Fra Egm

[AndyJ]

[quote=Stick;1177]...Well, I've been to a few races over the past 6 weeks but seen nothing of a EGM petition. And the link in the thread doesn't seem to work for me so I've still seen nought.

This is the missing link-
http://nmatrmiinfo.blogspot.com/2007...l-meeting.html

[end]

Yeeeees.

I see that this was posted by Norman Matthews who, I understand, also stomped out of an FRA Committee a couple of years ago in a hissyfit.

How do you spell malcontents?

[Tom]

How do you spell malcontents?

d-e-m-o-c-r-a-c-y

[socks]

reckon crocy-made is better use of those letters

[Tom]

reckon crocy-made is better use of those letters

Creamy cod is nicer. I'll go and get it in my comedy car.

[socks]

OK OK - well done!

[Wheeze]

Dominion:that is just for starters.

The sub-committee was set up at a Special FRA Committee held on 5th October and Dave J knows this because he was there; but rather than serve on it he resigned all his FRA offices.

Dave has never let the facts get in the way of his opinions and so all his pronouncements relating to UKA should be taken with a large lorry-load of salt.

The sub-committee and the FRA Committee should be left to do the job they were elected at the AGM to do (that is the AGM Dave could not be botherd to attend) and his rabble-rousing hinders this work.

I agree that the sub-committee should be allowed to get on with the job it was given. It's not long to wait and the decisions based on the findings will have ramifications for years.
But it's quite unnecessary to put the boot into a fellow runner, especially someone who has given so much service over the years and clearly has a passion for the sport. Most unsporting.

[Bladerunner]

Wheeze, unfortunately this has now become a 'personality issue' as much as an issue as whether we should remain affiliated to UK Athletics or not. There are people on both sides of the argument who are so deeply entrenched it won't matter what the sub-committee find they won't change their position.

The only way this issue can be put to bed is that everyone who is interested should read the sub committee report then their should be a postal vote which all members can take part in with the simple question should the FRA remain affiliated to UK Athletics...yes or no

[Wheeze]

I reckon you are right Bladerunner. Having not met the main protagonists in real space I don't have a view one way or the other. I just want to see all the views represented in a calm and fair fashion. Only in that way can the subcommittee get on with it in a balanced environment. All parties should make an effort to depersonalise this as far as possible.

I read the flyer and, yes, you could nit pick some of the detail and, yes, it jumps the gun but it represented a fairly held point of view.

[Fellhound]

Totally agree with Wheeze, and Bladerunner too makes a good point.

I still feel there's nothing wrong with DJ's call for an EGM though. It probably wouldn't happen until after the sub committee had reported back anyway.

I previously commented that the committee will ultimately have to do what the majority of members want anyway and Brett replied "hasn't it always?" Well, yes it probably has but it often seems to delay the inevitable for as long as possible.

This issue is causing an entrenchment of positions as Bladerunner says and I think there's a danger of it tearing the Association apart. A postal vote may be the only truly democratic way to settle the issue in the end.

I am firmly on the side of Dave Jones on this and think the sooner we make the break the better. It will be a painful road to get from where we are now to where the British Orienteering Federation are but the sooner we get started on it the better - in my view.

The current sub-committee's deliberations should be the last chance for procrastination before this is put to the members.