| so Duck, are you wondering about the sense of following:
the president of a commission of an organisation we are leaving - a president who was elected by votes at a cmas meeting - not an uwh one
who in turn has appointed all the members of his commission - again, not elected by uwh folks [just hand-picked by the president]
into a sport whose name has been hurriedly decided upon without the input of those who participate in the sport
which is using rules of the OLD organisation to justify imposing new rules about what gear you can/can't use [depending on which ref is poolside at the time]
yet claiming that the rules of the old organisation are so stifling we must break from them
o.k. i am using rules of the code in one example and rules of the parent organisation in another. but i think you get my drift.
my BIG question: how soon after the split from cmas, assuming it happens - and graham seems determined that it will, will the aqua challenge committee [or perhaps we can refer to them from here on in as the 'junta'] resign all positions and allow free voting by the players/national committees to ELECT a new president and committee members from nominations from member countries.
i'm happy enough if uwh decides to leave cmas, but i really don't want to swap one version of non-elected leadership for another. how soon until we see detailed manifesto/constitution that outlines how our new era of self-determination will work
will we truly have self-determination? or will we have the same old secrecies under a new banner, without input from players?
gee, i really got going here didn't i? sorry folks if the diatribe above is getting off-topic or if i got incoherent.
hopefully somewhere in the mess i asked insightful questions and raised serious issues. |