ICU presidet resignation

hunnymonster

Ok Guys, for the second time I've had to delete a thread about the resignation because of legal threats. You were all warned the first time but the thread had degenerated the second time. It's a real shame, there is a very interesting discussion going on but unless posters can keep the discussion to the known facts and stop making assumptions, we cannot allow any discussion. Final warning!

Truley

KenHy

Did the whole thread need to be deleted? - hard to know what not to discuss when nothing seems to be on the table. That for me is the biggest problem here - nobody has any idea what's actually happening. We keep hearing different contradictory stories.

Who situation is farcical anyway - everyone involved in the running of the ICU should resign and get an entirely new group of people in. Maybe would give a chance to sort out whatever problems are there. No slur on all those who put in good work running the ICU, but clearly the presence of particular individuals is causing problems and in the interest of the sport they should step aside, even if they have acted entirely honorably and in good faith through all these debacles.

hunnymonster

Yeah sorry folks, when I tried to just delete the bits that needed to be removed, what remains didn't make any sense (from a langaugae point of view not een talking about content) so I removed the whole thing.

Alannah NiC

KenHy,
best suggestion to date regarding all resigning. If board does not resign the clubs can force this to happen by calling an EDM. It will take 10 clubs to make this happen. If the existing board decides not to call an EDM within 30 days at the clubs request then the 10 clubs can appoint a chairman and meet in any case.

If this happens then the clubs can dismiss the board and agree a new structure and elect a new executive. QED.

multisport

@Alannah NiC, if you read the statement issued by Canoeing Ireland you will see that they have stated that there will be and EDM, they have not set a date for it yet but it will be in early 2013.
Someone with more knowledge might have the answer for me, would the EDM be a single issue meeting with the sole purpose of appointing a new exec? or could there be a full agenda where items could be submitted, rules changes proposed etc?
Canoeing Ireland Statement

@KenHy, If all board members were to resign it would force each discipline to call and EDM too as it's the chair/director of each discipline sits on the board, do you mean that all members of all boards should resign?
Why should all the board resign?, Pat has stated publicly that there is no wrongdoing on their part.

Given what has been said on this and other boards recently, I applaud the bravery of anyone willing to run for office in our federation, it seems that you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Thanks to those of you who have given up your time free of charge.

Alannah NiC

Multisport, if you look through the ISC governance document, the discipline chairs may have to resign anyway as they are they represent vested interest groups. The EDM could be a single issue agenda, the appointment of a new board for Canoeing Ireland which adheres to the ISC governance policy.

“Principle 1.7: That each board should be structured to reflect the knowledge of the sport and
sports industry and the complex operating environment facing the modern sporting organisation.
Normally, it is envisaged that a board will: Comprise between five and nine directors
• Have a sufficient blend of expertise and skills necessary to effectively carry out its role
• Have all directors being independent, regardless of whether they are elected or appointed
• Have the ability to make a limited number of external appointments to the board to fill skills gaps etc. etc.

Such a change may be aspirational but the clubs can force the above if the board of Canoeing Ireland don't call an EDM following their January meeting.

nouse4aname

Alannah NiC wrote: »

Multisport, if you look through the ISC governance document, the discipline chairs may have to resign anyway as they are they represent vested interest groups. The EDM could be a single issue agenda, the appointment of a new board for Canoeing Ireland which adheres to the ISC governance policy.

“Principle 1.7: That each board should be structured to reflect the knowledge of the sport and
sports industry and the complex operating environment facing the modern sporting organisation.
Normally, it is envisaged that a board will: Comprise between five and nine directors
• Have a sufficient blend of expertise and skills necessary to effectively carry out its role
• Have all directors being independent, regardless of whether they are elected or appointed
• Have the ability to make a limited number of external appointments to the board to fill skills gaps etc. etc.

Such a change may be aspirational but the clubs can force the above if the board of Canoeing Ireland don't call an EDM following their January meeting.

Alannah, like you I'm hoping an EDM occurs as soon as possible. But surely the purpose of the EDM will be to elect a new executive no? What you're suggesting is a complete rewrite of the current constitution. All because Pat couldn't get his motion past the post?

The board is and always has been made up of the executive plus the chairs of each technical discipline (as far back as i can remember anyway). The very reason we have the discipline chairs there is to "have a sufficient blend of expertise and skills necessary to effectively carry out its role". With such a diverse range of disciplines in our sport, is it not a good thing to have representation from each? Why would anyone want less diversity on our board?

These chairs are elected by ordinary members of this organization at their respective discipline AGM's. Actually, the exception to that rule is the TDU where only super-duper TDU members can vote to elect who represents them... (Am i once again incorrect on my TDU trivia???) The notion that these chairs are somehow parachuted onto the board is absolute nonsense. I was at the marathon AGM 2 years ago and at a very rough head count, there was over 150 people in the room. There wasn't enough space for all the members that showed up that day to elect the committee. To me, that is a far better representation of our sport than the pitiful turn out at the recent general ADM in October.

KenHy

nouse4aname wrote: »

the exception to that rule is the TDU where only super-duper TDU members can vote to elect who represents them... (Am i once again incorrect on my TDU trivia???)

That's correct - I think that should change also, instructors tend to be recreational whitewater paddlers while the remit of the TDU covers coaching and obviously those been coached and instructed have a stake in what they do too so voting should really be open to all ICU members.

On calling for resignations, I'm not implying that anyone did anything wrong. But in the interest of the sport's development (maybe even survival at this stage) I think that everyone involved in the management level of the ICU should step aside and allow a clean slate start. For me that's the executive, the GM and anyone else who was appointed directly to a management level in the ICU - that would exclude board members who are representing their disciple as they are there on a different basis and as far as I can see that is an issue for nobody. The presence of particular individuals are clearly an issue that is causing disharmony in the sport. They should recognize that and step aside to allow the sport to progress, it should end all this nonsense and a new AGM with a transparent appointment of a new GM we could get a new start.

Also needed I think is a specific representative to represent non-competitive paddlers is needed on the ICU board, one of the big problems as I see it now is that many recreational paddlers believe that the ICU does noting for them. They turn to the TDU to fill this role, but it is not within it's remit. Nor should it be, they are there to develop training and coaching progromes. If there was an actual recreational committee (whose chair set on board) who promoted recreational paddling it could go a long way to fixing the perception that the ICU doesn't do anything for recreational paddlers. The types of things I could see them doing would be running/supporting paddling events such as Paddlefest, carnafest and Galway fest, the whitewater race league (I know competitive, but an non ICF disciplne), supporting access, etc...

talkin sense

<snipped personal comments> - Zuppy

Why would anyone resign? Just because Pat MacAlinney could not live with the consequences of three democratic votes on which he was beaten?

It is clear that in his mind he is the only one who is right and everyone else is wrong. He was outvoted by representatives of the Sports Counicil, of The Irish Olympic Council, members of the Board and members of the Board again. He walked and nobody told him to walk. He and he alone must live with the consequences of that decision. Nobody else has done anything wrong so why should anybody else care? Believe it or not this is how adults behave in situations like this.

His behaviour has been reprehensible <in my opinion> but then again he <must IMO> feels that he is right and everybody else is wrong!

I am sick of these allegations of impropriety in relation to the GM. Who cares what he is called - GM, HEAD BANANA, HEAD HONCHO, CHIEF BOTTLE WASHER etc. etc. What you and all the other conspiracy nut jobs have missed is that he is employed at a rate of almost €40,000 a year less than the previous CEO.

Just because you <personal comments snipped> say there was wrongdoing does not make it so. it is so easy to throw out wild allegations but not a single shred of evidence has ever been produced to back up these wild allegations. Is it any wonder at the two previous threads were taken down on foot of threats of legal action. Put real verifiable evidence on the table or shut up!.

Shrill voices and persistent empty accusations are meaningless. So give it up all you lot. Unless you have something constructive to say keep your wild allegations to yourselves. If you really want canoeing to move forward in this country put some solutions forward and quit your pointless bellyaching.

What is past is past - if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. The main problem Canoeing Ireland has had over the last eighteen months is the divisive approach adopted by Pat MacAlinney and his fellows.

As President he should have worked to bring the organisation together instead of which he ran a clear agenda designed to badmouth and exclude anyone he did not agree with. He was a disaster for canoeing in Ireland and has wasted the last year and half in trying to destroy an organisation that he should have been trying to pull together and revive.

He deserves no credit whatsoever for attempting to break up an organisation which although not perfect has the best interests of the sport at heart. The Board is well shot of him!

nouse4aname

KenHy wrote: »

On calling for resignations, I'm not implying that anyone did anything wrong. But in the interest of the sport's development (maybe even survival at this stage) I think that everyone involved in the management level of the ICU should step aside and allow a clean slate start.

What makes you think the sport isn't developing?

- Domestic slalom was dead and buried 3 years ago. This was directly due to actions of the former CEO. We now have regular training weekends, a healthy junior development squad and a full domestic calender of events.

- The development of a dedicated Whitewater Centre at the Sluice in Lucan is past planning stages and looks set to happen in the near future.

- The marathon committee are distributing stable K-boats to clubs across the country to encourage paddlers into kayak racing. The wildwater committee are following suit.

-General membership of Canoeing Ireland was apparently up in 2012 (haven't seen the numbers yet myself).

-The Liffey Descent made a profit for the first time in nearly 15 years.

- We qualified 3 paddlers for the Olympics. 2 finished in the top 10!

Talk of the sports survival is nonsense. The sport is in a much healthier position now than it was under the previous CEO's regime. If i was judging the GM on how the sport has done in the last year, i'd find it hard to fault him.

KenHy wrote: »

Also needed I think is a specific representative to represent non-competitive paddlers is needed on the ICU board, one of the big problems as I see it now is that many recreational paddlers believe that the ICU does noting for them. They turn to the TDU to fill this role, but it is not within it's remit. Nor should it be, they are there to develop training and coaching progromes. If there was an actual recreational committee (whose chair set on board) who promoted recreational paddling it could go a long way to fixing the perception that the ICU doesn't do anything for recreational paddlers. The types of things I could see them doing would be running/supporting paddling events such as Paddlefest, carnafest and Galway fest, the whitewater race league (I know competitive, but an non ICF disciplne), supporting access, etc...

A fantastic idea! I think most paddlers would back you 100% on this. I would encourage you to put pen to paper and formally propose this!

Chavways

Jaysus , there's an awful lot of new accounts springing up around here. Why did you have to make another account nouse4aname?

nouse4aname

Nah man, i keep getting my posts deleted! Every time a thread gets pulled i'm back to square 1... haha

What does a man have to do around here to get his post count up! :P

cheekymonkey1

if the exisisting ceo / manager is doing the job at a similar standard to the previous one all at a lower price to the previous one , i feel that is good start,
in the absence of any actual errors of competence and any actual breaking of clearly laid out rules or policies that are clearly identified at job start, with clear descriptions of what consequences may be if targets not met etc you might as well juggle jellyfish. we are trying to develop paddlesport not advance on a beachhead in wartime. niall.

Canoemedia

Just a heads-up for those debating our recreational vs competition orientation, we are an affiliate organisation of the ICF and they have officers for the following disciplines:

Ocean Racing, Sprint, Slalom, Marathon, Wildwater, Canoe Polo, Dragon Boat Racing, Freestyle and a Canoeing for All rep. (to develop Para-Canoe among other things). They also recognise waveski, rafting and canoe sailing.

As the objectives (below) and specific disciplines highlight, the ICF is a sporting organization, rather than simply an umbrella body to develop and train instructors or recreational canoeing in general. We should be cogniscant of the structure and objectives of the world body when we are parsing the ICU structure and future aims.


The objectives of the ICF are:
1. At an international level with the priority given to maintaining canoeing as an Olympic discipline.
2. To ensure that both genders are represented on all decision-making bodies, including working committees appointed from time to time.
3. To settle disputes that may arise within the sport among its National Federations and to be the highest authority.
4. To ensure that international competitions are governed by Competition Rules adapted to the development of the sport of canoeing.
5. To encourage and safeguard the organisation of international competitions open to all National Federations.
6. To establish international championships.
7. To co-operate with the Organising Committee of Olympic and Regional Games.
8. To encourage the establishment of National Federations in countries where no such organisation exists.
9. To take measures to prevent endangering the health of athletes.
10. To encourage the development of recreational canoeing as a contribution to the healthy development of all ages.
11. To protect nature and pursue the rights of access for the sport of canoeing by adopting environmentally friendly practices within the sport and respecting other users.

KenHy

talkin sense wrote: »

To KenHy -
<snipped by Mod>

why would anyone resign? Just because Pat MacAlinney could not live with the consequences of three democratic votes on which he was beaten?

It is clear that in his mind he is the only one who is right and everyone else is wrong. He was outvoted by representatives of the Sports Counicil, of The Irish Olympic Council, members of the Board and members of the Board again. He walked and nobody told him to walk. He and he alone must live with the consequences of that decision. Nobody else has done anything wrong so why should anybody else care? Believe it or not this is how adults behave in situations like this.

His behaviour has been reprehensible <IMO>

I am sick of these allegations of impropriety in relation to the GM. Who cares what he is called - GM, HEAD BANANA, HEAD HONCHO, CHIEF BOTTLE WASHER etc. etc. What you and all the other <'s may> have missed is that he is employed at a rate of almost €40,000 a year less than the previous CEO.

Just because you and a number of other<'s> say there was wrongdoing does not make it so. it is so easy to throw out wild allegations but not a single shred of evidence has ever been produced to back up these wild allegations. Is it any wonder at the two previous threads were taken down on foot of threats of legal action. Put real verifiable evidence on the table or shut up!.

Shrill voices and persistent empty accusations are meaningless. So give it up all you lot. Unless you have something constructive to say keep your wild allegations to yourselves. If you really want canoeing to move forward in this country put some solutions forward and quit your pointless bellyaching.

What is past is past - if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. The main problem Canoeing Ireland has had over the last eighteen months is the divisive approach adopted by Pat MacAlinney and his fellow travellers.

As President he should have worked to bring the organisation together instead of which he ran a clear agenda designed to badmouth and exclude anyone he did not agree with. He was a disaster for canoeing in Ireland and has wasted the last year and half in trying to destroy an organisation that he should have been trying to pull together and revive.

He deserves no credit whatsoever for attempting to break up an organisation which although not perfect has the best interests of the sport at heart. The Board is well shot of him!

I think you'll find that I never said that the GM did anything wrong, in fact I said the opposite. Reread my previous post and you'll see that. If you want to ask me questions please ask me about stuff I actual said.

@Nouse4aname - I'm not saying that nothing good has happened over the past 18 months, but you can't deny that there is significant disharmony in the sport at present and at this stage I can't see a way past it without a clean slate start. Nothing personal against the GM (whom I also don't know personally), but if the process was restarted in a clear and transparent manor where procedural flaws such as the ones Seanieb point's. <No linking to other fora which may compromise this thread AGAIN> can't be made. I'd have no problem with the current occupant of the position applying again - if he's as good as he's been made out to be at the job surly with 18 months more experience of the role he'd be a stand out candidate in a properly run process?

Although I will point out that some of your points on Irish Paddlesport development are either nothing to do with the GMs performance or can be looked at differently - our Olympic performance was with one CANI athlete, one trained in Poland and another who was an international class paddler for about a decade before the current GM came on the scene.

As for the Liffey Descent profit - that was on the back of an ridiculous entry fee which should never have been allowed - I see that as a black mark - €50 to paddle the Liffey was madness, it should be €20 at max to encourage mass participation.

On top of that the training centre at the liffey seems to be much less used then in the past, I'm on that stretch of water several times a week during the summer and there was a noticeable decrease in courses run. and what happened the alpine progrome this summer? It was much restricted on previous years which by all accounts seemed to be very successful (based on the numbers of Irish Paddlers I would have met in France & Italy every year)

All and all every thing isn't rosy in the camp. And I think a clean slate would be the best way to try and fix the problems.

nouse4aname wrote: »

A fantastic idea! I think most paddlers would back you 100% on this. I would encourage you to put pen to paper and formally propose this!

How exactly does one do that? I can't see anything on the website.

edit - Actually quite a lot of the website is out of date, another black mark! On that topic does anyone know the current make up of the board as ->http://canoe.ie/en-us/information/aboutthecanoeunion/structureoftheirishcanoeunion.aspx is out of date by a number of months (even before the recent resignations)

adrianshanahan

talkin sense wrote: »

. The Board is well shot of him!

For clarification do you say this as a member of the board?

Zuppy

Mod Note:

OK! Enough of the name calling, to be honest I think it is childish and you all can refrain from it as I will no longer be editing such posts but deleting the whole post and handing out sanctions (as per charter and rules).

Second, no allegations of improper conduct without proof, this includes the links to another forum (in this case the IWW link which is the main reason this thread got deleted twice already). I have no bother with links to statements or official sites (or even the site in question) but conjecture on other fora can't be tolerated due to legal threats.

If you are going to say something that may be mistook for fact, preface it with the fact it is your opinion or belief. - a tip for not getting sued or getting boards sued. If it is false or affects someone character, avoid saying it.

Read the charter and the terms of use for this board and boards in general if you are in doubt or haven't already.

Thanks and please keep this thread alive as personally find it one of the most interesting in long time.

nouse4aname

KenHy wrote: »

@Nouse4aname - I'm not saying that nothing good has happened over the past 18 months, but you can't deny that there is significant disharmony in the sport at present and at this stage I can't see a way past it without a clean slate start. Nothing personal against the GM (whom I also don't know personally), but if the process was restarted in a clear and transparent manor where procedural flaws such as the ones Seanieb point's out on <URL not allowed - zuppy> can't be made. I'd have no problem with the current occupant of the position applying again - if he's as good as he's been made out to be at the job surly with 18 months more experience of the role he'd be a stand out candidate in a properly run process?

An independent member of the Irish Sports Council, an independent member of the Irish Olympic Committee, and Pat himself all sat on that hiring panel. If you're questioning their decision, then you are questioning the morals and ethics of the highest sporting organization in this country... They made the decision; the board ratified it. Its done. For reasons known only to himself, Pat has tried twice now to circumvent that decision. On both occasions, he has failed. Calling for the resignation of the entire board is to my mind a third attempt to circumvent the original decision. It seems to me that Pat and the TDU simply wanted someone else in the job and are willing to go to any lengths to get that person. Again, their motives for that remain unclear.

Meanwhile the rest of us simply get on with paddling, coaching, volunteering while the TDU and Pat continue to throw tantrums. This "disharmony" you speak of is theirs and theirs alone.

KenHy wrote: »

Although I will point out that some of your points on Irish Paddlesport development are either nothing to do with the GMs performance or can be looked at differently - our Olympic performance was with one CANI athlete, one trained in Poland and another who was an international class paddler for about a decade before the current GM came on the scene.

Polish lad only got the chance to race for us because of efforts made by the Sprint Committee and GM to secure a passport for him. He'd been living in Ireland for 5 years and was entitled to race for us. Without considerable work by the GM, this would not have happened... Bare in mind i'm only commenting on the work done by the GM here, not on whether its a good thing to have foreign paddlers representing us. I'd love if we had our own C1 paddlers going to the Games, but if this lad has been living here for years then best of luck to him. Maybe it'll help develop the discipline here!

KenHy wrote: »

As for the Liffey Descent profit - that was on the back of an ridiculous entry fee which should never have been allowed - I see that as a black mark - €50 to paddle the Liffey was madness, it should be €20 at max to encourage mass participation.

Down from the 65 euros that it used to be (under the previous regime)... The Descent made a profit this year because of substantial savings and cost cutting by the organizing committee and GM. Actually, there was no organizing committee in previous years (chalk that one up to the GM too). The previous CEO ran the whole thing with an iron fist, and consistently lost money on it. I fully admit that it is still overpriced, but progress has definitely been made. We need to find a big sponsor if we're going to get it back to the standard it used to be.

KenHy wrote: »

the training centre at the liffey seems to be much less used then in the past, I'm on that stretch of water several times a week during the summer and there was a noticeable decrease in courses run. and what happened the alpine progrome this summer? It was much restricted on previous years which by all accounts seemed to be very successful (based on the numbers of Irish Paddlers I would have met in France & Italy every year)

Can't really comment on that. I'd like to see the course numbers myself but it could be due to factors outside the control of the GM (ie- demand may be down). Same applies for the Alpine trips. It may have been cost cutting or it may have been demand or it may have been a combination of the two...

As you stated yourself "Some of your points are either nothing to do with the GMs performance or can be looked at differently"

KenHy

nouse4aname wrote: »

Down from the 65 euros that it used to be (under the previous regime)... The Descent made a profit this year because of substantial savings and cost cutting by the organizing committee and GM. Actually, there was no organizing committee in previous years (chalk that one up to the GM too). The previous CEO ran the whole thing with an iron fist, and consistently lost money on it. I fully admit that it is still overpriced, but progress has definitely been made. We need to find a big sponsor if we're going to get it back to the standard it used to be.

I paid €40 for the 2011 race - which was still too much IMO. I would not have paid €65 for it. €40 was pushing it and if I don't think I'd have bothered paying €50 this year (although been out of the country on the day meant I didn't have to consider it)

nouse4aname wrote: »

Can't really comment on that. I'd like to see the course numbers myself but it could be due to factors outside the control of the GM (ie- demand may be down). Same applies for the Alpine trips. It may have been cost cutting or it may have been demand or it may have been a combination of the two...

On the courses - well I know demand for courses (i.e. run by other clubs/providers) remains strong. I don't know the details of why/how there was less ICU courses this year but I don't see it being demand driven.

nouse4aname

KenHy wrote: »

How exactly does one do that? I can't see anything on the website.

If you're a member of a club, you can get them to propose a motion prior to the EDM/ADM. Otherwise i think you need 10 signatures on your motion. I can rustle up most of the signatures for you no problem, but you'll easily do it yourself. Its a great idea and based on the previous post by Canoemedia, it should actually bring us more in-line with the ICF structure (canoeing for all rep) . I doubt you'll have any objections to the motion. It'll require work though; setting up committees from scratch is a pain in the ar$e! But there are more than enough good people out there in recreational paddling to make this work.


Listen, you've good ideas and unlike others, you're willing to at least rationally argue these issues. I agree with quite a few of your points; its just we strongly disagree on one. I cannot agree that firing the GM/asking him to resign is in the best interests of Canoeing Ireland as a whole. It may be in the best interests of a select few (TDU springs to mind) but not for the rest of the sport. This is especially true when we have someone who is doing a far better job for 40,000 less than his predecessor (i think we can all agree on that). If he's doing a good job, then it simply doesn't make sense. It creates more uncertainty, creates a power vacuum in the sport and takes us all back 12 months. We've made great progress last year, and we should be trying to continue on that path!

Zuppy

nouse4aname wrote: »

Nah man, i keep getting my posts deleted! Every time a thread gets pulled i'm back to square 1... haha

What does a man have to do around here to get his post count up! :P

Suck it up and post more sense.

nouse4aname wrote: »

What makes you think the sport isn't developing?

- Domestic slalom was dead and buried 3 years ago. This was directly due to actions of the former CEO. We now have regular training weekends, a healthy junior development squad and a full domestic calender of events.

- The development of a dedicated Whitewater Centre at the Sluice in Lucan is past planning stages and looks set to happen in the near future.

- The marathon committee are distributing stable K-boats to clubs across the country to encourage paddlers into kayak racing. The wildwater committee are following suit.

-General membership of Canoeing Ireland was apparently up in 2012 (haven't seen the numbers yet myself).

-The Liffey Descent made a profit for the first time in nearly 15 years.

- We qualified 3 paddlers for the Olympics. 2 finished in the top 10!

This seems healthy to me and I have no doubt, like any organisations, we have our deficiencies and not everyone will be happy but it is a democratic organisation and people should abide by votes and not vote with their feet.

Correct me if I am wrong but I thought the executive was predominantly recreational paddler lead? If not please correct me. But if you want to re-designate one of the executive a canoeing for all rep, please do. But canoeing for all means more than a recreational paddling rep if it is modelled on the ICF.

Also another thought, since when is the TDU responsible for coaching? It is responsible for instructing and development. Coaching got written into it when we had to (NCTC driven - as I was at that particular AGM) call instructors, coaches instead. We reverted some time later when people got sense. Any reference to coaching probably means instructing. It makes no sense for a recreational and commercial lead group to be responsible for athletes, and I doubt there is anyone there capable of dealing with high performance development, (forgive me if I am doing anyone a dis-service but nothing has come out of the TDU to suggest otherwise).

I personally would like to see an end to this recreational versus competition campaign. I believe it is wrong and divisive. I am both! I am more than a number!!! (the prisoner tv show for you young guns in silly small boats).

A statement reported to me after the recent strategic development planning session held by CI was;

"It is time for recreational canoeing to reclaim the ICU",

@ and utterly divisive in my opinion, Canoeing is about canoeing and kayaking for all. The competitive disciplines organise and deploy their resources depending on the paddlers who compete and have an interest in that specific area. Recreational paddlers do their thing too but a large portion of them also compete and advance paddling (rec) within the diciplines too. So recreational paddlers (some of them) have a second voice at the table. I believe recreational paddling is well represented and has been done a disservice by so many resignations. What I would like to see is more of an outreach to non ICU paddlers and more offered to bring paddlers into the clubs. The majority of clubs are recreational and a quick look at the article of CI shows that they have massive power, so again recreational paddlers are advantaged. But if you still feel like you are not being heard, maybe you should step up to the table and spend time on the board or executive!

Can anyone tell me the status of the TDU? It was constituted like a club initially (I believe), did it become a sub committee or a technical committee or why does it sit on the board?

nouse4aname

Zuppy wrote: »

Also another thought, since when is the TDU responsible for coaching? It is responsible for instructing and development. Coaching got written into it when we had to (NCTC driven - as I was at that particular AGM) call instructors, coaches instead. We reverted some time later when people got sense. Any reference to coaching probably means instructing. It makes no sense for a recreational and commercial lead group to be responsible for athletes, and I doubt there is anyone there capable of dealing with high performance development, (forgive me if I am doing anyone a dis-service but nothing has come out of the TDU to suggest otherwise).

Interesting point you raise there Zuppy! The competitive coaching syllabus is only in its infancy and a number of volunteers (including yourself i believe) have done an awful lot of work in developing it. This was all taken away from the competitive disciplines last year when the TDU decided that coaching fell under their remit. I believe that was a mistake. There were 3 coaching workshops ran out of the Liffey Centre up until that point. I attended one and found it extremely beneficial! As far as I'm aware, there hasn't been a single coaching workshop since the TDU took over...

In my opinion, the competitive coaching should be kept separate from the TDU. The technical disciplines are the ones passionate enough about coaching to make this syllabus work. They should be left responsible to train and develop their own coaches. I would put forward a motion at the upcoming TDU EGM in this regard, but only TDU members are allowed do that... :rolleyes:

Also, what will happen to the new coaching syllabus if the TDU decide to separate from CI? How will our competitive coaches develop???

Zuppy wrote: »

A statement reported to me after the recent strategic development planning session held by CI was;

"It is time for recreational canoeing to reclaim the ICU",

@ and utterly divisive in my opinion.

Oh so you attended the Strategic Development planning session??? Lucky you!!!

My understanding was that Pat organized this and then failed to invite ANY of the technical disciplines. Himself, his executive buddies and a few invited friends sat around and devised the organization's entire strategic development plan all by themselves. Not one single chair of any competitive discipline was invited or had any say in the document.

How can you write a strategic development plan without consulting a single competitive discipline???

I've spoken to 3 chairs from 3 separate disciplines and all confirmed that this actually happened. The President at the time should be ashamed of himself and probably should have resigned sooner than he did! It was a bloody disgrace...

seanieb

nouse4aname wrote: »

An independent member of the Irish Sports Council, an independent member of the Irish Olympic Committee, and Pat himself all sat on that hiring panel. If you're questioning their decision, then you are questioning the morals and ethics of the highest sporting organization in this country... They made the decision; the board ratified it. Its done. For reasons known only to himself, Pat has tried twice now to circumvent that decision. On both occasions, he has failed. Calling for the resignation of the entire board is to my mind a third attempt to circumvent the original decision. It seems to me that Pat and the TDU simply wanted someone else in the job and are willing to go to any lengths to get that person. Again, their motives for that remain unclear.

This is false, and it's been pointed out to you previously.

The ex-ICU chairperson Eamon Devoy, refused to step down from his position heading up the ICU hiring panel that selected the ICU General Manager. Even though he served on the same board as one of the successful applicants. The new ICU chairperson was allowed to sit on the interview board for the post of General Manager Canoeing Ireland, however I don't believe he was allowed vote.

The recommendations of the interview board were presented to the ICU board and were adopted. The ICU board never interviewed or oversaw any part of the hiring process.

talkin sense wrote: »

What you and all the other conspiracy nut jobs have missed is that he is employed at a rate of almost €40,000 a year less than the previous CEO.

The previous CEO who set his own pay and thats why he got fired ...yeah that seems like a really argument :rolleyes:

But the big question is, how do you know the salary of the ICU GM? Sounds like you are ICU committee member posting anonymously.

nouse4aname

seanieb wrote: »

This is false, and it's been pointed out to you previously.

What exactly did i say that was false? Was there not independent members of both the Sports Council and Olympic Council on the hiring panel? Was Pat not on the hiring panel?

seanieb wrote: »

The new ICU chairperson was allowed to sit on the interview board for the post of General Manager Canoeing Ireland, however I don't believe he was allowed vote.

You don't believe??? :rolleyes: Well you're in contact with him Seanie! Go and ask him yourself.

seanieb wrote: »

The recommendations of the interview board were presented to the ICU board and were adopted. The ICU board never interviewed or oversaw any part of the hiring process.

Seanie, read my post! That is exactly what i stated. The hiring panel made a recommendation. The board voted to ratify that recommendation. We're both saying the same thing here...

KenHy

I see logic in the TDU having remit over coaching, It doesn't make sense to me that coaching is kept within each competitive discipline. There will be a lot of overlap between coaching in each discipline and instructing in GP paddling. Obviously coaches within each disciples will have to tailor what they do for their particular needs, but it makes sense to have an overall home for coaches. And it fits perfectly within the remit of the TDU in my (and obviously a lot of others) eyes.

That should mean coaches would have to participate in the TDU - which it seems at present they are reluctant to do. Of course that could be partly because of the voting/membership structure. Or maybe it's because they see the TDU as being a group of river kayakers and wonder why should they allow their sports development fall into the hands of another discipline. The next TDU agm is scheduled on February 16th (Exact time and venue to be confirmed) maybe if awareness of that was raised amongst competitive coaches they could come along and find out what it's all about and what each group can do for each other.

The role of the TDU seems to be central to the ongoing issues. It's role clearly needs to be defined. Maybe it should be the GP discipline that I was looking for earlier (and that seems to be how a lot of people see it, however currently it is certainly not that), but I feel that doing that would be a lost oppertunitity to give Canoeing Ireland an forum for developing paddling - both competitive (All disciplines) and recreational (Open Canoeing, Sea Kayaking, Whitewater). There is considerable overlap between them all and all would benefit from it I think. I'm not on the TDU (I'm an member i.e. instructor), but I gather that's the role they also see for themselves and from what I gather from conversations with those on the TDU they have felt that every attempt to develop along these lines is being frustrated by those involved in coaching and by the board/exec.

Zuppy

nouse4aname wrote: »

In my opinion, the competitive coaching should be kept separate from the TDU. The technical disciplines are the ones passionate enough about coaching to make this syllabus work. They should be left responsible to train and develop their own coaches. I would put forward a motion at the upcoming TDU EGM in this regard, but only TDU members are allowed do that... :rolleyes:

Also, what will happen to the new coaching syllabus if the TDU decide to separate from CI? How will our competitive coaches develop???




Oh so you attended the Strategic Development planning session??? Lucky you!!!

How can you write a strategic development plan without consulting a single competitive discipline???

Nope, I wasn't there but representatives of my club were. I am more a recreational paddler than a competitive paddler but was shocked to find that the disciplines were not. For whatever reason. which makes it a waste of time to be honest. The discipline lost out on not being there, the chance to recruit more people and offer more help to more clubs went a begging. No development plan with work for CI without it developing the sport as a whole. for example recreational canoeing should have been in position to glean the Olympic benefit like was seen in the UK.

KenHy wrote: »

I see logic in the TDU having remit over coaching, It doesn't make sense to me that coaching is kept within each competitive discipline. There will be a lot of overlap between coaching in each discipline and instructing in GP paddling. Obviously coaches within each disciples will have to tailor what they do for their particular needs, but it makes sense to have an overall home for coaches. And it fits perfectly within the remit of the TDU in my (and obviously a lot of others) eyes.

That should mean coaches would have to participate in the TDU - which it seems at present they are reluctant to do. Of course that could be partly because of the voting/membership structure. Or maybe it's because they see the TDU as being a group of river kayakers and wonder why should they allow their sports development fall into the hands of another discipline. The next TDU agm is scheduled on February 16th (Exact time and venue to be confirmed) maybe if awareness of that was raised amongst competitive coaches they could come along and find out what it's all about and what each group can do for each other.

I agree it makes sense for the competitive coaching system to be within the TDU if it had a clearly defined mandate and I for one don't see it being so at the moment. The technical disciplines are and should remain responsible for their own coaching and development within reason. No one has been able to tell me who voted in Moscow and which way they voted on wash hanging?!?!? It wasn't a competitive rep anyway because one wouldn't be that stupid to ban all wash hanging without at least defining what they meant and the ICF rightly received flack for this decision. This shows that competitive disciplines need to have some measure of control over the specifics of their remit.

If the TDU wishes to go it's own way? That is a weird statement as if it was a club (then why does it sit at the board and not my club?), if it leaves then it is no longer responsible for the training and development of a NGB and the CI will have to replace it with something else. The TDU is not the certifying body, CI is, under mandate from the ICF and the ECA.
If the TDU is a sub committee, then we can redefine it's role (or not) and it cannot leave, it just dissolves.

Neither the TDU nor the recreational paddling community or the competitive paddlers are the solution but all together with their differences ironed out and the path chosen for the greater good is. This like this thread will not suit everyone, possible no one will ever be 100% happy but I am happy with a democratic top table who follow the rules and listen to the members.

Again these are my thought and liable to change depending on the wind. :-)

nouse4aname

KenHy wrote: »

I gather from conversations with those on the TDU they have felt that every attempt to develop along these lines is being frustrated by those involved in coaching and by the board/exec.

How so? Any examples of how they're being frustrated? Not being argumentative, just would like to know what the TDU's beef actually is... I've heard lots of complaining but little or no specifics.

Since the TDU has taken control i've seen a total of zero developments on the coaching syllabus. Last year, Zuppy himself did some fantastic work on developing coaching competencies for marathon racing. Why haven't the TDU implemented any of this? How many training weekends have they organized since taking over? This coaching syllabus is in its infancy and is not robust enough to survive this political garbage. For the sake of our new coaches i hope this isn't used as a bargaining chip or weapon in the inevitable battle for territory, should the TDU split...


At the moment it is very debatable whether the TDU is the place for the coaching syllabus. If they do separate from Canoeing Ireland then it definitely is not the place for it. I want to develop my coaching qualifications, but i'm not joining another organization to do so.

KenHy

nouse4aname wrote: »

How so? Any examples of how they're being frustrated? Not being argumentative, just would like to know what the TDU's beef actually is... I've heard lots of complaining but little or no specifics.

I'm not in a great position to answer that not being actually involved myself. The main gripe I've heard about (and I emphsise this is hearsay, so I could well be a bit off) is that whenever the TDU try and do something that they get no co-operation from anyone involved in the competitive disciplines. Which would explain if the process has gone nowhere! For example there is a place on the TDU committee for a person whose roll would be to work on the coaching syllabus. Nobody is in that role at the moment. If it were to be filled by a whitewater paddler, inevitably anything they do would be rejected (or at least that's the perception) and nobody from competitive disciples seems interested in taking it up.

I'd not like to see the TDU split off from the ICU - I can't see the point in a TDU without the ICU. Calls for the TDU to split off do seem to come mainly from river paddlers who don't seem to have a very clear idea of what they want from a governing body or what the TDU's remit actually is, but know that the ICU currently does little for them!

SUPing

If you wish for more coaching weekends to be run then why not request it from the Canoeing Ireland office, same way people do when they want a Instructor course to be run, Instead of giving out that the TDU havent run any coaching courses (It has been along time since the TDU had the responsibility of Organising and Running Instructor & Coach Training/Assessments. That ll goes through the office and is run by the office or Private providers.)

NOTE: If you are a qualified coach Im pretty sure you can be a member of the TDU, so why not Join stand for election for the coach position and then do some work on it.
All the officers of the TDU do alot of work to develop there particular area,
Canoe, Kayak, Sea Kayak, Safety, Womens etc. We need a coach officer to develop the coaching structure.

If you look at recent changes you will see that the TDU has reintroduced the logging of competitive events in the Instructor training programme I think that very much shows that they are trying to give all our future instructors a much better idea of what s out there besides the river and sea.


The TDU seem to be getting mentioned quite alot here which I think is great as maybe we will have more people at the agms and people putting themselves up for a position or just sharing there Ideas.

I think that maybe what has happened over time is that people may have banged heads and friction/rifts between certain committees or who ever have formed. I think if the Board and the TDU met as a whole they would find they are all just looking at the best interests of paddle sports and one complements the other.

Hopefully all this can be sorted out soon, but it is good that people are talking about CI, TDU & Other committees as hopefully it will bring in some fresh faces and new thinking to all of them.

Cheers
Paddy

nouse4aname

KenHy wrote: »

For example there is a place on the TDU committee for a person whose roll would be to work on the coaching syllabus. Nobody is in that role at the moment. If it were to be filled by a whitewater paddler, inevitably anything they do would be rejected (or at least that's the perception) and nobody from competitive disciples seems interested in taking it up.

There WERE plenty of paddlers from competitive disciplines trying to contribute to the development of the coaching syllabus. However, when the TDU took it over last year, there was a perception (right or wrong) that all our hard work was for nothing and that now a bunch of whitewater paddlers were going to tell us all how to play polo and paddle K1's.

That perception is not helped by the fact that non-TDU members cannot attend meetings or vote at their AGM. How can we have a say in competitive coaching if we're not allowed put forward motions and we cannot vote. Why should we pay membership to a sub-committee of Canoeing Ireland for that privilege? I don't pay membership to marathon racing in order to vote at their AGM!

Can you see how this perception (be it true or false) has developed? The TDU is currently seen by many as an elitist organization where only the select few qualified instructors can participate. Others see it as a glorified trade union for working instructors. It needs a massive change in its governance policy before competitive paddlers will feel like it is worth engaging with them. I mean, i was slagged off here by Seanie and his mates for not knowing the basic function or remit of the TDU. I think that says more about the TDU than it does about me...

nouse4aname

Meanwhile, on a far more reputable forum than boards...
This evening i happened to read that certain board members voted against Pat's motion out of pure spite against the TDU, because they stole our beloved coaching syllabus!!! :eek:



Of all the madness i've read over the last few weeks, this was hands down the funniest conspiracy theory yet! If the discipline chairs actually cared that much about the coaching syllabus we'd of had the bloody thing written 2 years ago...

To the men in the tinfoil hats:
The board voted against Pat's motion for one reason. He couldn't provide a single justifiable reason for firing the GM. End of story.

talkin sense

Why anyone would jump to the conclusion that I am a member of the Board is beyond me. Just goes to show that the conspiracy theories range wide and deep.

Is it because I used information I picked up at ADM's and discussions with members of the Board or that I made it my business to actually find out what was going on instead of jumping to conclusions or believing the skewed version of the truth that Seanie is so insistent on but is unchallengeable because of e way he "moderates" his website?

Or is it because the truth simply doesn't tie in with the conspiracy theory?

For the record I am not a member of the Board and to be fair to him/her neither am I nouse4aname who has probably talked as much sense on this thread as anyone.

Who cares who I am or how many postings I have. In my opinion (my nod to the moderator) people who make thousands of posts either knows lot about everything or are windbags. I suspect that windbags maybe more accurate.

I come from a generation (figure this one out) where less is more and greater respect is held for those who speak rarely but who speak the truth and do not have something to say on everything no matter how big or small.

To the moderator - in my opinion you have stretched way beyond the concept of moderation and have moved into editorial territory. Removing my comment that it was a silly thing to suggest that the GM should go on the dole to appease certain people calls your independence into question. That Remains a validly held view or opinion - call it what you want - and it's removal calls your partiality into question. Avoid insulting remarks by all means but don't censor!!

Zuppy

talkin sense wrote: »

To the moderator - in my opinion you have stretched way beyond the concept of moderation and have moved into editorial territory. Removing my comment that it was a silly thing to suggest that the GM should go on the dole to appease certain people calls your independence into question. That Remains a validly held view or opinion - call it what you want - and it's removal calls your partiality into question. Avoid insulting remarks by all means but don't censor!!

Fair comment and I will take it on board. As a person involved in this discussion I agree with your point. The problem is as a Mod I can not expose boards to legal repercussions and all the legal threats to date in relation to this topic stem in relation to the appointment of the GM and its discussion on another forum. I may have been a bit over zealous in deleting that comment to prevent the discussion going in that direction. Right or wrong, it is done.

Here I am both a Mod and a user. I have made it clear in my postings which hat I am wearing and in part withheld my more extreme personal views. Anyone is free to report my posts or as a number of you have done, to PM me directly if it causes you concern and as I have told people who have questioned me and disagreed, I will refer the disagreement to my co Mod.

I have allowed the discussion free reign which didn't work but it is also not my intention to use this forum as a soapbox. Apologies if my middle ground strays but do call me out on it if you wish. I will not tolerate personal abuse or unfounded allegations, after that I am usually pleased to let things run, past history of this board pre this topi will show you that we are a bit like a sleepy hollow.

Also I have no intention of asking anyone to name themselves but please do not think that a name makes you anonymous and immune to consequences of your words. This is friendly advice to anyone who uses any forum.

End Mod rant!

seanieb

nouse4aname wrote: »

Meanwhile, on a far more reputable forum than boards...
This evening i happened to read that certain board members voted against Pat's motion out of pure spite against the TDU, because they stole our beloved coaching syllabus!!! :eek:

Of all the madness i've read over the last few weeks, this was hands down the funniest conspiracy theory yet! If the discipline chairs actually cared that much about the coaching syllabus we'd of had the bloody thing written 2 years ago...

To the men in the tinfoil hats:
The board voted against Pat's motion for one reason. He couldn't provide a single justifiable reason for firing the GM. End of story.

No one has insight into the minds of all the board members and that includes you. Before you sit back thinking you are 100% correct you should try talking to the Womens Polo Chair.

Having said that. Why do their motivations matter? It's done. How they voted is the only thing that matters to the wider ICU. I'm more interested in what comes next for the TDU and the ICU.

talkin sense wrote: »

I made it my business to actually find out what was going on instead of jumping to conclusions or believing the skewed version of the truth that Seanie is so insistent on but is unchallengeable because of e way he "moderates" his website?

Or is it because the truth simply doesn't tie in with the conspiracy theory?

Three questions:
1. What is the "version of the truth that" I'm insistent on? Seriously, what have I written other than the issues I had hiring process of the GM? I'd be happy to discuss that in-depth on the thread on IWW (where it wont get taken down)

2. What on earth do you mean unchangeable because of the way I "moderate" my website? How do I limit your or anyones ability to express themselves?

3. Why can't you simply debate on the points without having to resort to petty tactics like resorting to calling opinions "conspiracy" theories in an effort to belittle them.

Listen, while I might not see eye to eye with ye on every point, you'll have to forgiven myself and others skepticism. Several years ago I stood up and an ICU AGM and pointed out that there were several issues with the audited books that were presented to them members. People referred to it as a conspiracy theory too, I was shouted down and told "Go back to Fu*king Galway, theres no funny business here" by the majority of people there. Well as it turns out it took another four years for the ICU to get to the bottom it, and it resulted in the ICU CEO being fired.

No one is right all of the time, but dismissing them and not hearing their points because it makes you uncomfortable end up in an unhealthy environments where people are afraid to point out issues.

As for this vote and the subsequent resignations, I actually think the entire thing is pretty transparent now that a lot of board members have spoken.

Things are a mess, but I don't see any conspiracy or wrong doing. People disagreed about how to run an organization and the organization is poorly structured to deal with such an issue. Thats my summary.

Zuppy

As a user;

I agree with your point on the GM staying in place as a democratic vote was held, the position has not been abused or has the GM failed to meet any targets set out as far as I am aware. If there is an issue of a subjective nature then I presume that it would mean a formal interview, like any other job, and a performance standard laid down.

So far no one has stated that any of the objective measures or predetermined performance goal nor any of the duties have been lacking. Therefore the GM has done his job, any other measures of how well would have to be determined by his direct supervisors using objective measures, like any other job!

The ex pres has also stated publicly that there has been no malfeasance or improper conduct by the board so as far as I can determine he resigned and has not stated any concrete reasons yet. And it also means, to me, that the voting was all above board.

Have I missed anything?

multisport

seanieb wrote: »

try talking to the Womens Polo Chair.

Is there a mens polo chair too

Zuppy

Ok in an effort to be a bit more constructive. How should the ICU now move forward?

Elect a new exec?
Reform the TDU?
Revamp the whole ICU?

Zuppy

I was thinking, despite the articles of CI my new board would consist of;

The technical chairs
Sprint
Slalom
Marathon
WWR
Polo
Freestyle
The alternative chair for surf, ocean racing, dragon boats and canoe sail etc
Sea rep - not sure about this one.
TDU - as a sub committee of the CI with a mandate for access and development.
Two reps from the Clubs as they are the future. :-)
One rep from the AGM or the clubs or co opted as the canoe for all rep (disability, open canoeing, women in sport, youth etc)


A large committee I know but everyone has a voice and people could miss a meeting or two. Still unsure if we should have a regional rep (outside the pale). Mirrored on what we have coz it does seem to work. Lose the executive as then everyone is the board and less of a divide.

President to be chosen from committee and by the committee.

nouse4aname

seanieb wrote: »

Before you sit back thinking you are 100% correct you should try talking to the Polo Chair.

Did that 2 weeks ago Seanie! I'm not going to post her response here unless she gives me permission, but i can assure you that it did not differ from the other 3 board members that i've spoken to. Thats a total of 4 of them that all gave me roughly the same response:

"We cannot blindly fire a person when no justifiable reasons were given. It was wrong for Pat to expect that from us."

You're right, i cannot read the minds of the other board members but i've spoken to 50% of those that voted the motion down, so i think i'm in a far better position to comment than some of the crackpots that are spouting hilarious conspiracy theories...

(edit: i deleted the "women's" bit from your quote, out of respect to Michelle. I know this was just typo but i'd expect you to do the same.)

KenHy

nouse4aname wrote: »

There WERE plenty of paddlers from competitive disciplines trying to contribute to the development of the coaching syllabus. However, when the TDU took it over last year, there was a perception (right or wrong) that all our hard work was for nothing and that now a bunch of whitewater paddlers were going to tell us all how to play polo and paddle K1's.

I see that point - I think the TDU has felt that despite their best efforts that they haven't been able to change that view. Again, come to the TDU AGM if your available and encourage anyone else you know involved in coaching to come along. As Paddy pointed out coaches are welcome.

It's not a case of whitewater paddlers preaching on how to play polo or how to paddle a K1 - no more than a slalom coach would try coach the freestyle team. But coaching/instructing will inevitably have a lot of overlap when it comes to methods of teaching and delivery of progromes. As a Kayak Instructor I'd like to be able to coach people starting off (particularly juniors) in some other disciplines, if they begin taking it seriously they will need a specialist coach, but if GP instructors like myself could get them started maybe it would increase participation across the board. I still think it makes sense to house all development, coaching and training progromes in the one place. I will admit that it won't work if it's not wanted by all parties, but I'd like to see it given a chance.

nouse4aname wrote: »

That perception is not helped by the fact that non-TDU members cannot attend meetings or vote at their AGM. How can we have a say in competitive coaching if we're not allowed put forward motions and we cannot vote. Why should we pay membership to a sub-committee of Canoeing Ireland for that privilege? I don't pay membership to marathon racing in order to vote at their AGM!

Just to point out there is no separate membership fee for the TDU - it's just a case of registering with them when joining CI. In fact TDU members get club rate membership irregardless of weather they are members of a club or not - e.g. it's €20 whereas normal individual membership is €30

nouse4aname wrote: »

Can you see how this perception (be it true or false) has developed? The TDU is currently seen by many as an elitist organization where only the select few qualified instructors can participate. Others see it as a glorified trade union for working instructors. It needs a massive change in its governance policy before competitive paddlers will feel like it is worth engaging with them. I mean, i was slagged off here by Seanie and his mates for not knowing the basic function or remit of the TDU. I think that says more about the TDU than it does about me...

Yes, I see why coaches have this perception - I don't think it is a true one however. I'd agree that they should open up voting to all CI members. But it's not too closed - they allow all coaches and instructors (including trainees!) to attend and vote as far as I know so it's not exactly a closed shop either.

Zuppy wrote: »

Ok in an effort to be a bit more constructive. How should the ICU now move forward?

Elect a new exec?
Reform the TDU?
Revamp the whole ICU?

I think

- New exec obviously needed - should be a mix of recreational and competitive paddlers, or even better people active in both scenes.

- More participation in the TDU - only needs reform to the extent that this participation is encouraged

- I'd suggest the current board structure is broadly OK. I'm not familiar with guidance on corporate governance for sporting NGBs (although I have had a read through http://www.instituteofsport.ie/Governing_Bodies/NGB_Support_Kit/2_Governance/) - but I am familiar with the guidance for companies.

Basically there should be 3 levels

Staff who run the company/body - in this case the office staff, permanent instructors, etc... They would run day to day activities and be mandated some decisions making power but would be accountable to the board. Should be headed up by a full time CEO (or GM) who would also be on board.

An executive body - elected by shareholders/members - who are responsible for the running of the body. This to include at minimum a CEO (or GM?), treasurer and secretary. Apart from the CEO not all of them would need be full time, but would have a bit more work then a standard board member. I think this would be a change in the ICU as it would mean the CEO would be directly elected by and accountable to the members. I can see that been a practical problem - so maybe a longer fixed term then one year (somewhere between 3 & 5?) would be needed and security of tenure should be provided. They'd still be accountable to an annually elected board and would not be able to overrule them.

Non-Exec board members, Ideally they'd come in from outside the sport. realistically that's not practical. So chairs of the various disciplines to my mind fill this role. They should outnumber the exec and act as a check on them doing something silly. They should be headed by a chair/president - I see where Zuppy is coming from in saying they could be elected from the board members, but I think it would be better if they were directly elected by the membership. Preferably they would be someone with knowledge of running companies/sporting bodies or a legal background, but not someone who has previously been involved at board level at the ICU.

I'd keep the board as is - with the singular addition of a canoe for all/recreational sub-committee whose chair is a board member.

I'd be against regional reps. It gives additional weight to members from one area over another which is not right in my eyes.

Like Zuppy my views on most of the above are also liable to change with the wind - they are just suggestions!

TheBlackJoke

ah deleting posts, censorship at its finest

Zuppy

TheBlackJoke wrote: »

ah deleting posts, censorship at its finest

If you continue to troll.......

See your PM before continuing to post. Thanks

TheBlackJoke

Zuppy wrote: »

If you continue to troll.......

See your PM before continuing to post. Thanks

as i said in the PM, im not trolling. Didnt realise i wasnt allowed to post my opinions based on facts, i could post evidence to back up what im saying but that could have possible legal repercussions.

nouse4aname

KenHy wrote: »

It's not a case of whitewater paddlers preaching on how to play polo or how to paddle a K1 - no more than a slalom coach would try coach the freestyle team. But coaching/instructing will inevitably have a lot of overlap when it comes to methods of teaching and delivery of progromes. As a Kayak Instructor I'd like to be able to coach people starting off (particularly juniors) in some other disciplines, if they begin taking it seriously they will need a specialist coach, but if GP instructors like myself could get them started maybe it would increase participation across the board. I still think it makes sense to house all development, coaching and training progromes in the one place. I will admit that it won't work if it's not wanted by all parties, but I'd like to see it given a chance.

I cannot argue with your logic there. I'd love to see more instructors like that! And I am glad to see the TDU putting more competitive competencies on their instructor qualifications. Its a step in the right direction. However up until now, the courses run by instructors don't have a great track record of producing top level competitive kayakers. I'm not trying to criticise you guys, its just an observation. Instructors do a great service to the sport by running summer courses across the country. You expose thousands of kids to the sport. The problem in my eyes has been that retention is poor. That's where established clubs have a definite advantage with infrastructure and equipment...

PS- I'm not against the TDU housing the coaching syllabus per se. I just have some concerns:

1) The voting structure and membership of the TDU.
2) The input (if any) that ordinary competitive paddlers will have in developing the syllabus.
3) The divisive talk of the TDU splitting away from Canoeing Ireland.

KenHy wrote: »

Just to point out there is no separate membership fee for the TDU - it's just a case of registering with them when joining CI. In fact TDU members get club rate membership irregardless of weather they are members of a club or not - e.g. it's €20 whereas normal individual membership is €30

Ok so i'm a member of a club. I'm not an instructor and i've only started on the coaching syllabus, so technically i'm not a coach. How do i currently join the TDU?

KenHy wrote: »

Yes, I see why coaches have this perception - I don't think it is a true one however. I'd agree that they should open up voting to all CI members. But it's not too closed - they allow all coaches and instructors (including trainees!) to attend and vote as far as I know so it's not exactly a closed shop either.

I think its unfair to restrict the TDU to coaches and instructors (even if they do include trainees). There's plenty of top class paddlers who's opinions and expertise on coaching/instruction are as important, if not more important. Eoin Rheinisch is not a qualified coach or instructor, but how valuable would his input be? Under the current TDU system, he cannot contribute...

Zuppy

FYI - the instructors play a major part in the athlete development, this is why the old instructor and senior instructor system had them all competing or running competitions before they qualified people.

The first exposure to paddling is with the instructor usually and then through the clubs. The first parts of the long term development plans for athletes clearly reflects this and it should.

Personally when the coaching structure is up and running, I would hope that it then reaches out to the instructors. Competitive paddlers come from recreational paddlers (with a few exceptions). Established coaching systems run lectures in the instructor training especially to expose instructors to various options. See the BCU for our closest example.

Instructors are constantly looking for CPD and new methods to instruct, coaching offers a possibility. Who better to improve your forward stroke than a sprinter. Just like a freestyler can teach edging or a polo coach can teach boat control.

There is very little difference between the percived sides in this debate (rec V comp). All need each other. While some of my fellow recreational paddlers feel under represented at CI, I don't.
Most of the technical chairs are GP paddlers too (or were), the TDU seems to be the rally flag for river runners, the clubs hold a lot of power (mostly rec paddlers) and if we don't have large numbers of paddlers the CI falls apart anyway.

The TDU can have the coaching syllabus in my opinion but to be honest I have seen very little of them as both an instructor or a coach so I think either it is the wrong place at the moment or any coaching officer will have to contend with being massively out voted on the TDU committee.

A better and a more establish place for coaching would be a High Performance development unit like in most other NGB's. This would take some time to get up and running but so would the coaching side of the TDU.

A high performance development unit would initially focus on the coaching structure and take guidance from the current carded athletes and committees. It would then develop a coaching network and a proper system of CPD which is hugely important to coaching but somewhat neglected for instructors.
After a period it would then concentrate on talent identifaction and maintaining the Long term athlete development plans. It would also focus as a clearing house for information between like minded disciplines. This is just my view when you look at how other sports have developed. Triathlons HP unit came into effect before the development and focused on talent ID ahead of the coaching structure. Same results though, either method should work.


As for the TDU going its own way?? See my previous post. It can't really. It is not the certifying body and it would take a while and a lot of if's to become it without CI. As a rival sporting body?? Good luck, divisive (to paddling) in the whole but without big numbers and the Olympic disciplines it most likey will not be considered the NGB. I believe that those paddlers who wish to break away would also have no appetite for joining a new body and building it from scratch. The current TDU needs to be open to all, just like other committees are. I don't believe for a moment that anyone who gives up their time to serve on the TDU (or any other committtee) has anything but the best interest of paddling at heart. Methods and ideals might not suit me or you but they are giving back for the good of the sport IMO!

seanieb

nouse4aname wrote: »

I think its unfair to restrict the TDU to coaches and instructors (even if they do include trainees). There's plenty of top class paddlers who's opinions and expertise on coaching/instruction are as important, if not more important. Eoin Rheinisch is not a qualified coach or instructor, but how valuable would his input be? Under the current TDU system, he cannot contribute...

I agree. You should go to the TDU AGM, there are a lot of people who feel the same way.

KenHy

nouse4aname wrote: »

Ok so i'm a member of a club. I'm not an instructor and i've only started on the coaching syllabus, so technically i'm not a coach. How do i currently join the TDU?

If your registered with the ICU office as a trainee coach (which on my understanding you would have if you've started on the coaching syllabus) then you should already be a member - might be worth clarifying that with the office though in case I'm wrong about the trainee thing, another thing I can't find anywhere on the ICU/TDU website!

Grudaire

nouse4aname wrote: »

I mean, i was slagged off here by Seanie and his mates for not knowing the basic function or remit of the TDU. I think that says more about the TDU than it does about me...

I presume this was aimed at me among others..?

In fairness now, you have a very strong (and unwavering) opinion on the matters at hand, at yet in several instances you have had a completely wrong understanding of the organisation.

You held the training centre as not being as active as it used to be as a sign of the TDU failing (deleted thread), it now presumably comes under the remit of the board/GM. Yet you only have positive things to say about the Union?


I have gone and contacted cyclegal by PM here, I would like to publically thank her for responding. But as with many posts on this thread it has only suceeded in confusing me more.

So on that note I'm going to bury my head in the sand and wait for someone I trust to decide what the truth is

nouse4aname

Cliste wrote: »

You held the training centre as not being as active as it used to be as a sign of the TDU failing (deleted thread), it now presumably comes under the remit of the board/GM. Yet you only have positive things to say about the Union?

That's actually not what i said (obviously i can't go back and quote a deleted post).

I have never professed to know anything about activity levels at the Training Centre. The first i heard about less activity there was when KenHy posted it earlier on this thread. Read my response to KenHy; "I can't really comment on that (referring to the Training Centre). I'd like to see the course numbers myself but it could be due to factors outside the control of the GM''.

Cliste wrote: »

In fairness now, you have a very strong (and unwavering) opinion on the matters at hand, at yet in several instances you have had a completely wrong understanding of the organisation.

Replace the word "organisation" with "TDU". Don't assume that my lack of understanding on TDU affairs means i don't know how this organisation is or has been run. I don't have any understanding of dragonboat racing either. Does that make me less entitled to comment on the structures and policies of paddlesport in Ireland??? Lets be clear here, the TDU is just one small sub-committee of Canoeing Ireland. Up until recently, it happened to be a sub-committee which i had very little interest in. I'm quite happy to accept that i've a limited understanding of their day to day function. My only real interest in them has been over the last 6 months when they took over the competitive coaching syllabus.

My gripe with you on previous threads was that you stated you had "no problem" with financially rewarding TDU members for their work. Why should that be the case? Is their work any more valuable than what Michelle does as a volunteer for canoe polo? This is why certain folks in canoeing view the TDU as a glorified trade union for instructors. If you're an instructor and you volunteer to sit on the TDU, are you doing it for purely altruistic reasons or are you doing it to benefit your career? Its hard to differentiate, but when i hear "money" and "TDU" in the same sentence i seriously question peoples motives...

nouse4aname

On that last point;

I've often heard a rumour that TDU members claim petrol expenses when they attend committee meetings. Is this just an old wives tale or is there any truth to it?