On second thoughts, scrap the lasers and go just foiling for the singelhanders.

That's it Rolf, only Foiling Moths for both Men and Women, raced in the same fleet, but one of each (M+F) for each country. Then C cats for two up racing, mixed crews allowed. Mixed Kites and Mixed windsurfers. Keel boats should have been eliminated at the turn of the century, at least the very old, slow ones they use for the Olympics. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I dont get it Timbo, why dont you and I run the world? We could really have got something done <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

If anybody are following the blogs of Andy Rice and Magnus Wheatley, it seems like the compadres in ISAF Council are not immune to criticism. Perhaps the message is seeping trough and into the trenches cast at ISAF Council. They do seem a bit entrenched.

http://rule69blog.com/archive/2008/march/1217/
http://sailjuiceblog.com/

The latest scuttlebutt is that after asked for a revote, based on an 'urgent' need to put this on the March ISAF agenda, the executive committee asked for a definition of 'urgent'. It was finally determined that the matter was not 'urgent' enough for the March agenda. Therefore, they seem to want to push off the whole mess until their November meeting, when, they feel the sailing committee will have forgotten, or that time will not allow for a change of heart. To this, I submitted the following retort, to another forum, entrenched in the mono community:
Dear Editor,
Attached is a definition, as well as an interpretation of the word "Urgent" for the Executive Committee of the ISAF 's perusal:
"Urgent"
Adjective
S: (adj) pressing, urgent (compelling immediate action) "too pressing to permit of longer delay"; "the urgent words `Hurry! Hurry!'"; "bridges in urgent need of repair" *

In C. Cook's recent Scuttlebutt reply, he states that;…

"The Constitution Committee was asked to interpret the word “urgent” as used in the ISAF Regulations' and that… 'We simply interpreted the word 'urgent'."

In terms of usage the ISAF, the usage of "urgent" one presumes the Executive Committee contributes to, and interprets your constitution, in English. Similarly, one presumes the the Constitution Committee is composed of able-minded, English speaking participants, posessing a reasonable capacity for understanding the language that is used for communication in both Great Britain and the United States. However, in an effort to help your committee out, included is a definition of 'urgent' as well as usage in this context.

Should the matter the of antics surrounding the ISAF vote on equipment be shelved until November, such a decision impacts the Olympic training programs and the youth teams in a way that is 'pressing'. Funding, momentum for training would probably fall apart for these teams, and therefore, the decision is 'urgent' in the context of time and money. Hence, the obvious usage of the word "urgent" fits the definition of "too pressing to permit of longer delay" ; to avert the untoward event the pressing action is required at an earlier (May) meeting (as in the urgent words `Hurry!, ISAF, Hurry!').

It would be wise for the International organizing bodies to consider that ‘Olympic Yachting’, youth inclusion and athleticism are more important values than saving face in light of a terrible miscarriage of the EC's prior decision-making process in Estoril. Preferably, the Executive Committees will act expediently, appropriately and focus on making the sport more interesting, simple and engaging to spectators prior to 2012, rather than allow the wheels of time churn a bungled Estoril decision into a matter of record. If this happens, the sailing community, the ISAF and related international bodies may very well be lamenting the Executive Committee and the International Representatives 'historic 2007 role in getting the yachting event removed from future Olympics'.

To that end, in asking for the definition of 'urgent', and post-poning your revote until November 2008, and, for the deceptive expedient of using language and committee rules to subvert due process and healthy dialogue, there is another word to propose putting in front of the Executive Committee for interpretation:

"Disingenuous"

Adjective
S: (adj) disingenuous, artful (not straightforward or candid; giving a false appearance of frankness) "an ambitious, disingenuous, philistine, and hypocritical operator, who...exemplified...the most disagreeable traits of his time"- David Cannadine; "a disingenuous excuse" *
*Source: WordNet 3.0 © Princeton University 2006. http://wordnet.princeton.edu

I meant May agenda. Sorry for any confusion. R

Well .. YNZ were caught fondling themselves.. The shame of being found out to be major fondlers forced them to send out a half hearted "its not our fault letter". They would have had this "letter" as a fall back position knowing, the letter has about as much good as pissing on a bushfire.. They would have calculated that many would be gullable to believe in its effectiveness and so let them off the hook.. Just like you, and the ITA, just did..

But you know what, they, along with others like "US sailing" are at fault. Their vote was thought out and ratified well before the vote.. So don't kid yourself it was a simple "mistake" .. It was a well thought out researched strategy to gain personally/nationally. They knew the consequences and zone they represented.. Australia and New Zealand represent not just the country but all of Oceania.

Fortunately for YNZ the issue is now dead.. The chances of getting cats back into 2012 is over as US sailing will see its dead.. Maybe in 2020 they will be restated. But don't hold your breath..
So what to do.. Take a leaf out of the United States rule book on diplomacy and use "shock and awe" tactics..

I would suggest the "International" classes strip their "titles" from all NAs that voted against the cats.. Strip ISAF of veto of the ability to control cat "International" status..
But these things wont happen.. Sure guys will work to reinstate and guide the powers.. But I have zero faith in the process...

Excellent letter, Rexdenton.

I was just billed by US Sailing to join again for the coming year. Is there a person at US Sailing other than Charlie Cook to whom I can address my response letter? viz: Not only am I not renewing my membership, I will never again contribute a thin dime to US Sailing. My many years of representing multihull sailing, teaching, while encouraging others to participate in US Sailing events are, sadly, at an end.

No matter how noble and high the ground, people of this ilk don't waste a moment recapitualting their position, despite what about the sport and what it needs for youth development.They won't read it if you write it. That said, resolute stubborness is an epidemic these days; even when it is obviously wrong, people count on 'forgive and forget'.
My recommendation is people as outraged as you seem to be should write a letter to the IOC instead, letting them know how disappointed you are in US Sailing and the hijacked ISAF process. I wrote one prior to Estoril, when I saw the beginning maneuvering by US Sailing and the RYC which strongly suggested to me that they wanted to dump the cats. We should make certain that the IOC executive body is aware of the nonsense and posturing going on with the ISAF. An organizing body should be a forum, not a 'Star Chamber'.

It's not over yet. There are many people still working to see things set right.

G'day Rex who did you write the letter to? and do you have a list of people at the IOC that you could post on here for us to contact in a nice way?
regards

Here you go JeffS
PRESIDENT
Jacques Rogge
............................. Belgium











VICE PRESIDENT(S)


Gunilla Lindberg
............................. Sweden
Lambis V. Nikolaou
............................. Greece
Chiharu Igaya
............................. Japan
Thomas Bach
............................. Germany











MEMBER(S)


Gerhard Heiberg

............................. Norway
Denis Oswald

............................. Switzerland
Mario Vázquez Raña

............................. Mexico
Ottavio Cinquanta

............................. Italy
Sergey Bubka

............................. Ukraine
Zaiqing Yu

............................. People's Republic of China
Richard L. Carrión

............................. Puerto Rico
Ser Miang Ng

............................. Singapore
Mario Pescante

............................. Italia
Sam Ramsamy

............................. South Africa











ADDRESS



Executive Board
Château de Vidy
1007 Lausanne
Switzerland








TELEPHONE
(41.21) 621 61 11









FAX
(41.21) 621 62 16


The original letter that I sent in November to the ISAF was addressed to Jerome Pels And Arve Sundstrum.

**Remember!! The IOC are are friends, the ISAF is the recommending body (the unfriendlies) that are responsible for steering the agenda. The decision is not final until the IOC endorsement.

Please be nice to the IOC.

R

A specific, actionable strategy, with timelines and decision scenarios would be useful for some comments. The ISAF have proven their tactical ability in steering this away from us. What is the plan of the MH community representatives?

I understand where you are coming from on that, Dave. In Catamaran Sailor magazine I used to encourage people to join US Sailing, because I thought it was the right thing to do -- to support the national governing body of our sport.

Besides our personal membership, we also send the payments for the memberships of the Wave Class Association and NAMSA. (At least I think all of those are paid up. And if they are not for this year, I don't feel bad about it, under the circumstances. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />.)

A lot of other catamaran associations pay their dues to US Sailing, as well, I'm sure. Fat lot of good it did as far as influence. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> Maybe we need to give MORE money to US Sailing. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

john,
While I appreciate the efforts your attempting..
May I ask is the C.Cook who help decide that the issue wasn't "urgent" the same C. Cook who engineered the aberrant voting which forced the decision to eliminate cats?
If so what progress has been made?
Apart from C. Cook has again made the decision harder to redo.

Same person, ISAF Exec Comittee Delegate Charley Cook. See www.Sailingscuttlebutt.com for link to the ISAF definition and explanation of 'urgent'. This whole thing is a railroad job from the beginning in August 2007 to the tabling of the 'urgent' re-vote question.

R

THE ISAF POSITION ON 2012 OLYMPIC EVENTS
The minutes of the ISAF Executive Committee meeting of February 15-17, 2008
have been published on the ISAF website, with discussions including debate
on the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition, reports from the ISAF Commissions,
Youth Olympics, Advertising Code, ISAF World Cup, track and trace
technology, etc. Regarding the Olympic Events, the ISAF Executive Committee
noted letters received from three ISAF MNAs regarding the selection of the
events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. Whilst not formal
submissions, the letters suggested that ISAF could reconsider the decision
on the events at the forthcoming 2008 ISAF Mid-Year Meeting through the
submission process.

The ISAF Regulations govern submissions which may be considered at the
Mid-Year Meeting and state that only “urgent” submissions can be put forward
and considered. The ISAF Executive Committee has the sole responsibility to
determine whether a submission is “urgent” or otherwise. The Executive
Committee has decided that submissions for re-addressing the decisions on
events for 2012 in the mid-year are not urgent and should be dealt with in
November 2008.

The Executive Committee recognizes that some ISAF MNAs do not agree with the
Council decision taken in November 2007 on the ten events for the 2012
Olympic Sailing Competition. This position, which has been formally notified
to ISAF by a few ISAF MNAs, should not enable the valid Council decision to
be reviewed at the 2008 Mid-Year Meeting. The decision on the equipment to
be used for each of the ten events will be made at the 2008 November
Conference. At the upcoming 2008 ISAF Mid-Year Meeting, the ISAF Council
will make a list of the equipment it considers may possibly be appropriate
for selection at the 2008 November Conference. -- Complete report and
minutes:
http://www.sailing.org/22374.php?PHPSESSID=2bcbbb511ae5bc195e7b87284b3c963e

Am I reading this right - they are saying they can revisit the event selection in November, yet in the meantime they're going to make decisions about the equipment at the mid-year meeting? Yet the equipment decision (i.e. which specific classes) is completely dependent on the event selection.