to Measurement and related issues.

The Class Rules Sub-committee handles, as the name implies, the Class Rules of ISAF Classes.

When a class applies for ISAF Class status the ISAF staff will check if the requirements of § 26.2 and 26.3 in the ISAF Regulations are complied with and the Class Rules Sub-committee will check the Class Rules. Henry Thorpe handles radio sailing issues at the ISAF office and is himself an active IOM sailor.

The office and the Class Rules Sub-committee report to the Equipment Committee that will make a recommendation to the ISAF Council to either approve or reject the application. The Council then makes its decision and in most cases will follow the recommendation by the Equipment Committee. The ICA of the class applying is invited to address the Equipment Committee meeting.

The IOMICA Executive has been requested to list the pros and cons of being an ISAF Class. I would to suggest that this is not as straightforward as it might seem. There are a number of “consequencesâ€

RoyL
Posts: 705
Joined: 15 Dec 2003, 21:03

Post by RoyL » 28 Aug 2009, 16:54

Jan: Since you asked, a few questions raised by your post:

1. What is the current relationship between RSD and ISAF? It has been implied by some here that one of the reasons we must join with ISAF immediately is because RSD is going to be dissolved by ISAF. However, the ISAF website still lists RSD as its model sailing division and its continued status seems to have been confirmed by ISAF in May, 2009. Will IOMICA lose its ISAF status if it does not affiliate directly with ISAF by November, 2009? If RSD continues in existence will IOMICA still be required to report to RSD?

2. You have stated that Henry Thorpe "handles radio sailing issues at the ISAF office". What exactly does that mean? I thought that ISAF was governed by its volunteer committees and that the "office" performs administrative functions. Does/will Mr. Thorpe have authority and pass judgement over IOM class issues? (For example, are our rules questions to be resolved by Mr. Thorpe?) Are there senior staffers in the "office" or on committees that we will have access to or will make final decisions?

3. Jan, are you also the official of ISAF with responsibility for radio sailing? Are there other members of the council or ISAF committees that we should be talking with? When either Henry Thorpe or you post here, is this the formal position of ISAF on radio sailing and ISAF's terms and conditions for IOMICA's governance and affiliation?

3. You have said that the question concerning ISAF affiliation is simply one of "being a part of the sailing community or not." Respectfully, there are tens of thousands of people around the world who are part of the "sailing community" who are not affiliated with ISAF or any of its national authorities. Further, given the cost and nature of r/c sailing, our sport attracts large numbers of people with different economic concerns and interests than a great deal of other forms of organized sailing. If, as it presently seems, that ISAF is unwilling to adapt any of its class requirements for r/c sailing, then it is very important to have a clear understanding of what "obligations" are to be imposed on both our individual members and national authorities. Could you provide your understanding of these obligations?

4. I do think it is appropriate to hear from our class leaders as to their opinion of what they think are the advantages and disadvantages of direct ISAF affiliation for IOMICA. Particularly how they view the "consequences" of the rights and obligations imposed and granted by such a relationship.

Oh, and Antonio, unfortunately and respectfully, like many of your posts your English leaves something to be desired and I literally have no idea the "specific" questions you are asking. I would also point out to you that my current status is simply one of interested observer. I am no longer a member of the Executive and I don't believe I am under any obligation any longer to respond to requests for my opinions or views, not that they matter to anyone anyway! (lol)

Jan Dejmo
Posts: 16
Joined: 31 Mar 2009, 08:51

Post by Jan Dejmo » 28 Aug 2009, 19:18

Roy

1.

In short the current situation is likely ISAF still waiting for some radio sailing classes to become ISAF classes in that the special allowance in the ISAF regulation for RSD to run World Championships for its classes could be deleted.

ISAF does not affiliate ICAs but classes and the One Metre Class currently does not have ISAF status.

The last question is for IOMICA to ask the new RSD PC that will be elected at the upcoming General Assembly and I understand that you are one of the candidates.

2.

The office handles the issues that the ISAF Executive Committee delegates to it. The office do not pass judgement over class issues. If you by class issues mean class rules such are handled in accordance with ISAF Regulation 26.11.

3.a

I am not an ISAF official but probably have some insight in how ISAF works. If IOMICA wants binding answers I recommend to contact the ISAF General Secretary who will make sure that the issue is handled in the proper way.

3.b

To me it seems that ISAF has already adapted its class requirements for radio sailing and also has taken other steps to promote the discipline of radio sailing. The obligations of being an ISAF Class are covered in the ISAF Regulations. And so are the rights.

4.

This does not seem to be a question directed to me.


Regards

Jan

Post Reply