Australian Sailing

Commodore Captain

New member
1
1
The Bay
The Article (Star Wars) is on the front page now.

Everyone is invited and the debate is simple, how is what happened good for the sport?

No hiding over in the Australian IRC Championship thread.

So no snipping from around corners or hiding with sock puppets, get up front and centre.

I have expressed my view!

 

MRS OCTOPUS

Anarchist
651
199
AUSTRALIA
The Article (Star Wars) is on the front page now.

Everyone is invited and the debate is simple, how is what happened good for the sport?

No hiding over in the Australian IRC Championship thread.

So no snipping from around corners or hiding with sock puppets, get up front and centre.

I have expressed my view!
Mr Sparrah is that you?

BWAHAHAHA,

Two threads and now the socks arrive.

Must be a big hole that needs filling.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Livia

Super Anarchist
3,951
1,018
Southern Ocean
Not sure he is a sock, far too clever to be from around here.

Writes well too which also rules him out.

Makes a serious point though which again rules him out a sock.

Beside there would not be 5 people on the entire site that could name the Angevin Kings.

 

Curious

Anarchist
798
383
There are some very serious points to be raised. Such as;

1- Had the competitor made repeated claims or implications that the club's protest committee and officials had been corrupt, dishonest or incompetent in the now-deleted "Queensland catamaran collision" thread on a well known sailing site?

2- If so, would that have been a breach of the RYA and AS Codes of Conduct for a sailing instructor?

3- Does a sporting body have a duty of care to protect their members and volunteers from public abuse and harassment?

4- If a competitor has publicly abused a protest committee, wouldn't it be unfair to expect another set of volunteers to act as a protest committee when that person was a competitor?

5- Wouldn't if be unfair to other competitors if they could come up in a hearing against someone who had publicly insulted and abused a protest committee of that club, and whose judgement could therefore be affected?

6- Can a private club stop someone from competing in a club race, subject to normal anti-discrimination laws? 

7- If someone has breached the rules of a private club, should that person expect that club and its volunteers to spend the time and hassle to let that person sail with them, knowing that he broke the club rules when he wanted and that they could cop vicious public abuse from them whenever he decided?

8- Is the abuse of sporting officials a known problem?

9 - Why should anyone give up their own time to help run a race for someone who has thrown shit at them in public?

10- Would other clubs and the RYA do anything about a competitor and instructor who abuses volunteers and breaches the RYA Code of Conduct?
 

 
Not sure he is a sock, far too clever to be from around here.

Writes well too which also rules him out.

Makes a serious point though which again rules him out a sock.

Beside there would not be 5 people on the entire site that could name the Angevin Kings.
Henry II, Richard I, John, Henry III - holy shit I actually remembered something from Ancient British History at school

 

Livia

Super Anarchist
3,951
1,018
Southern Ocean
Do the "Flags" refer to themselves in their group reach around meetings as kings now? 

Oh the shame!!!!!
TS it is clever reference to the fact as individual sailors we do not to vote for the board of Australian Sailing  just the peasants did not get to vote for John or Henry but from 1257 there was a parliament of sorts ( 3 from the church, 3 from the king and balance from the barons from memory) which morphed into a Westminster System.

As I said too clever to be a sock from around here.

 

duncan (the other one)

Super Anarchist
5,396
423
Siderney
Very nice CC.

As you quite rightly point out, the situation stinks, and has opened an enormous bucket of worms.

Will we soon see an OA exclude an out of town olympic hopeful competing against their own favourite from their regatta for spurious reasons?

What about the CYCA deciding they'd rather not have one of those competitive Frenchies in the Hobart race?

Will the legal shitfights get bigger?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Livia

Super Anarchist
3,951
1,018
Southern Ocean
Very nice CC.

As you quite rightly point out, the situation stinks, and has opened an enormous bucket of worms.

Will we soon see an OA exclude an out of town olympic hopeful competing against their own favourite from their regatta for spurious reasons?

What about the CYCA deciding they'd rather not have one of those competitive Frenchies in the Hobart race?

Will the legal shitfights get bigger?
Personally I would exclude every IRC boat with a French assessed hull factor from Hobart, but that is just me!

At least that is objective criteria though in terms of what the good Commodore wrote.

You can say as an objective fact the assessment is inconsistent with local assessment of HF

 
Last edited by a moderator:

roon

Member
56
18
Quote: "The alleged RRS 69.1 conduct appears to be that several weeks earlier, the competitor as a non-member of the organising authority had requested to sail as a crew member on another member’s vessel in an afternoon fun race and this request was refused.

Notwithstanding the refusal but without coming onto the premises of the organising authority, the competitor crewed on the member’s boat......"

By your own admission there was no hearing for said rule 69 infringement yet you claim the competitors entry was rejected on the grounds of the competitor being in breach of rule 69....."Firstly, the competitor was in breach of RRS 69.1"

"No doubt sensing the possible fallout, Australian Sailing appointed what was essentially an Olympic regatta jury comprising well respected judges for a 10-boat regatta in the desert of Tatooine.".....What possible fallout are you referring to? 

 
There are some very serious points to be raised. Such as;

1- Had the competitor made repeated claims or implications that the club's protest committee and officials had been corrupt, dishonest or incompetent in the now-deleted "Queensland catamaran collision" thread on a well known sailing site?

2- If so, would that have been a breach of the RYA and AS Codes of Conduct for a sailing instructor?

3- Does a sporting body have a duty of care to protect their members and volunteers from public abuse and harassment?

4- If a competitor has publicly abused a protest committee, wouldn't it be unfair to expect another set of volunteers to act as a protest committee when that person was a competitor?

5- Wouldn't if be unfair to other competitors if they could come up in a hearing against someone who had publicly insulted and abused a protest committee of that club, and whose judgement could therefore be affected?

6- Can a private club stop someone from competing in a club race, subject to normal anti-discrimination laws? 

7- If someone has breached the rules of a private club, should that person expect that club and its volunteers to spend the time and hassle to let that person sail with them, knowing that he broke the club rules when he wanted and that they could cop vicious public abuse from them whenever he decided?

8- Is the abuse of sporting officials a known problem?

9 - Why should anyone give up their own time to help run a race for someone who has thrown shit at them in public?

10- Would other clubs and the RYA do anything about a competitor and instructor who abuses volunteers and breaches the RYA Code of Conduct?
 
And what dog do you have in this fight? Stump up or fuck off

 

Recidivist

Super Anarchist
Dark Cloud, just as a disclaimer, I have no dog in this fight and I'm not even a Queenslander.  However, I asked over in the IRC thread, and never got an answer from anyone.  Who was the OA?  The NOR stated that RQ, on behalf of AS, was the OA.  In my view, RQ could not nominate itself as OA for a state championship.  Therefore, the OA must have been AS, who delegated certain functions to RQ.

Is there any formal instrument of delegation?  Do we know what of the OA's functions were delegated to RQ?  All of them - including the appointment of a RC?  Who DID appoint the RC?  Captain Commodore says that the OA refused the entry, but several times he(?) conflates the OA and RQ.

Who, in what role, refused the entry?  RQ could for one of it's own events, but if they purport to do it for a state championship, for which the OA could only be AS, they would need to demonstrate that they had expressly been delegate the power to do so, because otherwise they don't have that power.

Clearly AS don't think they refused the entry.

Was the entry refused by the RC rather than the OA?  If so, who appointed the RC?  If RQ, again, they would need to be able to demonstrate that they had the express delegation from the ACTUAL OA - AS, to do so.

Can someone show us the paperwork?

Because unless this stuff is straightened out, the refusal WAS capricious at best and possibly vindictive or spiteful, and sets a dangerous precedent for sailing in Australia - are you listening AS?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dark Cloud, just as a disclaimer, I have no dog in this fight and I'm not even a Queenslander.  However, I asked over in the IRC thread, and never got an answer from anyone.  Who was the OA?  The NOR stated that RQ, on behalf of AS, was the OA.  In my view, RQ could not nominate itself as OA for a state championship.  Therefore, the OA must have been AS, who delegated certain functions to RQ.

Is there any formal instrument of delegation?  Do we know what of the OA's functions were delegated to RQ?  All of them - including the appointment of a RC?  Who DID appoint the RC?  Captain Commodore says that the OA refused the entry, but several times he(?) conflates the OA and RQ.

Who, in what role, refused the entry?  RQ could for one of it's own events, but if they purport to do it for a state championship, for which the OA could only be AS, they would need to demonstrate that they had expressly been delegate the power to do so, because otherwise they don't have that power.

Clearly AS don't think they refused the entry.

Was the entry refused by the RC rather than the OA?  If so, who appointed the RC?  If RQ, again, they would need to be able to demonstrate that they had the express delegation from the ACTUAL OA - AS, to do so.

Can someone show us the paperwork?

Because unless this stuff is straightened out, the refusal WAS capricious at best and possibly vindictive or spiteful, and sets a dangerous precedent for sailing in Australia - are you listening AS?
You make some good points, and ask some good questions.  As I understand it, the OA is the club running the event - SA is never an OA cos they don't run anything, so RQ must be the OA - for running state/nat champs, the club only needs for the event to be sanctioned (allowed) by SA.  I could of course be wrong.

 

stufishing

Member
395
19
Brisbane
From the notice to competitors. RQ is the OA.

OA.JPG

 

MRS OCTOPUS

Anarchist
651
199
AUSTRALIA
From the mythical front page.

May I just point out that this is pretty confusing. I assume by "the competitor" you  mean "the non competitor".

........

The alleged RRS 69.1 conduct appears to be that several weeks earlier, the competitor as a non-member of the organising authority had requested to sail as a crew member on another member’s vessel in an afternoon fun race and this request was refused.

Notwithstanding the refusal but without coming onto the premises of the organising authority, the competitor crewed on the member’s boat. Subsequently, the competitor had sought to compete as crew member on a member’s vessel in the local ocean race. 

.........

Now thats as funny as f#KC.

Why should this newbe scribe  :D go to such great pains, to point out that the Butthurt one sought permission to sail on a members boat in an afternoon fun race  FFS,  and note that they  didn't step foot on club property.

Was the Butthurt one already banned from the club?.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Turkey Slapper

Super Anarchist
5,735
63
Queensland
Recidivist, allegedly there is a clause in the club constitution that the club, or anyone in a position can use it when their feelings are hurt, even from personality clashes, which they can exclude anyone from events or ban them from being a member which they have done by the sound of it a couple of times in the recent past event misshaps for different incidents, all without having to give any reason/explanation/hearing as to why, coincidentally one team has been involved in at least 2 of the recent incidents but have escaped any wrath of the constitution from what I'm led to believe, maybe this is causing a bit if confusion and rumors! Now from all info published so far of the latest one, these same club rules now with high end lawyer help can over ride YA rules and ij's, nj's, oj's and bj's! Where normally nothing beats a bj!!! Can someone correct me on this?

My concern, if all this is true, that we have a club that can flex this muscle for any reason, on any competitor, at any regatta it hosts, for no reason, and this could well be used for ones own trophy hunting social media fame at the detriment to not only fleet sizes, but competition levels! Now this was a state titles, so could happen at a national titles, or a world titles! Now I think this is a dangerous rule/precedent for invitation regattas of that magnitude!

 

Curious

Anarchist
798
383
Still no one will answer the simple question about whether the non-competitor was involved in the abuse of the same club’s officials and volunteers, and if so, why a club should cater for them 

 
Top