As current Manchester rep to the UKHBPA I need to occasionally talk for Manchester on UK issues, sometimes I'll speak on your behalf in a manner that benefits us and as I think you'd want me to. Other times I'll canvas for opinions before taking them back to the almighty UKHBPA headquarters secret meeting room. This thread is where I'll do that, it's also where you can raise any issues you think need raising, if they are to do with our glorious masters.
UKHBPA opinions thread.
Fri, 27/04/2012 - 7:23pm
#1
snottyotter
UKHBPA opinions thread.
1st up, those pesky Irish. Anyone have any strong opinions one way or the other on whether they should be playing in the UK champs. It probably won't be decided by the UKHBPA but it is being discussed at the moment.
I have no problem with them playing. The reasons against them playing are:
They ain't technically part of the UK, and it's the UK champs.
They are pushing to be separated from the UK scene as far as Euro spot allocation goes, and requested their own spot rather than a joint qualification with the UK, in this sense it would strengthen any future spot allocation arguments if they don't play in, what is essentially, a tournament for UK teams.
Reasons for them playing are;
They're from a scene that is closely related to the UK one.
They were part of the UK until they started kicking off about it. (tongue in cheek)
They have played in a previous UK champs.
They are charming fellows and it's always nice to have them around.
As the scene grows it will become more of a contentious issue. To my eyes the Irish teams should have a separate allocation. The UK gets a limited number of allocations, by including the Irish you reduce the chances for UK teams to qualify as there are more teams going for the same number of spaces.
Northern Ireland is UK so should stay in the UK allocation although I could see an argument for letting them choose which one they went with as logistically it would be a lot easier for them to drive south to play games.
ROI should have a separate allocation.
Northern Irish folk should choose which quali they want to play in, but shouldn't be allowed to play in both.
Sorry, mis-understanding. They want separate allocation for the euros. This is about playing in the UK champs in Birmingham, it'll be a no forruns tournament open to teams who play in UK scenes.
when you say "they" do you mean ROI or NI?
NI is like 1 guy.
How are we defining a UK team anyway? If the crazy cannuks came to study at the uni for the year would we let them play??
Yeah, I think it's means you play most of your current polo in a UK scene (or 2 of your players do)
I think that our rep should not be part of the steering group. IMO we need to vote in a rep.
Fair enough, if people are willing to rep, stick your name in here and we can arrange a vote for a week or 2. I am willing to do both but am happy to pass on rep responsibility too.
I think you're assuming that all mhbp players are in support of the ukhbpa. We need more information before we even decide that well have a rep IMO. As it stands there is no mandate so it doesn't really exsist.
That's what is being sorted out at the moment, I'm assuming all MHBP players want to have a say in what that mandate (fnar) will be.
The UKHBPA is going to happen, and eventually it's going to have a say in the future of polo, we should have as big an input in how this is going to shape up as possible, whether or not you agree with what it is the right now, s'all about the future ennit? Think of the children.
At the moment it feels like we're being invited to a gig by a band who haven't practised together yet and don't even know what genre they'll be playing.
Is this anything more than a Cambridge & London love-in?
Yeah. It's a work in progress, there is a big need for a proper constitution and defined roles and responsibility and there will be a long meeting at Cambridge to sort it out. Most input is from London, Cambridge, Birmingham, Cardiff and Me, I'm moaning a lot. You're also not the only people that ain't happy about everything that's gone on so far. I think the main thing is that more input is needed, taking a back seat is counter productive. I'm hoping that, a little like getting involved proactively in Manchester polo has been a big help to the scene recently, getting involved in the forming of the UKHBPA will help there, and also give us a voice in the way it is formed and what comes out the other end.
And it's more like we're being asked to play in a band who haven't practised yet and don't know what genre they'll be playing.
Musical differences aside and, because of the chicken or egg principle that applies to the development and formation of a new national body, it is entirely understandable why we are where we are.
Going forward, I guess it is up to the few non-elected enthusiasts with a shared vision, to make that tangible to the rest of the UK. If there's something of value within that presentation then the process of selecting reps can begin in earnest - only then will the reps will have some idea of what they are standing for and the scenes will get the right to exercise their vote locally.
Rob's been the sole guy from our scene to roll his sleeves up on this so far and I think we're grateful for his continued activities and observations, yet it is right and proper at some stage to canvas the MHBP subscribers to see if there are others who are interested/have a skillset etc. going forward. Whether the rep role reports to the Steering Group or directly rather depends on the body's constitution and guidelines.
Perhaps more importantly at this stage, the MHBP needs to know/decide whether they want to be within a UK body (and therefore to an extent under it/maybe to be managed or controlled by it). Hence we need that UKHBPA representation or resume as soon as possible with a view to holding a local poll. As a certain polo powerbroker has already cast doubt on the 'legitimacy' or scope of MHBP in representing Manchester polo holistically, don't be surprised if there aren't representatives sought from other Manchester cycling groups that play polo.
A HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
ROFL
Sorry, I needed to express that in case said powerbroker ever stumbles over here to turn their nose up at us.
Actually Imogen has just started the YMFBGCAG (Young Mancunians Faggot Bike Golf Community Association Group)
OK, the UKHBPA forum is now readable to all, go check it how and tell me how wonderful/shit I've been doing.
Been there and lost a little bit of my life I'll never get back... ;-)
That's the hope for everyone.
Going to be getting some of the constitution type stuff out of the way for this tonight before a meeting in Cambridge. Anything anyone wants in it? Any ideas for anything?
Maximum tenure for reps: 2 years, 1 year gap?
Do you want me to summarise all the points I've made about this over the last three months? Remember to make sure the Qualies format is robust and, to use John H's euphemism, 'accurate'...
A list of things to remember would be good.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JKTr8Z7IczMwnPbMvELpI2BOANdJoPNILoUC...
Rough 1st draft of the constitution, please go have a look and leave comments on it.
In no particular order:
There needs to be clarity on representation/affiliation/membership - define 'scene' for example. Some key terms are too open to distortion right now.
There is a contradiction between the general wording that goes in the direction of affiliated scenes opting in to governance - there would also need to be an exit process for completeness - and then being able to join the body as an individual? Why do either or both?
Hypothetically, MHBP could vote to join (be 'affiliated to') the body and vote to send an elected representative. There could also be 20 individuals outside the MHBP group who also join from Manchester - how might they be represented, could they overturn an MHBP voted view?
IMHO - the body states that they exist to get scenes to become organised (dare one say it - like us) and then become affiliated and represented. However the body needs to have thought through its stance on individual affiliations where an organised regional body exists. The body might want to set out templates or a range of realistic scenarios where by regionally the body can impact across the UK. As a UK body it can't have black spots or it doesn't have credible representation - put another way, the body needs mass sign up at the start, not dribs and drabs. Therefore countdown to a start date and prepare well for it across the reps/regions.
All representatives must be credible - therefore the body must also define ways in which it will accept mandated reps from the start. There can't be made-up rules going forward for reps to suddenly pop up and influence key issues without parity with other scenes with larger playing numbers. How are the regions divided up and do they reflect/balance out the number of players being represented? Make a map (with approx player numbers) to show us it's fair.
I take it 'officers' mean John H and Max type 'roles' - it'd be useful to have stated the appointment procedures and the limitations (of influence) of these positions to protect the credibility of the reps.
What's the body's take on independent polo activities eg. if you perceive the LO or the Invitational as independent tournaments and the owners don't want to play by your rules/or say Sky decide to promote bike polo tourneys?
Your next steps should be more about selling the proposition and the model, you can't lead with a constitution and expect to set the UK on fire.
More as I think of it.
Keep it coming, officers is anyone we need to do stuff for us, could be Bill as rules officer, or someone as treasurer or someone as british cycling contact. I don't imagine there will be too many rules to not play by, we're not going to be running much hopefully, getting other people to do stuff, with a bit of ratifying here and there.
Missed the bit about individuals joining but will get back to it, will you highlight and write these on the actual document too. cheers
^ Nope - why have a rep and bark yourself... ;-)
Pages