A Cohesive EP-Onroad National Scene?
03-03-2014, 03:30 AM
#16
It could also be argued Daniel that without a full restructure you still will not end up with a solution to the issues. The issues as I see them and as many of the people i have spoken to about these things revolve around accountability, governance, transparency and most importantly about putting the racers first and the individuals and politics second. And this is not just from a section, but from the entire organization. These are big issues for many people in QLD.
And while Graham might be a rabid chiwawa in his dealings with AARCMCC, his views are ones that resonate though a lot of QLD RC, and those issues will need to be addressed if one wishes to bring them into the fold.
There are reasons why ORCCA, VORTEC et al, exist and remain strong and I think that examining those issues and understanding those fundamentals are essential to this debate. Because in the end, if you just slap a few band aids on this, and never address the underlying causes, we will be in this same position in a few years time with yet another breakaway splinter group doing its own thing.
Me, I am just a QLD toy car racer who wants to attend an AARCMCC QLD EP Titles and the Nationals in his own state. But i don't think we even have one EP club who is affiliated. So something has to give to have a truly national scene and the national executive seem unwilling or incapable of working with even one QLD club to make these things happen, so these are big issues that a simple fix of finding 3 people is not going to change anything much at all.
And while Graham might be a rabid chiwawa in his dealings with AARCMCC, his views are ones that resonate though a lot of QLD RC, and those issues will need to be addressed if one wishes to bring them into the fold.
There are reasons why ORCCA, VORTEC et al, exist and remain strong and I think that examining those issues and understanding those fundamentals are essential to this debate. Because in the end, if you just slap a few band aids on this, and never address the underlying causes, we will be in this same position in a few years time with yet another breakaway splinter group doing its own thing.
Me, I am just a QLD toy car racer who wants to attend an AARCMCC QLD EP Titles and the Nationals in his own state. But i don't think we even have one EP club who is affiliated. So something has to give to have a truly national scene and the national executive seem unwilling or incapable of working with even one QLD club to make these things happen, so these are big issues that a simple fix of finding 3 people is not going to change anything much at all.
The club/heads reps are accountable to the racers.
The executive members are accountable to the club heads/reps.
A person can only sustain one of these positions so long as there isn't anyone running against them who can attract more votes from their voting base.
At the moment no one is accountable in EP ONR because no one wants to get involved. People need to be interested enough in the governance of the sport to have a surfeit of people wanting to be in the positions, then we would have engagement and accountability.
Having the racers directly responsible for selecting national body reps would be an absolute disaster. 9/10 racers will vote for what is best for them at a given point in time with no regard for what may be good for their club let alone the sport long term. 9/10 racers have no idea of the history of the sport, have no idea what has been tried before, what has worked and what has failed, they don't have an idea of the requirements for sanctioning from IFMAR nor how to liaise with other organisations. I see so many people make suggestions they think are new, when they are not. I see the same experiments tried again and again at clubs, it makes me really sad to see such enthusiasm wasted unchannelled by knowledgeable people.
The people who run clubs have some idea of what's required, more than the average racer anyway. Having clubs vote for reps is an imperfect system, but it's better than the alternative. Often working to secure a better future for the sport means not appeasing current racers, because current racers are invested in the system as it stands – to change the system for the better you're going to make some of those people unhappy.
In the last 2 years we've seen the EP OFR executive follow strict guidelines for the introduction of rules, and we've seen them put out discussion documents and surveys. The IC OFR executive have used racer surveys to inform the votes they've put to clubs or state reps according to their system, people are happy with both these groups. Again the difference is involvement from people willing to work within the system.
03-03-2014, 05:30 AM
#17
So I will agree to disagree and leave it at that.
03-03-2014, 05:57 AM
#18
A couple of thoughts in response to various parts of the conversation:
1. I wasn't aware of impending changes in Vic. If VORTEC (and any clubs that leave VORTEC) move to a class structure common across the rest of the country that's a positive move in my opinion (I may have misread those comments - if so my apologies)
2. I don't think there is really any need for total restructure of AARCMCC. I think there is plenty of capacity within the existing system for us to do a great job with the category. There is no reason an active/positive/creative committee can't be transparent, clear and accountable if there is sufficient open communication and support with the rest of AARCMCC. For example, within the existing system I don't see a reason a new committee couldn't establish a reference/advisory group and invite each state's clubs to select a delegate/member to such a reference group - which could then support the committee in planning and communication. I don't see a reason an exec committee couldn't adopt some standard practices around adoption of new rules - a practice of an annual (or twice annual) rules update with proposed new rules published for consultation before formal voting procedures for example. Those are a couple of practices that could easily operate within the existing system/structure and help with openness, communication and clear systems (in my opinion).
3. There is enough trouble finding capable people who have the time, skills and willingness to run clubs, and to contribute to a national scene without also having to establish a formal structure (more people) in every state.
4. I like the GP8-Off approach of a designated number of state champs events each year (4 is the number I think) contributing to a national points series - with state events rotating in and out of the points series each year. Building some interest in travelling without trying to overdo it - and meaning that each second year any given State Champs race has that extra prestige and draw. Running a national pointscore system in each of the main classes would be relatively straightforward - and the mod class a clear and simple (and visible) Worlds qualifying system
5. I'm personally not in favour of a popular "racer" driven election system for a national body. With many people legitimately not that interested in what happens nationally, it would be a system at risk of skewed results.
6. The reasons some state bodies continue are at least in part a historical hangover from a time long ago when AARCMCC wasn't that interested in EP racing, and when it was very heavily centred in one state. Those reasons need not continue be the case any more. In a world where national (and international) communication is instant and easy, there's no reason an effective national body can't operate.
My own personal view is that at the end of the day, any system is as effective or ineffective as the people who have the time, skills and willingness to contribute to it.
Too many words too late at night....sorry!
Thanks for the positive conversation about ideas and philosophy. Let's keep it that way and not about personalities.
1. I wasn't aware of impending changes in Vic. If VORTEC (and any clubs that leave VORTEC) move to a class structure common across the rest of the country that's a positive move in my opinion (I may have misread those comments - if so my apologies)
2. I don't think there is really any need for total restructure of AARCMCC. I think there is plenty of capacity within the existing system for us to do a great job with the category. There is no reason an active/positive/creative committee can't be transparent, clear and accountable if there is sufficient open communication and support with the rest of AARCMCC. For example, within the existing system I don't see a reason a new committee couldn't establish a reference/advisory group and invite each state's clubs to select a delegate/member to such a reference group - which could then support the committee in planning and communication. I don't see a reason an exec committee couldn't adopt some standard practices around adoption of new rules - a practice of an annual (or twice annual) rules update with proposed new rules published for consultation before formal voting procedures for example. Those are a couple of practices that could easily operate within the existing system/structure and help with openness, communication and clear systems (in my opinion).
3. There is enough trouble finding capable people who have the time, skills and willingness to run clubs, and to contribute to a national scene without also having to establish a formal structure (more people) in every state.
4. I like the GP8-Off approach of a designated number of state champs events each year (4 is the number I think) contributing to a national points series - with state events rotating in and out of the points series each year. Building some interest in travelling without trying to overdo it - and meaning that each second year any given State Champs race has that extra prestige and draw. Running a national pointscore system in each of the main classes would be relatively straightforward - and the mod class a clear and simple (and visible) Worlds qualifying system
5. I'm personally not in favour of a popular "racer" driven election system for a national body. With many people legitimately not that interested in what happens nationally, it would be a system at risk of skewed results.
6. The reasons some state bodies continue are at least in part a historical hangover from a time long ago when AARCMCC wasn't that interested in EP racing, and when it was very heavily centred in one state. Those reasons need not continue be the case any more. In a world where national (and international) communication is instant and easy, there's no reason an effective national body can't operate.
My own personal view is that at the end of the day, any system is as effective or ineffective as the people who have the time, skills and willingness to contribute to it.
Too many words too late at night....sorry!
Thanks for the positive conversation about ideas and philosophy. Let's keep it that way and not about personalities.
03-03-2014, 07:11 PM
#19
It could also be argued Daniel that without a full restructure you still will not end up with a solution to the issues. The issues as I see them and as many of the people i have spoken to about these things revolve around accountability, governance, transparency and most importantly about putting the racers first and the individuals and politics second. And this is not just from a section, but from the entire organization. These are big issues for many people in QLD.
And while Graham might be a rabid chiwawa in his dealings with AARCMCC, his views are ones that resonate though a lot of QLD RC, and those issues will need to be addressed if one wishes to bring them into the fold.
There are reasons why ORCCA, VORTEC et al, exist and remain strong and I think that examining those issues and understanding those fundamentals are essential to this debate. Because in the end, if you just slap a few band aids on this, and never address the underlying causes, we will be in this same position in a few years time with yet another breakaway splinter group doing its own thing.
Me, I am just a QLD toy car racer who wants to attend an AARCMCC QLD EP Titles and the Nationals in his own state. But i don't think we even have one EP club who is affiliated. So something has to give to have a truly national scene and the national executive seem unwilling or incapable of working with even one QLD club to make these things happen, so these are big issues that a simple fix of finding 3 people is not going to change anything much at all.
And while Graham might be a rabid chiwawa in his dealings with AARCMCC, his views are ones that resonate though a lot of QLD RC, and those issues will need to be addressed if one wishes to bring them into the fold.
There are reasons why ORCCA, VORTEC et al, exist and remain strong and I think that examining those issues and understanding those fundamentals are essential to this debate. Because in the end, if you just slap a few band aids on this, and never address the underlying causes, we will be in this same position in a few years time with yet another breakaway splinter group doing its own thing.
Me, I am just a QLD toy car racer who wants to attend an AARCMCC QLD EP Titles and the Nationals in his own state. But i don't think we even have one EP club who is affiliated. So something has to give to have a truly national scene and the national executive seem unwilling or incapable of working with even one QLD club to make these things happen, so these are big issues that a simple fix of finding 3 people is not going to change anything much at all.
Shane Hyde for LCRCCC.inc
03-03-2014, 07:50 PM
#20
03-03-2014, 07:58 PM
#21
Scott, these are some really great comments. I'll try and add to them, but you've done such a good job I don't know how much else I can say.
+1.
Yes, all this is possible within the current structure.
IC OFR has extended the State Jury concept we use at major meets, and uses that for voting purposes. I'm not so in favour of that, especially as those delegates are elected by show of hands of all racers at the Nats, and so don't represent the either the clubs who ultimately have the voting rights, or the racers in the actual state they are supposed to be representing, but I digress...
Consideration would have to be given to the timing of to make sure the process isn't too drawn out. But basically I could see a proposal made by a club being sent to the state delegates who suggest changes before a final draft is approved by the proposing club and then released for comment. Particularly useful comments could then be incorporated into the proposal before being released for voting. If the proposals were all able to be viewed in advance like this, then there is no reason not to release a lot of proposals for voting little more than a month before the mid-/year update.
Having that pool of delegates there as a working group has other advantages too, the Executive could give them directions, like please investigate the feasibility of X, or this rule is broken, please draft me a proposal to fix it, etc.
Indeed. If some of the current state organisations were to fall away, it might free up some talent for the national body. The endeavours of those people would then benefit everyone not just those in their state.
I agree with you. I think this works well for IC OFR, and would help address one of the points Dan raised earlier. Travelling is encouraged, and it makes it easy to decide which events to travel to.
We would need exactly no changes to implement your last point. The Worlds rankings really should be prominent on the AARCMCC website. Being able to easily look up who is doing well in these events adds to their prestige and visibility and encourages participation and progression. It's a no brainer.
Where I can add to this here is to say the ranking system needs to be reworked. I have a system that would do the job well I think. It gives the same reward to the winner of each round, but awards points proportionally to positions below that based on entry numbers. It also has the advantage that you get a ranking just from participating in one event. You'd count your best n events still, but instead of needing n events to have a ranking, everyone who's competed has one (good for trying to sort out Worlds spots, or just for bragging rights with your mates). An example of this system is here: http://www.morcc.com.au/rankings/Cur...ings.html#calc
I'd also like to see the Worlds classes run at such events and get rankings whatever the number of entrants. Paying for travel and accommodation and getting no reward for it really sucks, and it is a factor that stops a lot of people from entering an interstate race. And, as Dan pointed out, unless the numbers are there on the entry list many people simply don't enter.
I've already commented on this, and agree with Rob that it is easier to leave it at that than further the conversation there.
This is true. AARCMCC currently does use phone hook-ups for a variety of purposes at executive level. Electronic votes are allowed in certain situations. As others have commented this should perhaps be extended to the AGMs. To do that would require an organisation-wide vote to alter the constitution, but I think this is one area where that could be accomplished without too much heartache.
Don't be sorry too much. This is all good stuff.
A couple of thoughts in response to various parts of the conversation:
1. I wasn't aware of impending changes in Vic. If VORTEC (and any clubs that leave VORTEC) move to a class structure common across the rest of the country that's a positive move in my opinion (I may have misread those comments - if so my apologies)
1. I wasn't aware of impending changes in Vic. If VORTEC (and any clubs that leave VORTEC) move to a class structure common across the rest of the country that's a positive move in my opinion (I may have misread those comments - if so my apologies)
2. I don't think there is really any need for total restructure of AARCMCC. I think there is plenty of capacity within the existing system for us to do a great job with the category. There is no reason an active/positive/creative committee can't be transparent, clear and accountable if there is sufficient open communication and support with the rest of AARCMCC. For example, within the existing system I don't see a reason a new committee couldn't establish a reference/advisory group and invite each state's clubs to select a delegate/member to such a reference group - which could then support the committee in planning and communication. I don't see a reason an exec committee couldn't adopt some standard practices around adoption of new rules - a practice of an annual (or twice annual) rules update with proposed new rules published for consultation before formal voting procedures for example. Those are a couple of practices that could easily operate within the existing system/structure and help with openness, communication and clear systems (in my opinion).
IC OFR has extended the State Jury concept we use at major meets, and uses that for voting purposes. I'm not so in favour of that, especially as those delegates are elected by show of hands of all racers at the Nats, and so don't represent the either the clubs who ultimately have the voting rights, or the racers in the actual state they are supposed to be representing, but I digress...
Consideration would have to be given to the timing of to make sure the process isn't too drawn out. But basically I could see a proposal made by a club being sent to the state delegates who suggest changes before a final draft is approved by the proposing club and then released for comment. Particularly useful comments could then be incorporated into the proposal before being released for voting. If the proposals were all able to be viewed in advance like this, then there is no reason not to release a lot of proposals for voting little more than a month before the mid-/year update.
Having that pool of delegates there as a working group has other advantages too, the Executive could give them directions, like please investigate the feasibility of X, or this rule is broken, please draft me a proposal to fix it, etc.
4. I like the GP8-Off approach of a designated number of state champs events each year (4 is the number I think) contributing to a national points series - with state events rotating in and out of the points series each year. Building some interest in travelling without trying to overdo it - and meaning that each second year any given State Champs race has that extra prestige and draw. Running a national pointscore system in each of the main classes would be relatively straightforward - and the mod class a clear and simple (and visible) Worlds qualifying system
We would need exactly no changes to implement your last point. The Worlds rankings really should be prominent on the AARCMCC website. Being able to easily look up who is doing well in these events adds to their prestige and visibility and encourages participation and progression. It's a no brainer.
Where I can add to this here is to say the ranking system needs to be reworked. I have a system that would do the job well I think. It gives the same reward to the winner of each round, but awards points proportionally to positions below that based on entry numbers. It also has the advantage that you get a ranking just from participating in one event. You'd count your best n events still, but instead of needing n events to have a ranking, everyone who's competed has one (good for trying to sort out Worlds spots, or just for bragging rights with your mates). An example of this system is here: http://www.morcc.com.au/rankings/Cur...ings.html#calc
I'd also like to see the Worlds classes run at such events and get rankings whatever the number of entrants. Paying for travel and accommodation and getting no reward for it really sucks, and it is a factor that stops a lot of people from entering an interstate race. And, as Dan pointed out, unless the numbers are there on the entry list many people simply don't enter.
6. The reasons some state bodies continue are at least in part a historical hangover from a time long ago when AARCMCC wasn't that interested in EP racing, and when it was very heavily centred in one state. Those reasons need not continue be the case any more. In a world where national (and international) communication is instant and easy, there's no reason an effective national body can't operate.
My own personal view is that at the end of the day, any system is as effective or ineffective as the people who have the time, skills and willingness to contribute to it.
Too many words too late at night....sorry!
Thanks for the positive conversation about ideas and philosophy. Let's keep it that way and not about personalities.
Too many words too late at night....sorry!
Thanks for the positive conversation about ideas and philosophy. Let's keep it that way and not about personalities.
03-03-2014, 08:07 PM
#22
Tech Fanatic
The problem with this talkfest is that none of this can happen until someone has the fortitude to reform from within the Organisation. Otherwise this is all just academic.
03-03-2014, 08:28 PM
#24
Tech Fanatic
No law was ever broken by myself or my club.
03-03-2014, 09:13 PM
#25
The positions are vacant. Perhaps you and Scott will take up those positions and move all this forward. Most, if not all of these things have been debated here in the AARCMCC thread at least once. You both seem to share a vision you would like to see enacted, and both have the where for all, experience and most likely the support of the racers to make it all happen. So how about it?
03-03-2014, 09:29 PM
#26
One other idea would be to open up membership to other state bodies
VORTEC and ORRCA QLD are already setup. why not use their experience.
If AARCMCC had state levels or allowed affiliations with other state bodies the talent base would be there. Reps from state bodies would resolve local issues.
Delegates from the state bodies could then form the national body.
Shane Hyde
my thoughts only
VORTEC and ORRCA QLD are already setup. why not use their experience.
If AARCMCC had state levels or allowed affiliations with other state bodies the talent base would be there. Reps from state bodies would resolve local issues.
Delegates from the state bodies could then form the national body.
Shane Hyde
my thoughts only
03-03-2014, 09:31 PM
#27
The positions are vacant. Perhaps you and Scott will take up those positions and move all this forward. Most, if not all of these things have been debated here in the AARCMCC thread at least once. You both seem to share a vision you would like to see enacted, and both have the where for all, experience and most likely the support of the racers to make it all happen. So how about it?
The most I would want to commit to right now is a State Delegate position.
This year really is very important for me personally. The only race I'm committing to travelling for is Tamworth and series organisation is cut back to the bare minimum for the same reason.
03-03-2014, 11:30 PM
#28
I promised myself I would look after my career this year, and not neglect the things I have for the last 3. If I have a permanent job in Australia next year I would consider it then.
The most I would want to commit to right now is a State Delegate position.
This year really is very important for me personally. The only race I'm committing to travelling for is Tamworth and series organisation is cut back to the bare minimum for the same reason.
The most I would want to commit to right now is a State Delegate position.
This year really is very important for me personally. The only race I'm committing to travelling for is Tamworth and series organisation is cut back to the bare minimum for the same reason.
I cannot say that I am any different, I set my priorities and they did not include getting involved in in things further than being a racer.
03-04-2014, 12:19 AM
#29
In my experience, open, positive and imaginative conversation leads to building consensus and community, and is often the pre-cursor to action.
I'd love to hear thoughts from more people and explore other approaches to improving EP-On.
03-04-2014, 12:56 AM
#30
great thread
ARRRR this is what i like to see...
Like all of you my time to do this is limited but i know right now we have a quorum here that could change the way things go forward...
The dynamics of the task are to rationalize and run race at a consistent standard around Australia that meet world standard..
Now the way i see it EP need their own touring car boxes to measure the cars and if we were to manufacture a box that was affordable so that most clubs could afford them then that's one box ticked..
it doesn't need to be perfect but if we teach them at grassroots level then they know what to expect at national...(off road you do this so well)
having seen somebody put that calendar together is awsome and we should always en devour to lift clubs up rather than knocking them down and stop the clubs competing on same weekend for the same crowd.....every body gets hurt when this happens
any way im willing to help when i can ill get one mock box to Roger to trial and we can go from their
Having been involved in HDCC car club for many years it leeds me to one thing
If we work in a positive constructive way we will move forward with discussion we can make informed opinion and never be scared on going back and reviewing something
uuruu for now orr see you in canberra
Like all of you my time to do this is limited but i know right now we have a quorum here that could change the way things go forward...
The dynamics of the task are to rationalize and run race at a consistent standard around Australia that meet world standard..
Now the way i see it EP need their own touring car boxes to measure the cars and if we were to manufacture a box that was affordable so that most clubs could afford them then that's one box ticked..
it doesn't need to be perfect but if we teach them at grassroots level then they know what to expect at national...(off road you do this so well)
having seen somebody put that calendar together is awsome and we should always en devour to lift clubs up rather than knocking them down and stop the clubs competing on same weekend for the same crowd.....every body gets hurt when this happens
any way im willing to help when i can ill get one mock box to Roger to trial and we can go from their
Having been involved in HDCC car club for many years it leeds me to one thing
If we work in a positive constructive way we will move forward with discussion we can make informed opinion and never be scared on going back and reviewing something
uuruu for now orr see you in canberra
Last edited by JAM Racing; 03-04-2014 at 01:12 AM.