worlds 2008

Fred, I'm glad to hear you want to have good refs. One reason for the names is for identifying the good and bad refs. So if you truly want good refs, you want their name on it. Or at least an easily identifiable number. Since Pizazz started taking reviews of the refs at Sheffield, I brought up that the refs needed to be numbered so we (the coaches and players) could figure out who we think is good and who isn't. Problem came with refs that didn't care to make their number noticeable. I wonder if they sensed that there would be a problem if the players and coaches reviewing the games saw that they were a problem so they made small or light numbers or none at all. With the name on the vest it shouldn't be as much of an issue. You may not get the recognition at the time but by watching the complete game you may figure out which ref made the good calls and which made the crap ones just by seeing their name once and then matching fins or mask or something. I think you should change your priorities to include promoting the refs spending a couple of extra bucks so that the future of the game will be a bit better.

__________________
Just in case you weren't sure, it's official -- CMAS sucks.
Oh yeah, and now they're broke.

Ok duck, you have a point regarding the names or numbers on the shirts. It would make it easier so I see the use of it.

Carols, the comfort of the refs is indeed important and combined with the point above I can understand the reasoning for the vests.

Nonetheless, I wonder why we should agree on colour for the pants of deck refs etc. Yes other sports also have a 'dress code' for refs, but they also have a solid structure when if comes to reffing on an international level and one solid structure regarding training etc. WE don't really have that luxury so far and that should, in my humble opinion, be the priority. That was what I meant exactly.
By the way. The vest discussion is getting us really off topic so maybe to publish it in another thread.

So that the ref outfits issue is back on topic I should have said "for 2008 World's if you want to properly critique the refs then we need to have the identifying markings". That would have worked.

__________________
Just in case you weren't sure, it's official -- CMAS sucks.
Oh yeah, and now they're broke.

In fact we do have standardised referee manuals, these are available on the WAA web site. Also the WAA has a division called the Referees Guild each countries chief referee and level 3 referees nominated by their countries chief ref are members, they have their own web site and mailing list.

If anybody actually bothered to read our development plan they would have seen that the points Fred mentions are a priority in the plan. With limited resources available the area of focus at this time is sorting out and making sure we have the best refs possible for the Durban event, and a proper selection method and criteria for future events.

Once this is done the WAA will be appointing a person to obtain all the refereeing teaching and training aids that are in use around the world, then they will collate this information and present it to the Guild. Once received the guild will be writing up a standardised course for the teaching of referees worldwide.

This is the main thing needed to get a base of competent referees to build on for the future. These things are happening but with any volunteer organisation they just take time.

Now to digress just a little, I must say that I find it extraordinary to read all these comments about what is needed but there has not been one comment on the documents that will set the impetus for the WAA for the next four years, our development plan. Is it that people just don't understand what the plan is about, is it too hard to follow, do people think we don't need one.

Cheers

__________________
WAA The best in Underwater Sports

Graham,

thanks for clearing up some things. It could indeed be in the development plan. I have downloaded all parts available but haven't had/made the time to read them. I'll do so shortly.
Anyhow, it would be good to standardize everything a bit more as certain rules are very different depending on countries. In Europe this is very clear. Certain things are allowed in the Netherlands but not in France and vice versa.

Yet also here language might be a barrier. Our most experienced referee speaks 3 languages quit fluently, but English is unfortunately not one of them. When I was still living in Belgium he printed the mails and showed them to me, but that doesn't work any more now. Would it be possible for me to join the referree guild without being a level 3 referee but just to ease communications? Who should I ask this? Simon maybe?
Which brings me to another interesting question. On to a new thread.

Hi Graham,

If you're looking for comments on these documents to be posted on this underwaterhockeyworld site, it would probably make sense to start a separate thread to keep them organized there.

I have read the docs, and the only comment I'll make at this time is that they are too generic, and therefore will serve as a difficult foundation on which to build the so-called "strategy implementation" document. It appears to me that several of the points and comments in the Aquachallenge docs have been cloned from other more sport-agnostic docs, without critically assessing if they apply to our sport. For example, is it really a key performance indicator of WAA that we should aim for "minimum of 1000 hits per month on national calendar web site"? (And if so, what web site is that exactly?). Is a "poorly skilled and ineffective board" really the number 1 management risk that we face?

Many of those sport-agnostic goals in the docs are certainly desirable (such as fostering good governance), but there's not enough meat here for me to really assess how that is going to be done. I'm assuming that will be part of the strategy implementation doc. Since you've announced that the strategy implementation will be available early in this new year, I'll look forward to seeing that before commenting further.

Tim

Tim go to politicians sop box and then to WAA development plan and there I will respond.

Cheers

__________________
WAA The best in Underwater Sports

graham, i've read through the document and to be completely honest, while i had a few thoughts and on the whole thought most of it looked positive, my overwhelming response was to be irritated and annoyed at the constant use of "aqua challenge" in the document, which inflamed my frustrations at the name change which have by now been forgotten on this site.

considering all the rubbish with cmas, the stated intent from cmas to take action in any case and the apparent irrelevance of the branded name of the sport related to these issues, the change just seems now even more irrelevant.

i'll try to read through it again and ignore it, and maybe find some points for feedback.

__________________
it's more polite on the grating than on the subs bench

What I said or meant to convey is that no country has solid black as an official single national color - ie USA - red/white/blue; Canada - red/white; Australia yellow/green, etc. Red was suggested but at least 1 country has red in their national colors - Canada, and red suit is commonly worn, as dark color, by Canada and Turkey.

__________________
Carol Rose

Hey boys and girls, my 'ref attire' message was intended as informational. Comment all you like. Refs I have contacted, world wide, like the Body Bagz rash vest, and now, we are going with it.

__________________
Carol Rose