Tirol International Open PPC 1500; Hopfgarten, Austria; 8th to 11th October 2004.

Sparks

gouda wrote:

The report issued is on NRPAI letterhead so presumably comes with the authority of the NRPAI,if not the Chairman and Treasurer should disown it,otherwise it is seen as been sanctioned by the Committee. Wouldn't you agree?

I would, that's one of the reasons I complained in the first place.

I doubt if you would get access to his (McDowell) office but even if you did you are not one of the people authorised by the NRPAI to negogiate on this.

Indeed; but who on the team was authorised by the NRPAI to sign the NRPAI up to the WA1500 body? Or extend invitations for PPC coaches? Or to even form the team in the first place? It has to be one set of rules for all, not a "make-it-up-as-you-go-along" approach.

I understand there are a few people who the DoJ recognise as representatives of the NRPAI with whom they have been dealing for a few years now. Perhaps you are on the team but I have not been made aware of it previously,so I stand to be corrcted on this one.

Nope, I've been deputised to be on the NRPAI committee on occasion in the past, but I've not negotiatied on their behalf. However, the DoJ does recognise other bodies apart from the NRPAI - they've met with the NTSA in the past independently. However, because we're a part of the NRPAI, we have certain ground rules as to what we can do. That's a part of the whole ethos of being in the NRPAI. If, however, people can ignore that ethos... well, that way lies chaos and would be wholly unproductive.

Sparks

Just got the ISSF newsletter yesterday morning, and noted this passage in it relating to the refusal of the application of the IPSA to be recognised by the General Association of International Sport Federations in the SportAccord meeting this year in Korea (SportAccord is the largest and most important sports administration meeting of the year):

The ISSF ... once again, would like to remind all members, officials, trainers, coaches and athletes of our international federation of the decision of our General Assembly 2000 in Sydney, Australia to not cooperate with the IPSC and that no member of the ISSF shall participate in any practical shooting activities. The shooting events practiced by the IPSC are excellent tests of practical firearms skills but they are not sporting events in the ISSF understanding. Military and police shooting activities as well as training activities for body guards and for self defence purposes are necessary and practical but certainly cannot be considered as sports activities within the Olympic movement.

It's dragging over old ground, I know, but I thought people might want to see why I thought the thread was ever justified in the first place...

Rovi

...and that no member of the ISSF shall participate in any practical shooting activities

Does this amount to an equivalent of 'The Ban' (GAA speak)?

les45

I presume Mark you meant IPSC, and not the IPSA !. As far as we are concerned our members can shoot ISSF , for our part we welcome any and all to compete once they comply with our rules and regulations and those of the State.

DVC John FitzGerald RD I.P.S.A

Sparks

Does this amount to an equivalent of 'The Ban' (GAA speak)?

Well, yes and no. It's 'The Ban' applied to member federations, not to actual individual shooters. Ie. an NTSA shooter could shoot IPSA competitions, but the NTSA could never be involved in IPSA stuff as an organisation without falling foul of the ISSF.

Sparks

les45 wrote:

I presume Mark you meant IPSC, and not the IPSA !

Blip! Sorry John, bit of a typo - I did indeed mean the IPSC.

As far as we are concerned our members can shoot ISSF , for our part we welcome any and all to compete once they comply with our rules and regulations and those of the State.

And it's the same for the NTSA - anyone can shoot an ISSF match and any NTSA member is free to shoot an IPSC match. It's just that the two organisations have to remain seperate in thought, word and deed. The NTSA, if sanctioned by the ISSF, would find itself in very hot water indeed. In fact, the sanction put to the french shooting association was derecognition of their association - which would mean noone from france could go to the Olympics, the World Championships, any of the World Cups, the World Cup Finals, the European Championships or any of the other Continental Championships. Without that ability to send people to those matches, the NTSA would have very little reason to exist at all, to be honest.

les45

I would hope that at least in our little patch of ground all sports shooters could work together. If at some stage a facility becomes avialable that we could both use ,would the ISSF object !

Sparks

I don't think that such a facility could ever be built les (assuming you're talking about a full-blown, running-and-shooting IPSC match). The demands of the two styles of shooting are too different. But if it could be built (and was), then so long as the two organisations weren't linked, the ISSF wouldn't object. You'd have to have a third party organisation that actually ran the range and keep both NGBs out of it, but frankly, that's what you would do anyway - it's not any NGB's job to run ranges.