mharlow

iTrader: (27)

I believe the club officials were spoken to last Sunday on their thoughts of the venue (Not that this was required by the rules but it was a commonsense approach from AARCMCC). Ultimately it was an AARCMCC decision anyway no matter what the clubs thought. But at least they got the right decision, St Ives haven't had a Nationals for a long time and they were well due.

NOFX

iTrader: (25)

Interesting. Of course in these matters there should be no such thing as the 'right' decision. Just due process with transparency

mharlow

iTrader: (27)

Off course it's the right decision. Maitland & St Ives were the only ones that submitted applications and Maitland had the last Nats in NSW. How is this not the right decision St Ives meets all the AARCMCC's requirements so it was a no brainer. As for Transparancy there was a lot more this time then there has been in the past. Just because you were not consulted personally doesn't mean others have not been. Maybe you should talk to some of your club members on what discussions went on last sunday.

Radio Active

iTrader: (2)

We were given a set of criteria for selection, they were:

• Next NSW Club on the roster (currently – St Ives, Ryde, Castle Hill & Maitland)
• Ability to comply with the current EP10 OFR rules.
• Venue and facilities
• Officials

If St Ives have nominated appropriate officials, and shown that their track, venue, etc. can comply with the regulations then based on this criteria the choice was the one that complies with due process, and the right choice from that perspective.

I'm happy with the decision. If Maitland had been successful with this criteria it would have meant that St Ives either couldn't satisfy some conditions or that Maitland had far better facilities.

Michael H, I think your being a little defensive. Michael R's comment I think was just meant to mean that it doesn't matter who got the event as long as the decision was made in the correct way. He wasn't implying St Ives shouldn't have got it.

I'm ok with the other clubs being canvassed for their opinions. As we all know, the EP OFR President is a member of St Ives. He may have felt conflicted, getting the input of other neutral club officials helps him to be objective. It's a sensible and responsible thing to do. I don't think he meant there was a formal vote, that wasn't part of the criteria (and a vote of 2 clubs is hardly likely to be useful), but it seems he just asked for the comments of other clubs with reference to the selection criteria.

I wish St Ives all the best. I'm sure they will do a good job. I look forward to competing there next year.

NOFX

iTrader: (25)

Don't get ur knickers in a knot! Mavs post states that the other clubs voted on the venue, your post states the other club officials were merely consulted. They aren't the same thing.

Maverick CR

Perhaps.......... "other NSW clubs and their members, were consulted on the venue"............ would have been a more appropriate response.
My apologies for causing a conflict among our NSW comrades.
My comments were, in now way, meant to be single out any individual, nor cause any angst toward any Club.
Sometimes, in the name of expediency, an agreement by the many, may not suit the few.
Hopefully, we can look forward to next year, and support each other in this endevour.

Mav

doorz

iTrader: (2)

Very diplomatic Mav,,,,

Maverick CR

Thanks Baggs. Those Winston Churchill DVDs are paying off.

Hope you're feeling better man.

Mav

doorz

iTrader: (2)

Thanks mate,,all good now,,

Obviously there we changes to the dates for the cc rounds this year,due to the nats,,,call me when you can,,

nckmat

iTrader: (24)

Any news on the revised date?

doorz

iTrader: (2)

Nothing certain yet Nick,,,We'll probably be waiting till after the Nats now,,we did have a date,,but we changed due to other meet,,then they changed their date,so we could have run on the 1st date,,but,,too late now,,,

Waiting,,

Maverick CR

New thread with the dates and details.

2012 NSW Off-Road Club Series

Mav