My thoughts are:
After GH had:
Taken expensive legal action against CMAS through CAS
Deliberately ignored CMAS rules at Sheffield
Published minutes of a meeting referring to “putting a gun to CMAS’s head”
Deliberately undermined BARI
I am not surprised CMAS decided to take disciplinary action against him.
Most particularly having requested a CMAS vote on the participation of Jersey, which he lost, Graham ignored the ruling. This alone is probably enough to warrant disciplinary proceedings.
In the defence stated, it is claimed there was no dual participation of athletes at Sheffield. According to the web-site of that event, both French and Australian Open Elite and Masters Elite teams had dual registered Luc Horvais and Greg Bush. I don’t see why dual registration is a problem, but rules have to be obeyed within governing bodies and part of the defence given was that it didn’t occur.
Without checking every issue myself with UWHC and with the CMAS execs involved I cannot satisfy myself the rights and wrongs of every issue. I just can’t regard the information I hear from UWHC as unquestionably fair and accurate see also this post:
GB Under Water Hockey :: View topic - Unjust CMAS
I don’t have the time or inclination to check into all of the issues of the disciplinary but I think it is reasonable in the circumstances for CMAS to pursue disciplinary action to get rid of a President who appears to be constantly working against them.
Graham’s actions can be argued to be in the best interests of hockey and Sheffield can only be judged to have been a huge success for us. However to be a part of a body such as CMAS it is necessary to stick to their rules. Ignoring their rulings is likely to lead to the current situation which I regard as contrived. Challenging CMAS rules then ignoring their rules is a route which could only realistically lead to where we are today and I regard these actions as having deliberately split the sport, although I expect Graham will disagree with this.
There is a perfectly valid debate to be had about whether hockey should split from CMAS and whether WAA or CMAS offer a better future. If all nations could go to WAA, the decision makes itself.
It does concern me that I find some of the information put out by the UWHC to be inaccurate or biased against CMAS and a poor basis for making decisions about our future. However I am also concerned about CMAS, mainly because hockey is not their primary focus but also some of the valid reasons that UWHC raise (especially Masters and Juniors).