It's real alright Rolf. This is the result of some very hard work in the background by a group of us in the UK under the auspices of UKCRA led by Nick Dewhirst.

We had the statement yesterday but were asked not to reveal it ahead of publication.

Congratulations and thank you for the effort John! If you can, a short notice on who we should thank and how it was done would be good. Very inspirational.
I just forwarded the PDF to the Norwegian Sailing Federations general secretary with a short and polite note about what is happening. Group G (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Estonia) voted for multis, but keeping the federation informed can not do damage?

Well done the RYA and all involved. Now we have to push our own National Associations and get them to see the light.

I don't think it will hurt keeping all the pro MNAs on side as the more that speak with one voice the louder it becomes and maybe those MNAs that voted against will listen.

This begins to open the door a little bit on the issue. You will find Yachting Australia in this fight as well. I think that it is important to note, that going forth this needs to be done without all of the angry words that some national members have been recieving. I am speaking of a certian amount of real nastiness that has been levied against some of them. This does not help our cause and only serves to hurt it in the long run. We need support, not enemies in this fight. Thanks!

Great! It is already in the right hands in Brazil.
Keep them coming.

Can Wouter tell us what is happening in Holland?

I just did the same in Austria. Hope it helps.

Copied from The Daily Sail:
RYA calls for ISAF re-vote
We speak to Rod Carr about the RYA's call for ISAF to re-open voting on the 2012 Olympic classes
Today the debate about the selection of events for the 2012 Olympic Games in London, made in Estoril last month (see here and here), has taken a new turn. As dissatisfaction spreads throughout the sailing world, the RYA has fired a significant warning shot across the bows of the ISAF. The RYA it should be remembered is not only one of the top Olympic nations when it comes to sailing but represents sailing in the country where the 2012 Games are to be hosted.
A letter was, today, sent to ISAF from the RYA in addition to being copied to every voting MNA (Member National Authority) in the World. The letter – attached below - calls for a re-evaluation of the 2012 Olympic events to be voted on in March next year at the ISAF’s mid-year meeting.

This is the first time we have seen any MNA stick their head above the parapet and actually call, officially for some action to be taken. The question now is; what has to be done for this to work?

Earlier this morning we spoke to RYA CEO, Rod Carr, who was very clear about their view on the vote in Estoril. “The first thing that I want to point out is that [the vote] was a legitimately, legally made decision. We are not challenging the legality of it. We are challenging the rightness of it,” he explained.

So how does this letter begin the process of getting ISAF to change their minds with regard to class selection? In essence, alone, it can do very little. For the ISAF to be able to review the situation officially two thirds of the voting ISAF Council members - 24 out of 36 - must agree to the proposition. But before we even get that far there is another hurdle to jump: “As it says in the letter, we need the ISAF to defer telling the IOC what the events are,” Carr explains. “The IOC should be informed by March and we are saying, write to them and say ‘we request permission to defer announcing our events.’ I can’t believe, this far out from the [2012] Olympics that is something the IOC would refuse.”

So then if the ISAF do ask to defer their announcement to the IOC how on earth are the RYA going to be able to achieve the support of two thirds of a council who have already voted on the subject? “To get that motion on the table, we could propose it, but we believe it would be much better if the President of the Executive Committee realised there are lot of upset nations and said ‘right, we have an issue’ rather than letting each nation come in with their own admissions to support ours,” Carr comments. “That is what we would prefer, so that is why we have copied our letter to every MNA in the world, so they can easily show their support. My guess is that if that does not gender much of a response at all then the Committee will say, ‘well Britain feels quite strongly about it and the Australians do, but no-one else does.’ If all the people who have spoken to us to say they want it re-opened, which is about 20 countries before we sent the letter out, then there is lots of pressure.”

Clearly then if the RYA receive the backing of the 20 MNAs they have already spoken to, the job of getting 24 Council members to re-open the voting is almost there, with each MNA having a repreentative on on the ISAF Council, albeit a shared one with other MNAs.

Of course there is another way that the voting could be re-opened. The ISAF constitution has a clause in which if five National Authorities band together and call for an emergency meeting then it must take place. It seems this is another possibility for re-opening negotiations. “If you have five nations, you could call a special council meeting, but we are not looking to do that. I think if we do not get enough nations to persuade the President to re-open, then having five will probably not get us anywhere as we will still have to convince another 20 odd people not to get the same vote again. That is a bit of a hand-grenade option. As soon as you do that you risk not having a concession. We want to build a situation where reasonable MNAs and people of interest say ‘frankly we messed up here, we have a chance to put it right, let’s put it right,’” states Carr.

However, with the current climate as it is and much complaining about the voting process in Estoril, whereby all the votes were made at the same time as opposed to having an effective vote off between events, how can we ensure the same mistakes are not just made again? “Once they have decided to re-open the debate they will of course have to vote again and we hope they will not re-vote on the American slate principal, ie all at once,” explains Carr. “We hope there will be a vote-off, with the most popular classes like the Laser [men’s single handed dinghy] first and the most questionable classes such as the multihull in the latter stages. That is what we want and if it is re-opened we will stand by the outcome of that.”

We have seen in this voting process a number of national authorities making the poor decision to vote based on which event they are most likely to medal in. This voting without the good of the sport in mind is clearly not the way forward and no matter what happens this time round we still believe a reshuffle of how the ISAF Council is arranged is in order. Carr is more hopeful other nations will vote in the interests of the sport. “We hope that more nations will act like we did and the Australians and realise that if you vote purely on medal winning possibilities then you end up shooting yourself in the foot. Clearly it is no good having lots of good Olympic class sailors but no Olympics,” he exclaims.

Whatever happens it is encouraging to finally see one MNA backing the opinion of so much of the sailing public. However, this letter by itself, although a good start, is not yet enough. We must hope that we can sort out this mess, re-open the voting and ensure an exhilarating Olympics in London come 2012. We must also look at the way in which these decisions are made in our sport and start to consider some possible changes.

It's great that they are seeking a re-vote, though I still question the stated assumption that the original vote was legal. MNAs have publicly stated that they cast their vote based on criteria that are different from those required by the ISAF regulations. Effectively they (those MNAs) are publicly trumpeting their own lack of integrity! Surely they are at least bringing the sport into disrepute - itself an offense subject to individual sanctions under ISAF regulations.

What was new to me in the dailysail piece was that the voting procedure was altered after a motion from "the americans". Wonder if it was US Sailings representatives or another committee member and how calculated that motion was.

To follow up on what John has said, there are a number of people who have done a vast amount of work in the background. Skype has been melting, Mobile bills have been large, bosses (mine asked what was going on) have had to give a little slack at times and it looks like the efforts have been worth while. I also had a copy of the above last night and can too vouch for it's authenticty.

Most of what has been done will remain in the shadows, but those that have been involved know the time will hopefully have been well spent.

So, a large amount of activity at the level of MNA's acrross the world in getting the ISAF to reconsider.

Sadly, It would appear that the USA is bound and determined to have a keel boat in the olympics at all costs. So not much hope in persuading US Sailing to join the RYA in asking for a change. The risk of loosing a keel boat is too high for the USA.

It would seem that plan B is to break off and form a new international sanctioning body for multi's. How serious is the movement to create a new international organization that would replace ISAF for multihull sailing?

While you can come up with strong reasons for why this would be great.... the reality of creating a real organization and fighting ISAF for authority over multihull sailing will be daunting. Anybody know the players and their game plan for this initiative.

Not just at the level of MNA's; much lobbying of MNA's, persons at the ISAF, "interested parties"; persons forming parts of MNA's etc.

Lots of people around the world doing lots of things.

Second Rule of Diplomacy: In order to be able to ask for concessions and set conditions one must be engaged in the discussions. ie: if you take your football home you don't get to set the rules for the game. So do we really want to jump ship and form another organization, separating us from the majority of racing sailors???, and ... "Keep your friends close, put keep your enemies closer"; by staying involved don't we keep our "enemies" closer???

Some AUS sailors will be meeting at 7.00pm tonight to discuss the formation of the AMC (Australian Multihull Council) to unite and co-ordinate Multihull sailors as one, plus address the issue of Cats being dropped from the Olympics. The meeting will be addressed by Phil Jones, COE of Yachting Australia and Darren Bundock. The meeting will well represented by some of the best AUS and International Multihull sailors.

The only thing I'd say about pulling the pin on ISAF is that IF, and it's big 'if', cat sailors could get themselves sufficiently organised to develop cat racing competition into a marketable commodity, and done correctly it has extraordinary potential, IOC would fall over themselves to gain rights to a piece of the action. We are talking $$$$$$ and that after all, is the language of the IOC.
And the converse is also true in that if we remain a weekend 'turn up and sail and go home' organisation, we stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting anyone to listen to anything we say. It really is that simple IMO.

There are good precedents (at Olympic level) for sporting bodies dis-associating themselves from a “governing” body, which has been seen to be dis-advantaging the “break away” group.
IF a governing/controlling body was formed for and from multihull sailors, for the benefit of multihull sailing, and being a completely separate body from the ISAF, then that new body could negotiate directly with the IOC for inclusion into the Olympic games (and probably with more than the one only class of multihull as of now, as well). If this new organization were accepted as the one and only “legitimate” multihull governing body, representing all multihulls, then it would qualify for financial assistance from the IOC in the same way that the ISAF does now.
Multihulls, regardless of what many would say, ARE in an entirely different context from mono hulls, and as such, the only way for them to receive the suitable attention that they deserve is to be seen as, and be in actuality, SEPARATE (in their organization and control) from the ISAF and the monohull fraternity. That is not to say that we are not still “all sailors” what ever we sail, BUT the control and administration of each has to be separated to ensure the best for all.
As long as governance of multihulls falls under the predominantly mono hull mentality administration, we will always be “the poor relations” and treated accordingly. It will always be difficult to gain the recognition we deserve, as the only way we receive anything now is to go “cap in hand” and virtually “beg for our supper”. We have the right to stand on our own feet, face to face with all other sports as equals, and not as second-class citizens as we are considered to be, and treated as such, within the sailing fraternity in particular, and the overall sporting world in general.

The following is a letter from Rod Carr addressed to all those who wrote to him in person to complain:

Hello all,
You took the trouble to email me some weeks ago expressing your disquiet at the RYA position regarding catamarans, specifically the selection of a cat as an Olympic event.

We all know what happened at the ISAF conference.

This email and letter, which has been sent to every MNA in the world plus the ISAF council - is the main plank of the RYAs effort to get the November decision reviewed and hopefully overturned.

In order for this to happen we need to 75% of the ISAF Council to agree with us. We have been working hard behind the scenes to gather support form other MNAs.

To be honest I don't think individual protest will cary much weight with ISAF, however, if you can bring any pressure to bear on other MNAs using any international contacts you may have ...now is the time!

Regards,

Rod Carr.

Chief Executive, RYA.



75% is going to be tough so if you can influence your MNA, now is the time.

After Torben's gold in the last games and Scheidt's successfull campaign in the Star class, it is a political suicide to ask for a Brazilian vote against this class.

I believe a favorable vote to multihulls is possible due to the following reasons:

a) The country has virtually no chances in many other classes that never yielded a medal, while the Tornado brought two (gold and bronze).

b) The athletes who won medals in the Tornado directly influence the decision making process (Lars Grael is in politics)

b) There is no high performance dinghy loby, just some girls claiming that they could have a chance with match racing format.

Conclusion: it is possible to obtain a favorable vote from Brazil for a multihull class, but only if it does not interfere with keeping the Star class, so the voting methodology is critical.