![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
As you may be aware I am the complier for the Officials rankings, and find the rules for this to be a nightmare! So I am trying to revise them to make it simpler, these would (of course) need approval by the ACM and slalom committee.
Background
There seems to be a general lack of interest in this competition, indeed many are unaware that there is a competition let alone a trophy for the overall winner. In this day and age is the Officials competition relevant? Do we wish to continue? If we do we need to publicise it better. Many events seem to complain of the difficulty of getting people to judge and I assume this was set up to encourage judging. In which case we need to make it more relevant for this purpose. Should we award a trophy for the Prem /Div 1, Div2/3 and Div 4 winners as well as the overall? Currently there are 329 names on the list, half of which have only done one event, usually their home club event. So far Nick publishes the entire list and I propose next year to only send him the top 50 names, unless anyone vigorously objects.
Proposal 0
![Twisted Evil :twisted:](./images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif)
WHEN organisers send me the results (and that doesn’t happen often, most of the time either Nick sends them to me or I have to wait for them to be published on the web) the ranking of the competitor is not included. I spend a great deal of time trying to track down peoples ranking. If they have not competed for several years they will have no ranking and I have to make a best guess as to where they should be.
Proposal 1: In future organisers are to put the competitors last ranking division on the results sheets, and we will ask Ken to modify Simply Slalom to show the information.
Many names I recognise but there are a few who seem to crawl out of the woodwork only for Officials events. Indeed a few paddlers this year have told me that they intend to paddle only in Officials next year and not do a ranking event. As this is a way of keeping people in the sport and judging, the event then becomes relevant however, one has to ask why they are dropping out of ranking events. But that’s a discussion for another day…………….
Proposal 2: Rule B6.6 refers to non-paddling judges. Organisers NEVER tell me if they have non-paddling judges and the award of 25 points for each event they judge at is ridiculous. If a non-paddling judge did only 6 events they would only be around number 65 on the current ranking list. In order to be at the top they would have to do 25 events!
Therefore, in an attempt to value volunteers do we
A) scrap this rule
B) increase the number of points awarded for each event done to give them a better chance of getting near the top
C) have a separate competition for Non-paddling judges?
If we decide to continue then Organisers MUST inform me of all NON-paddling judges otherwise it won’t work. The easiest way is for a form to be completed that could be e mailed to me with the results. Another addition to the Organisers pack.
Proposal 3: Why not have a club trophy? Awarded to the club who has the most members judging throughout the year. As there are currently 64 clubs on the list we can work out the winners in one of several ways.
A) We take the first 10 clubs on the list only and then add up the number of events their members have judged at, the winning club being the one with the most events
B) We take the first 10 clubs and add up all the points their members have gained, the winning club being the one with the most points
C) We count ALL the clubs and then either A or B
D) Add the points from the top three paddlers for the club, the club with the highest score wins. (or some other number of paddlers)
E) Open to other suggestions.
Obviously we would need to find a trophy for this but to get it off the ground and encourage clubs to get its members to judge I think we would need to find some sort of sponsorship at least for the first few years to make it attractive to the clubs.
Proposal for C2’s. Here’s where CP and I disagree. On one of the Officials events the paddlers paddled in their class and then all joined up and paddled C2’s. In this case they would all have got 2 sets of points. Is this what we want? Therefore, how do we award points to C2’s? We need to form a proposal to put to the ACM to sort out this mess. There are no rules about how points are allocated when a C2 paddles an Officials event. I have therefore awarded one set of points for 'the crew' depending on where they finished.
CP believes that each member of a ranked crew should have the points awarded to them, but that if they do a single and C2 at one event (or K1 and C1, or two C2 pairs) you get the highest points but not double points
As I said I am open to suggestions on all of these proposals and hope that this post will encourage some scratching of the little grey cells and some ideas on how we can improve the current situation. Here's hoping for some comment / suggestion and not just deafening silence.
Mrs CP
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)