AOA management
 John P
|
Posted: 1 July 2012, 9:14 AM
This topic is a spin-off from the AOA points forum.
In the golden days, Auckland wide regional orienteering issues were managed by a committee composed of 2 delegates from each club and a president, which appointed a technical officer and OY statistician. The technical officer was a committee member, if memory serves me correctly. The brief for delegates was to act in the interests of regional orienteering and while they presented their club's point of view on items they were able to vote otherwise given the discussions that occurred. The presidency rotated amongst the clubs and was appointed by the club in residency but my memory is hazy on this.
The technical officer was responsible for producing a draft age-class and course combinations for the year and for supervision of the quality of the OY events. It was not uncommon to see the technical officer, setter and controller in conversation towards the end of an event about the courses. The statistician was responsible for a draft points system and the drafts went through the committee.
In my opinion, the current system has not served us as well, as Robbie suggests in his comment in the OY points topic. In particular, I have noticed a decided slide in standards, for example, a much higher incidence of dog-legs, different courses running the same legs in opposite directions, bingo controls, courses where the setter has focused on control sites rather than legs and people studying their map for considerable lengths of time before starting.
I have also had difficulties as the OY statistician under the current set-up which I don't think I would have had under the previous arrangement. In particular, the OY points system I inherited was controversial with strongly held positions for age-class weightings to be applied to all courses and the critics calling for a return to all of an age-class running the same course.
I did not have a committee I could go to that would provide a variety of view points and solutions and that could act independent of the club committees. I thought if I got together a group of 4 or so from the clubs I might be able to initiate a compromise to put to the clubs but found two articulate and determined weightings advocates and two articulate and determined all-do the-same-course advocates. If you have been following the OY points topic then you can probably identify the participants and their positions. They are quite correct in their statements that I was not open to their suggestions - I wasn't.
Time for a change. Suggestions?
|
|
John P
|
Posted: 8 July 2012, 9:28 AM
My discourse has met with a giant yawn so it might as well go but I am unable to locate a delete option. Is it there forever?
|
|
Michael A
|
Posted: 9 July 2012, 4:31 AM
Why the over complicated competition?
Why not keep it common sense simple!
Where are the outliers / rogues in the scenario below ?
Rule:
OY competition is for `A` division, age grades only.
`A` division competitors wishing to participate in an OY competition must run their age grade course or courses above.
`A` division competitors running courses below their age grade will not be deemed part of the OY competition.
(whoops, now for the flack, no `B' grades in an OY competition, let `B`grade courses be without the competition factor !
Cheers
|
|
John P
|
Posted: 10 July 2012, 2:53 AM
Thanks Michael - certainly simpler and an interesting idea that I have not met previously. Worthwhile taking it to your club committee to consider when this year's series is reviewed following the last event. If you want to share it with others on this website then you are more likely to get an audience on the AOA OY points forum rather than this one, which has not received any comment on the management issues.
|
|
|
© Ruffneck Productions