grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com

A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
in the Skydive mag.

The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.

Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:

The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
meet director and team captains).

Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.

Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.


Blue skies

Grumpyskydiver

Nick

Grumpy

I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
repesenting Grumpy?


As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
impartial in this.

As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
that wanted to could wait until the next day.

As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.

Regards

Nick




grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:

> A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> in the Skydive mag.
>
> The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
>
> Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
>
> The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> meet director and team captains).
>
> Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
>
> Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
>
>
> Blue skies
>
> Grumpyskydiver

Nick

Grumpy

I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
repesenting Grumpy?


As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
impartial in this.

As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
that wanted to could wait until the next day.

As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.

Regards

Nick




grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:

> A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> in the Skydive mag.
>
> The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
>
> Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
>
> The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> meet director and team captains).
>
> Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
>
> Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
>
>
> Blue skies
>
> Grumpyskydiver

grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com

So Nick,

By writing, the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have
manifested, are you saying that GP's should not be run by Meet
Directors and Judge's, but would be better run by the team's and
Council members?

If I remember rightly that at all GP's in any discipline in the passed,
if it was going to be run away from the rules, then it would go to a
unanimous vote only. Andy Scott knew this and pushed it to go his way.

Blue skies

Grumpyskydiver



Nick wrote:
> Grumpy
>
> I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
> football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
> captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
> repesenting Grumpy?
>
>
> As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
> the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
> that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
> interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
> impartial in this.
>
> As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
> and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
> that wanted to could wait until the next day.
>
> As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
> so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.
>
> Regards
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
> grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> > at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> > in the Skydive mag.
> >
> > The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> > football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> > alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> > is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
> >
> > Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
> >
> > The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> > an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> > meet director and team captains).
> >
> > Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> > being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> > written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> > allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> > the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> > competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> > just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
> >
> > Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> > competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
> >
> >
> > Blue skies
> >
> > Grumpyskydiver

Nick

Grumpy

The decision to allow teams to self manifest was taken by the dropzone
(and I assume in agreement with the meet director), if there is an
issue with this the it should be taken up with the dropzone. During the
vote that took place I don't remember the meet director stepping in the
ensure that the comp continued, maybe this should be taken up with the
meet director.

I'm afraid that I don't have a record of what the results of the vote,
perhaps you have this information. I can't remember any other vote at a
meet requiring a unanimous vote, perhaps that they have all been
invalid, if that the case should we invalidate the results of all meets
where a vote has taken place!


At the end of the day the meet was finished by midday on the Sunday,
those that wanted to watched the match and those that wanted to carried
on jumping, from what I could see everybody enjoyed themselves and it
was good and safe. I can't see an issue here.


I think there are much bigger issues where dropzones books large
numbers of tandems knowing that a GP is going to take place meaning
that the GP is close to not being completed in the weekend, when
dropzone push the times so people are jumping in very dark conditions,
when teams are being pushed to jump through clouds or in high winds, or
when teams are told not to stop as the dropzone don't want the plane
going round for a second pass!!!!


Do you represent a team that attended the GP and didn't get to do what
they wanted?

Nick



grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:

> So Nick,
>
> By writing, the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have
> manifested, are you saying that GP's should not be run by Meet
> Directors and Judge's, but would be better run by the team's and
> Council members?
>
> If I remember rightly that at all GP's in any discipline in the passed,
> if it was going to be run away from the rules, then it would go to a
> unanimous vote only. Andy Scott knew this and pushed it to go his way.
>
> Blue skies
>
> Grumpyskydiver
>
>
>
> Nick wrote:
> > Grumpy
> >
> > I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
> > football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
> > captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
> > repesenting Grumpy?
> >
> >
> > As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
> > the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
> > that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
> > interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
> > impartial in this.
> >
> > As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
> > and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
> > that wanted to could wait until the next day.
> >
> > As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
> > so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> > > at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> > > in the Skydive mag.
> > >
> > > The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> > > football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> > > alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> > > is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
> > >
> > > Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
> > >
> > > The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> > > an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> > > meet director and team captains).
> > >
> > > Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> > > being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> > > written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> > > allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> > > the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> > > competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> > > just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
> > >
> > > Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> > > competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
> > >
> > >
> > > Blue skies
> > >
> > > Grumpyskydiver

Trickyhead@gmail.com

I was a team captain there, and from what I remember it was pretty
unanimous to stop the comp. Even if the judges had been consulted, no
one would have jumped anyway.

I felt it was a nice break. With fairly few teams the turnaround was
pretty quick so finishing for the day was good for us (Phobia) being an
inexperienced team.

I hope sibson bid for a GP again next year. From what I could tell they
had taken hardly any tandem bookings (I only saw 1 or 2) which meant we
could get on with the competition. I also got annoyed with the people
who moaned about not being able to fun jump (HELLO... THERES A GP!).

Whats the problem anyway? were you there? obvoiusly not.

Nick

Tricky

When I mentioned tandems I was referring to another dropzone that held
a GP this year that appeared to have put tandems way before the GP (as
they also did last year), I think that the way Sibson ran things was
great.

As for the judge, there was only one there and I think the break was
good for her too as she'd been stuck in the judging room on her own all
day.

Nick


Trickyh...@gmail.com wrote:

> I was a team captain there, and from what I remember it was pretty
> unanimous to stop the comp. Even if the judges had been consulted, no
> one would have jumped anyway.
>
> I felt it was a nice break. With fairly few teams the turnaround was
> pretty quick so finishing for the day was good for us (Phobia) being an
> inexperienced team.
>
> I hope sibson bid for a GP again next year. From what I could tell they
> had taken hardly any tandem bookings (I only saw 1 or 2) which meant we
> could get on with the competition. I also got annoyed with the people
> who moaned about not being able to fun jump (HELLO... THERES A GP!).
>
> Whats the problem anyway? were you there? obvoiusly not.

grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com

The big issue here Nick is, what is true and what are lies?

What has been swept under the BPA carpet by a council member?

It's not that the meet was stopped, but how and by whom?

That's were all our BPA GP competitors in all disaplins should be
looking.

Blue skies

Grumpskydiver

Nick wrote:
> Grumpy
>
> The decision to allow teams to self manifest was taken by the dropzone
> (and I assume in agreement with the meet director), if there is an
> issue with this the it should be taken up with the dropzone. During the
> vote that took place I don't remember the meet director stepping in the
> ensure that the comp continued, maybe this should be taken up with the
> meet director.
>
> I'm afraid that I don't have a record of what the results of the vote,
> perhaps you have this information. I can't remember any other vote at a
> meet requiring a unanimous vote, perhaps that they have all been
> invalid, if that the case should we invalidate the results of all meets
> where a vote has taken place!
>
>
> At the end of the day the meet was finished by midday on the Sunday,
> those that wanted to watched the match and those that wanted to carried
> on jumping, from what I could see everybody enjoyed themselves and it
> was good and safe. I can't see an issue here.
>
>
> I think there are much bigger issues where dropzones books large
> numbers of tandems knowing that a GP is going to take place meaning
> that the GP is close to not being completed in the weekend, when
> dropzone push the times so people are jumping in very dark conditions,
> when teams are being pushed to jump through clouds or in high winds, or
> when teams are told not to stop as the dropzone don't want the plane
> going round for a second pass!!!!
>
>
> Do you represent a team that attended the GP and didn't get to do what
> they wanted?
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > So Nick,
> >
> > By writing, the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have
> > manifested, are you saying that GP's should not be run by Meet
> > Directors and Judge's, but would be better run by the team's and
> > Council members?
> >
> > If I remember rightly that at all GP's in any discipline in the passed,
> > if it was going to be run away from the rules, then it would go to a
> > unanimous vote only. Andy Scott knew this and pushed it to go his way.
> >
> > Blue skies
> >
> > Grumpyskydiver
> >
> >
> >
> > Nick wrote:
> > > Grumpy
> > >
> > > I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
> > > football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
> > > captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
> > > repesenting Grumpy?
> > >
> > >
> > > As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
> > > the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
> > > that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
> > > interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
> > > impartial in this.
> > >
> > > As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
> > > and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
> > > that wanted to could wait until the next day.
> > >
> > > As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
> > > so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Nick
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> > > > at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> > > > in the Skydive mag.
> > > >
> > > > The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> > > > football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> > > > alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> > > > is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
> > > >
> > > > Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
> > > >
> > > > The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> > > > an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> > > > meet director and team captains).
> > > >
> > > > Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> > > > being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> > > > written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> > > > allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> > > > the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> > > > competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> > > > just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> > > > competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Blue skies
> > > >
> > > > Grumpyskydiver

Nick

Grumpy

A large number of people at the meet wanted the meet put on hold to
allow those that wanted to watch the match. This was put to the team
leaders as a vote. The result of the vote was almost unanimous. The
meet was put on hold. This was the decision of the team leaders.

I don't remember at any point the meet director stepping in to stop
this vote taking place, perhaps he/she should have.


Do you have other information that questions any of this?


I've had a look in the rule to see where it says that any votes taken
must be unanimous, obviously you are very knowledgeable in this matter,
could you point this out to me where it says this.

Again I ask, were you involved in the meet (team leader, competitor,
official)?

Regards

Nick





grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:

> The big issue here Nick is, what is true and what are lies?
>
> What has been swept under the BPA carpet by a council member?
>
> It's not that the meet was stopped, but how and by whom?
>
> That's were all our BPA GP competitors in all disaplins should be
> looking.
>
> Blue skies
>
> Grumpskydiver
>
> Nick wrote:
> > Grumpy
> >
> > The decision to allow teams to self manifest was taken by the dropzone
> > (and I assume in agreement with the meet director), if there is an
> > issue with this the it should be taken up with the dropzone. During the
> > vote that took place I don't remember the meet director stepping in the
> > ensure that the comp continued, maybe this should be taken up with the
> > meet director.
> >
> > I'm afraid that I don't have a record of what the results of the vote,
> > perhaps you have this information. I can't remember any other vote at a
> > meet requiring a unanimous vote, perhaps that they have all been
> > invalid, if that the case should we invalidate the results of all meets
> > where a vote has taken place!
> >
> >
> > At the end of the day the meet was finished by midday on the Sunday,
> > those that wanted to watched the match and those that wanted to carried
> > on jumping, from what I could see everybody enjoyed themselves and it
> > was good and safe. I can't see an issue here.
> >
> >
> > I think there are much bigger issues where dropzones books large
> > numbers of tandems knowing that a GP is going to take place meaning
> > that the GP is close to not being completed in the weekend, when
> > dropzone push the times so people are jumping in very dark conditions,
> > when teams are being pushed to jump through clouds or in high winds, or
> > when teams are told not to stop as the dropzone don't want the plane
> > going round for a second pass!!!!
> >
> >
> > Do you represent a team that attended the GP and didn't get to do what
> > they wanted?
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> >
> > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > So Nick,
> > >
> > > By writing, the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have
> > > manifested, are you saying that GP's should not be run by Meet
> > > Directors and Judge's, but would be better run by the team's and
> > > Council members?
> > >
> > > If I remember rightly that at all GP's in any discipline in the passed,
> > > if it was going to be run away from the rules, then it would go to a
> > > unanimous vote only. Andy Scott knew this and pushed it to go his way.
> > >
> > > Blue skies
> > >
> > > Grumpyskydiver
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Nick wrote:
> > > > Grumpy
> > > >
> > > > I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
> > > > football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
> > > > captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
> > > > repesenting Grumpy?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
> > > > the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
> > > > that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
> > > > interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
> > > > impartial in this.
> > > >
> > > > As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
> > > > and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
> > > > that wanted to could wait until the next day.
> > > >
> > > > As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
> > > > so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> > > > > at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> > > > > in the Skydive mag.
> > > > >
> > > > > The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> > > > > football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> > > > > alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> > > > > is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
> > > > >
> > > > > The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> > > > > an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> > > > > meet director and team captains).
> > > > >
> > > > > Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> > > > > being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> > > > > written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> > > > > allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> > > > > the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> > > > > competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> > > > > just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> > > > > competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Blue skies
> > > > >
> > > > > Grumpyskydiver

Nick

Grumpy

A large number of people at the meet wanted the meet put on hold to
allow those that wanted to watch the match. This was put to the team
leaders as a vote. The result of the vote was almost unanimous. The
meet was put on hold. This was the decision of the team leaders.

I don't remember at any point the meet director stepping in to stop
this vote taking place, perhaps he/she should have.


Do you have other information that questions any of this?


I've had a look for the rule to see where it says that any votes taken
must be unanimous, obviously you are very knowledgeable in this matter,
could you point this out to me where this rule is.

Again I ask, were you involved in the meet (team leader, competitor,
official)?

Regards

Nick





grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:

> The big issue here Nick is, what is true and what are lies?
>
> What has been swept under the BPA carpet by a council member?
>
> It's not that the meet was stopped, but how and by whom?
>
> That's were all our BPA GP competitors in all disaplins should be
> looking.
>
> Blue skies
>
> Grumpskydiver
>
> Nick wrote:
> > Grumpy
> >
> > The decision to allow teams to self manifest was taken by the dropzone
> > (and I assume in agreement with the meet director), if there is an
> > issue with this the it should be taken up with the dropzone. During the
> > vote that took place I don't remember the meet director stepping in the
> > ensure that the comp continued, maybe this should be taken up with the
> > meet director.
> >
> > I'm afraid that I don't have a record of what the results of the vote,
> > perhaps you have this information. I can't remember any other vote at a
> > meet requiring a unanimous vote, perhaps that they have all been
> > invalid, if that the case should we invalidate the results of all meets
> > where a vote has taken place!
> >
> >
> > At the end of the day the meet was finished by midday on the Sunday,
> > those that wanted to watched the match and those that wanted to carried
> > on jumping, from what I could see everybody enjoyed themselves and it
> > was good and safe. I can't see an issue here.
> >
> >
> > I think there are much bigger issues where dropzones books large
> > numbers of tandems knowing that a GP is going to take place meaning
> > that the GP is close to not being completed in the weekend, when
> > dropzone push the times so people are jumping in very dark conditions,
> > when teams are being pushed to jump through clouds or in high winds, or
> > when teams are told not to stop as the dropzone don't want the plane
> > going round for a second pass!!!!
> >
> >
> > Do you represent a team that attended the GP and didn't get to do what
> > they wanted?
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> >
> > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > So Nick,
> > >
> > > By writing, the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have
> > > manifested, are you saying that GP's should not be run by Meet
> > > Directors and Judge's, but would be better run by the team's and
> > > Council members?
> > >
> > > If I remember rightly that at all GP's in any discipline in the passed,
> > > if it was going to be run away from the rules, then it would go to a
> > > unanimous vote only. Andy Scott knew this and pushed it to go his way.
> > >
> > > Blue skies
> > >
> > > Grumpyskydiver
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Nick wrote:
> > > > Grumpy
> > > >
> > > > I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
> > > > football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
> > > > captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
> > > > repesenting Grumpy?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
> > > > the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
> > > > that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
> > > > interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
> > > > impartial in this.
> > > >
> > > > As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
> > > > and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
> > > > that wanted to could wait until the next day.
> > > >
> > > > As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
> > > > so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> > > > > at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> > > > > in the Skydive mag.
> > > > >
> > > > > The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> > > > > football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> > > > > alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> > > > > is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
> > > > >
> > > > > The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> > > > > an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> > > > > meet director and team captains).
> > > > >
> > > > > Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> > > > > being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> > > > > written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> > > > > allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> > > > > the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> > > > > competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> > > > > just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> > > > > competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Blue skies
> > > > >
> > > > > Grumpyskydiver

Nick

Grumpy

A large number of people at the meet wanted the meet put on hold to
allow those that wanted to watch the match. This was put to the team
leaders as a vote. The result of the vote was almost unanimous. The
meet was put on hold. This was the decision of the team leaders.

I don't remember at any point the meet director stepping in to stop
this vote taking place, perhaps he/she should have.


Do you have other information that questions any of this?


I've had a look for the rule to see where it says that any votes taken
must be unanimous, obviously you are very knowledgeable in this matter,
could you point out to me where this rule is.

Again I ask, were you involved in the meet (team leader, competitor,
official)?

Regards

Nick





grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:

> The big issue here Nick is, what is true and what are lies?
>
> What has been swept under the BPA carpet by a council member?
>
> It's not that the meet was stopped, but how and by whom?
>
> That's were all our BPA GP competitors in all disaplins should be
> looking.
>
> Blue skies
>
> Grumpskydiver
>
> Nick wrote:
> > Grumpy
> >
> > The decision to allow teams to self manifest was taken by the dropzone
> > (and I assume in agreement with the meet director), if there is an
> > issue with this the it should be taken up with the dropzone. During the
> > vote that took place I don't remember the meet director stepping in the
> > ensure that the comp continued, maybe this should be taken up with the
> > meet director.
> >
> > I'm afraid that I don't have a record of what the results of the vote,
> > perhaps you have this information. I can't remember any other vote at a
> > meet requiring a unanimous vote, perhaps that they have all been
> > invalid, if that the case should we invalidate the results of all meets
> > where a vote has taken place!
> >
> >
> > At the end of the day the meet was finished by midday on the Sunday,
> > those that wanted to watched the match and those that wanted to carried
> > on jumping, from what I could see everybody enjoyed themselves and it
> > was good and safe. I can't see an issue here.
> >
> >
> > I think there are much bigger issues where dropzones books large
> > numbers of tandems knowing that a GP is going to take place meaning
> > that the GP is close to not being completed in the weekend, when
> > dropzone push the times so people are jumping in very dark conditions,
> > when teams are being pushed to jump through clouds or in high winds, or
> > when teams are told not to stop as the dropzone don't want the plane
> > going round for a second pass!!!!
> >
> >
> > Do you represent a team that attended the GP and didn't get to do what
> > they wanted?
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> >
> > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > So Nick,
> > >
> > > By writing, the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have
> > > manifested, are you saying that GP's should not be run by Meet
> > > Directors and Judge's, but would be better run by the team's and
> > > Council members?
> > >
> > > If I remember rightly that at all GP's in any discipline in the passed,
> > > if it was going to be run away from the rules, then it would go to a
> > > unanimous vote only. Andy Scott knew this and pushed it to go his way.
> > >
> > > Blue skies
> > >
> > > Grumpyskydiver
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Nick wrote:
> > > > Grumpy
> > > >
> > > > I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
> > > > football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
> > > > captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
> > > > repesenting Grumpy?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
> > > > the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
> > > > that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
> > > > interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
> > > > impartial in this.
> > > >
> > > > As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
> > > > and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
> > > > that wanted to could wait until the next day.
> > > >
> > > > As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
> > > > so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> > > > > at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> > > > > in the Skydive mag.
> > > > >
> > > > > The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> > > > > football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> > > > > alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> > > > > is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
> > > > >
> > > > > The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> > > > > an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> > > > > meet director and team captains).
> > > > >
> > > > > Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> > > > > being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> > > > > written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> > > > > allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> > > > > the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> > > > > competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> > > > > just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> > > > > competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Blue skies
> > > > >
> > > > > Grumpyskydiver

grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com

Nick

How can anyone who is a 'Whisle blower' expose his/her ID to someone
who is also hinding his/her ID? This forum is full of members who
would like to keep their ID secret for that very reason. They are
Council members, DZ owners, Competitors, Sunday jumpers and even
Judge's.

Yes I was there.

I note that you seem not to know who should be running a GP, who the
Meet Director was or how many Judge's there was. So how can you say
what truely went on.

Blue skies

Grumpy


Nick wrote:
> Grumpy
>
> A large number of people at the meet wanted the meet put on hold to
> allow those that wanted to watch the match. This was put to the team
> leaders as a vote. The result of the vote was almost unanimous. The
> meet was put on hold. This was the decision of the team leaders.
>
> I don't remember at any point the meet director stepping in to stop
> this vote taking place, perhaps he/she should have.
>
>
> Do you have other information that questions any of this?
>
>
> I've had a look in the rule to see where it says that any votes taken
> must be unanimous, obviously you are very knowledgeable in this matter,
> could you point this out to me where it says this.
>
> Again I ask, were you involved in the meet (team leader, competitor,
> official)?
>
> Regards
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>
> grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > The big issue here Nick is, what is true and what are lies?
> >
> > What has been swept under the BPA carpet by a council member?
> >
> > It's not that the meet was stopped, but how and by whom?
> >
> > That's were all our BPA GP competitors in all disaplins should be
> > looking.
> >
> > Blue skies
> >
> > Grumpskydiver
> >
> > Nick wrote:
> > > Grumpy
> > >
> > > The decision to allow teams to self manifest was taken by the dropzone
> > > (and I assume in agreement with the meet director), if there is an
> > > issue with this the it should be taken up with the dropzone. During the
> > > vote that took place I don't remember the meet director stepping in the
> > > ensure that the comp continued, maybe this should be taken up with the
> > > meet director.
> > >
> > > I'm afraid that I don't have a record of what the results of the vote,
> > > perhaps you have this information. I can't remember any other vote at a
> > > meet requiring a unanimous vote, perhaps that they have all been
> > > invalid, if that the case should we invalidate the results of all meets
> > > where a vote has taken place!
> > >
> > >
> > > At the end of the day the meet was finished by midday on the Sunday,
> > > those that wanted to watched the match and those that wanted to carried
> > > on jumping, from what I could see everybody enjoyed themselves and it
> > > was good and safe. I can't see an issue here.
> > >
> > >
> > > I think there are much bigger issues where dropzones books large
> > > numbers of tandems knowing that a GP is going to take place meaning
> > > that the GP is close to not being completed in the weekend, when
> > > dropzone push the times so people are jumping in very dark conditions,
> > > when teams are being pushed to jump through clouds or in high winds, or
> > > when teams are told not to stop as the dropzone don't want the plane
> > > going round for a second pass!!!!
> > >
> > >
> > > Do you represent a team that attended the GP and didn't get to do what
> > > they wanted?
> > >
> > > Nick
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > So Nick,
> > > >
> > > > By writing, the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have
> > > > manifested, are you saying that GP's should not be run by Meet
> > > > Directors and Judge's, but would be better run by the team's and
> > > > Council members?
> > > >
> > > > If I remember rightly that at all GP's in any discipline in the passed,
> > > > if it was going to be run away from the rules, then it would go to a
> > > > unanimous vote only. Andy Scott knew this and pushed it to go his way.
> > > >
> > > > Blue skies
> > > >
> > > > Grumpyskydiver
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Nick wrote:
> > > > > Grumpy
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
> > > > > football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
> > > > > captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
> > > > > repesenting Grumpy?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
> > > > > the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
> > > > > that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
> > > > > interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
> > > > > impartial in this.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
> > > > > and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
> > > > > that wanted to could wait until the next day.
> > > > >
> > > > > As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
> > > > > so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > >
> > > > > Nick
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> > > > > > at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> > > > > > in the Skydive mag.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> > > > > > football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> > > > > > alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> > > > > > is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> > > > > > an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> > > > > > meet director and team captains).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> > > > > > being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> > > > > > written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> > > > > > allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> > > > > > the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> > > > > > competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> > > > > > just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> > > > > > competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Blue skies
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Grumpyskydiver

Nick

Not worried about exactly who you are, just establishing that you were
there. I thought it was a great weekend but it's a shame it was spoilt
for as you must have been really upset about the comp being put on
hold.

I'm a competitor, do I really need to know who the meet director is,
and BTW I do know who the judge was (did I ever say that), I had a goot
chat with her on the Sat night.


There is nothing in the rules that states that a meet cannot be put on
hold for any reason. Also in the rules where any decisions are to be
made these are made by the team leaders and the officials, the
consensus from the team leaders was that the meet should be put on
hold. I didn't see any meet official stepping in (BTW according to the
rules for the nationals which apply here the meet director has "the
casting vote on any matters identified by the chief judge") as there
was only one judge there (which you didn't appear to be aware of in
your first post) she obviously didn't think it was a problem.

Again I ask you to point out in the rules where is states that for a
vote to be carried it has to be unanimous.

Nick




grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:

> Nick
>
> How can anyone who is a 'Whisle blower' expose his/her ID to someone
> who is also hinding his/her ID? This forum is full of members who
> would like to keep their ID secret for that very reason. They are
> Council members, DZ owners, Competitors, Sunday jumpers and even
> Judge's.
>
> Yes I was there.
>
> I note that you seem not to know who should be running a GP, who the
> Meet Director was or how many Judge's there was. So how can you say
> what truely went on.
>
> Blue skies
>
> Grumpy
>
>
> Nick wrote:
> > Grumpy
> >
> > A large number of people at the meet wanted the meet put on hold to
> > allow those that wanted to watch the match. This was put to the team
> > leaders as a vote. The result of the vote was almost unanimous. The
> > meet was put on hold. This was the decision of the team leaders.
> >
> > I don't remember at any point the meet director stepping in to stop
> > this vote taking place, perhaps he/she should have.
> >
> >
> > Do you have other information that questions any of this?
> >
> >
> > I've had a look in the rule to see where it says that any votes taken
> > must be unanimous, obviously you are very knowledgeable in this matter,
> > could you point this out to me where it says this.
> >
> > Again I ask, were you involved in the meet (team leader, competitor,
> > official)?
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > The big issue here Nick is, what is true and what are lies?
> > >
> > > What has been swept under the BPA carpet by a council member?
> > >
> > > It's not that the meet was stopped, but how and by whom?
> > >
> > > That's were all our BPA GP competitors in all disaplins should be
> > > looking.
> > >
> > > Blue skies
> > >
> > > Grumpskydiver
> > >
> > > Nick wrote:
> > > > Grumpy
> > > >
> > > > The decision to allow teams to self manifest was taken by the dropzone
> > > > (and I assume in agreement with the meet director), if there is an
> > > > issue with this the it should be taken up with the dropzone. During the
> > > > vote that took place I don't remember the meet director stepping in the
> > > > ensure that the comp continued, maybe this should be taken up with the
> > > > meet director.
> > > >
> > > > I'm afraid that I don't have a record of what the results of the vote,
> > > > perhaps you have this information. I can't remember any other vote at a
> > > > meet requiring a unanimous vote, perhaps that they have all been
> > > > invalid, if that the case should we invalidate the results of all meets
> > > > where a vote has taken place!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At the end of the day the meet was finished by midday on the Sunday,
> > > > those that wanted to watched the match and those that wanted to carried
> > > > on jumping, from what I could see everybody enjoyed themselves and it
> > > > was good and safe. I can't see an issue here.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think there are much bigger issues where dropzones books large
> > > > numbers of tandems knowing that a GP is going to take place meaning
> > > > that the GP is close to not being completed in the weekend, when
> > > > dropzone push the times so people are jumping in very dark conditions,
> > > > when teams are being pushed to jump through clouds or in high winds, or
> > > > when teams are told not to stop as the dropzone don't want the plane
> > > > going round for a second pass!!!!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Do you represent a team that attended the GP and didn't get to do what
> > > > they wanted?
> > > >
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > So Nick,
> > > > >
> > > > > By writing, the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have
> > > > > manifested, are you saying that GP's should not be run by Meet
> > > > > Directors and Judge's, but would be better run by the team's and
> > > > > Council members?
> > > > >
> > > > > If I remember rightly that at all GP's in any discipline in the passed,
> > > > > if it was going to be run away from the rules, then it would go to a
> > > > > unanimous vote only. Andy Scott knew this and pushed it to go his way.
> > > > >
> > > > > Blue skies
> > > > >
> > > > > Grumpyskydiver
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Nick wrote:
> > > > > > Grumpy
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'll say that for my team (even those who didn't want to watch the
> > > > > > football) that the vote was a great idea. Are there any other team
> > > > > > captains around that would like to comment, which team are you
> > > > > > repesenting Grumpy?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As a competitor at the GP in questions I didn't have any problems with
> > > > > > the comp being stopped for the football on the Saturday (considering
> > > > > > that the forecast for the Sunday was very good) and as I wasn't at all
> > > > > > interested in watching the football it could be said that I am pretty
> > > > > > impartial in this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As I remember it a vote was put to all of the teams (via the captains)
> > > > > > and it was agreed that those that wanted to could continue and those
> > > > > > that wanted to could wait until the next day.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As the DZ said the comp would be run by teams self manifesting those
> > > > > > teams that did want to watch the football just wouldn't have manifested
> > > > > > so I felt that having the vote was a very fair thing to do.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nick
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> > > > > > > at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> > > > > > > in the Skydive mag.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> > > > > > > football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> > > > > > > alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> > > > > > > is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> > > > > > > an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> > > > > > > meet director and team captains).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> > > > > > > being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> > > > > > > written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> > > > > > > allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> > > > > > > the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> > > > > > > competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> > > > > > > just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> > > > > > > competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Blue skies
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Grumpyskydiver

metal mickey

Hello Grumpy

Why dont you read the FAI Sporting Code - Section 5 - it's on the FAI
website just take a look it states the following in good old black and
white

4.5.3 Organiser's Responsibilities
(1) The Organiser must ensure that the completion of the competition
takes precedence over leisure, pleasure and publicity activities. Dont
you think that football falls into one of these activities.

This is not in the BPA rules as far as I am aware.

Mickey


grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com wrote:
> A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> in the Skydive mag.
>
> The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
>
> Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
>
> The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> meet director and team captains).
>
> Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
>
> Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
>
>
> Blue skies
>
> Grumpyskydiver

luugnutes

On 20 Oct 2006 08:35:59 -0700, "metal mickey" <suzie_15@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Why dont you read the FAI Sporting Code - Section 5 - it's on the FAI
> website just take a look it states the following in good old black and
> white
>
> 4.5.3 Organiser's Responsibilities
> (1) The Organiser must ensure that the completion of the competition
> takes precedence over leisure, pleasure and publicity activities. [Dont
> you think that football falls into one of these activities.]
>
> This is not in the BPA rules as far as I am aware.

It's not a valid competition unless the FAI rules are followed?

Mick Cooper

"Alan Wilkinson" <Alan@skydivers.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1161269457.702299.78060@m7g2000cwm.googlegrou ps.com...
> Grump or whoever you are, some words of advice.....
>
>
> GET A LIFE!!!!
>
> So what if they stopped the comp for a football game????? You know
> what? it might have been fun?
>
> Feel free to declare your identity.
>
> Alan W
>
>

They never do Alan

if they had something worthwhile to say - they would have the balls to put
their name to it.

Phantom O' Skygod

Skydive Sibson

A message for Grumpy Skydiver.

The only reason that I mentioned the stop as 'controversial' because there
was one judge (Frank) who was not even an official at the meet, contacted
the BPA chief judge (Kate) who also wasn't present and tried to declare the
meet null and void because we had stopped for what he thought was solely
because there was a football match on.

The real reason for the team leaders meeting was that the meet director was
very concerned that a lot of the inexperienced jumpers were not coping with
the weather conditions on the day. It was 35 degrees, 15-18 knots and
extremely bumpy with the wind coming over the tall trees at the end of the
PLA. Teams that had completed 4 rounds in under 4 hours were complaining of
dehydration and bad landings. Pool cameramen/women were pulling out because
of the heat. This lead to a team leaders meeting as most team captains had
approached the meet director asking for a break.

Andy Scott was present at the team leaders meeting (wearing his union jack -
as were many others). There was a vote for a break and most voted yes
whether it be because they were tired or wanted to watch the football - who
knows, but your comment "The stop did not go down well" . . . . . well sorry
but you're incorrect. Match or no match - there would have been a break and
that was the jumper's choice.

We had some great feedback from a lot of the competitors mainly thanking us
for not booking in tandems and concentrating on the competition.
Competitions are run for the jumpers and we wouldn't have competitions
without them so it's pretty important to listen to them and try to
accommodate their needs.

The meet ran extremely well in my opinion so maybe you should get your facts
right next time before you use my name as if I agree with you because I'm
clearly do not and Andy doesn't need to cover his arse because he had no say
in the proceedings - just one vote as a team captain . . . . as for the
high five. . . . don't bother!

Sarah Hall
(I'm not afraid to sign my real name grumpy!)



<grumpyskydiver@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1161079225.269751.100180@k70g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>A big 'High five' for Sarah Hall, for hinting that not all was well
> at this year 4-way GP at Sibson. This can be found in the club pages
> in the Skydive mag.
>
> The alleged contriverstional stoppage of the competition to watch the
> football did not did not go down well with all that were there. It is
> alleged that not all teams wanted to stop and, even more seriously, it
> is also alleged that the Judge's were not even consulted.
>
> Now, if you read Andy Scott's report in the GP results it says:
>
> The meet completed all 6 rounds easily by Sunday lunchtime - even with
> an agreed 2 hour stand down on the Saturday evening (agreed between
> meet director and team captains).
>
> Now there is no mention of the Judge's, or that all team captains,
> being consulted. Also it is worth noting that Mr. Scott has not
> written a report for any other GP but this one. Was it because,
> allegedly, that it was he who wanted to watch the football. Also were
> the Judge's not consulted because it is against the rules to stop a
> competition, as Scott knows (allegedly), for such a reason. Or, was he
> just covering he's ass because he knew he was in the wrong.
>
> Should a Council member be showing such disrespect (allegedly) to the
> competitors and, more seriously, to our Judge's.
>
>
> Blue skies
>
> Grumpyskydiver
>