kb
Squire
Posts: 261
|
Post by kb on Apr 23, 2008 19:49:48 GMT -6
Just to bring this over to the Tournament page....
1. Southwest Section site is current as of 4-11-08. It says TAMU is not a member club.
2. MTD's post reflects the same, as well as the fact the HM is not on the Division calendar and has not asked for sanctioning of this tournament.
3. I have now received a letter from the president of the TAMU fencing club saying that as per Dana Brown, they are a member club of the USFA and that the tournament will be sanctioned.
Two out of three say it ain't so.
So can we get an "official" say on this some time soon???
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Apr 23, 2008 21:05:27 GMT -6
My understanding from the USFA is that TAMUFC just became a member of the USFA (as in, the number of days since they joined can be counted on one hand).
I am not looking at the official GCD rules for hosting a tournament that will get sanction, but I do recall that a club has to have been a USFA member for a certain amount of time prior to the holding of the tournament. (Probably somewhat more than 10 days).
(One reason we at CLFC make sure we send in our club membership renewal as soon as the USFA posts the forms for the new season. We have that vets tournament in August!)
I can not speak with any authority on this, but it might be just ever so possible that it is within the power of the EC or the Tournament Committee Chair to go ahead and grant sanction. I could also be wrong. Even if I am right, I think some of the EC are out of town. There is also the question of what kind of precedent they want to set.
Last-minute stuff is tough. Dicey all around.
|
|
|
Post by MTD on Apr 23, 2008 21:31:36 GMT -6
I can confirm that the United States Fencing Association states that the Texas A&M Fencing Club has USFA membership. They became a USFA member April 22, 2008, and that membership will run through July 31, 2008.
(I cannot confirm yet whether that membership does or does not include the optional USFA insurance. If it does not, then, like many clubs, and common among school-based ones, they have to look to their own insurance when liability arises in a club activity.)
I can also confirm that nobody in the National Office can extend USFA sanction to divisional tournaments. It is the approximately 60 divisions which have that authority.
And, I can confirm that it is beyond the legal authority of any person in the Gulf Coast Texas Division or any administrative body of the Gulf Coast Texas Division to grant sanction to the 2008 Heavy Metal. To do so would violate the Bylaws of the Division. The relevant section of the Bylaws states: "... the club must have been a member of the USFA for a minimum of six months of the previous season, and must have been a member of the USFA for six weeks before the requested competition date. In addition, the club must remain a member of the USFA prior to and during its allocated competition, in order for the competition to be USFA sanctioned." TAMUFC was a member of the USFA for well over six months of the 2006-2007 season, but will not have been a member of the USFA for six weeks until June 3rd, well after this weekend. Further, to the best of my knowledge, TAMUFC never even requested that the Division Tournament Committee consider adding either the original Heavy Metal date, or this Heavy Metal date, or any other date, to the Division's calendar.
I can also confirm that it was on February 19 (which I note was definitely more than six weeks before this weekend!) that the Chairman of the Division Tournament Committee wrote to TAMUFC to explain that TAMUFC would have to follow the standard protocols all other clubs do if they wanted Heavy Metal sanctioned, but, if, as was their right, they didn't want Heavy Metal sanctioned, they should make clear on askFRED that the tournament has no connection with the Division and USFA classifications cannot be earned.
That all having been said, there still may be some nice fencing this weekend in College Station.
Matt Delevoryas Secretary Gulf Coast Texas Division
|
|
kb
Squire
Posts: 261
|
Post by kb on Apr 23, 2008 21:34:27 GMT -6
This would be the place where we slip in an Aggie joke about not knowing they have to renew their USFA membership... (aww c'mon, someone had to say it!!!) ;D
The interesting bit is the USFA coming in and just auto-sanctioning a tournament and disregarding the Gulf Coast Division rules and regs that the USFA worked so hard to put in place. Not throwing stones at TAMU, they are just victims of circumstance on this subject.
Dicey indeed.
edit....ohhhh that Matt is fast (and right as usual King Friday!!!) As Emily Latella would have said: "Nevermind".
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Apr 23, 2008 21:36:51 GMT -6
Yeah, I didn't think the division had an opening to grant sanction, but I could not be sure. I didn't have the by-laws in front of me.
Like I said, in my clubs we jump to get onboard ASAP. This is exactly what we try to avoid.
Thanks MTD.
It should still be a nice tournament.
|
|
kb
Squire
Posts: 261
|
Post by kb on Apr 23, 2008 21:38:18 GMT -6
MTD is as official as it gets...
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Apr 23, 2008 21:58:31 GMT -6
The club has been in an ongoing conversation regarding the sanctioning of this tournament. The conversation has included Rachel, the division vice-chair and listed authority on division recognized tournaments. The club is under the impression that this tournament is legit.
As for whether or not the club has USFA-insurance, that isn't a discussion for this board, nor is it pertinent to this conversation.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by Leslie Freiman on Apr 24, 2008 8:19:52 GMT -6
I rarely post messages but I had to respond to this thread. I cannot understand why we would not try to sanction this event if it is within the division's rights to do so. It would seem a shame to punish the fencers who have signed up for the event and those that are traveling to attend the event. It is after all the fencers that are hurt by a failure to sanction. If the club has become a USFA member and otherwise complies with the requirements, it seems like we are cutting off our nose to spite our face. This is the last event in our section before the national cut-off to change or renew ratings. So who does this hurt? The fencers...
|
|
nemo
Blademaster
mobilis in mobili
Posts: 729
|
Post by nemo on Apr 24, 2008 8:31:08 GMT -6
The relevant section of the Bylaws states: "... the club must have been a member of the USFA for a minimum of six months of the previous season, and must have been a member of the USFA for six weeks before the requested competition date. " To Leslie, that looks pretty straightforward. It seems it is not within the division's power to grant sanction. I agree. It is a shame to punish the fencers. Hopefully, those who feel this is a critical difference will see this in time. At the bottom of the forum you can see who logged on in the last 24 hours. I do see IDs I recognize as coming from folks in the South Texas and North Texas Divisions. Hopefully, word will get out. To schlager7, kinda sorry you were wrong on this one. Of course, MTD was right about one thing. Ratings or no, that's going to be a good tournament. The epee looks particularly good. I can't go to Cali this summer anyway, but I just may go to College Station this weekend. My question is why did the Aggies wait until the day before yesterday to join the USFA? Oh, wait, Aggies... yeah
|
|
|
Post by Aldo N on Apr 24, 2008 9:04:37 GMT -6
Important as they are to an ambitious fencer, USFA rankings should not become the be-all and end-all of why one fences. That is just not a healthy mindset.
|
|
kb
Squire
Posts: 261
|
Post by kb on Apr 24, 2008 12:35:20 GMT -6
Important as they are to an ambitious fencer, USFA rankings should not become the be-all and end-all of why one fences. That is just not a healthy mindset. No, but there are a few fencers heading off to college to fence NCAA and their coaches would like them to have the highest "08" rating possible. Had this been a sanctioned tournament, this would be their last chance before Summer Nationals to accomplish that. These kids fence because they love it, but they are realists as well. Ratings help in seeding and are a part of the game.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Apr 24, 2008 13:28:31 GMT -6
It's still the only tournament on AskFRED.net for this weekend. We're trying to get it worked out. However likely or unlikely it is for that to work out, the Heavy Metal is a tournament which we have referees for, strips for, and all the other trappings of a tournament. We hope we can bring the committee to our way of thinking.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by Leslie Freiman on Apr 24, 2008 18:11:29 GMT -6
Well sanctioned or not--it is good fencing and my son, Ben, and two of his friends will be there. Hope it works out.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Apr 24, 2008 22:04:49 GMT -6
We hope to see everyone at the Heavy Metal. We are still trying to get this fixed with the division and think we have a good position -- we'll see. Bottom line though -- it's a tournament open to all this weekend. You're not getting a better offer than that right now. Dan
|
|