IGC - a force for good or a failing institution

At 18:31 06 March 2018, Neil Goudie wrote:
Fascinating responses.

First of all, I was careful not criticise any current or previous
members of the IGC. I simply asked the question. Is the IGC a force
for good or a failing institution?

All IGC representatives got to where they are on merit and are
democratically nominated by each member country's Gliding
Association. Although it is unfair, and perhaps defamatory, when
people 'play the man and not the ball' it does suggest frustration by
some individuals - some of whom are former entrants in World
Championships.

The bottom line is that each Gliding Association can replace their
representative at any point and it's good governance to do that
regularly.

Turning to the point on expenses - I would expect all reasonable
expenses to be paid - if we want to attract volunteers to these roles
nobody should be out of pocket for completing a role for their
country.

In any case my question wasn't about personalities or personal
expenses - they are all accountable - and should be transparent for
all to see and we only have to turn to Football, Cycling or Olympic
governing bodies on how they can turn sour very quickly.

The issue is about collective responsibility for the success of the
whole of World Gliding and that decisions by the FAI IGC impact all
club gliding across the globe. Many forget that.

I noted that one IGC representative says the issue is that it is
financially very attractive to run a Championship in one of the
Eastern European countries and that the 'block vote' from that part of
the world dominates the outcome of votes on scheduling of
competitions.

Another organiser, emailed in private, said that the IGC Competitions
are becoming too big, too cumbersome, and too dependent on
volunteers free time.

Why do we have two contradictory views?

Others from Russia and Lithuania agree that there should better ways
to maintain the growth and financial stability of clubs in Eastern
Europe.

Some have stated the IGC role isn't to explicitly encourage
participation in the sport: that is the role of the country's Gliding
Association.

I completely disagree: IGC decisions on rules for badges and
competitions are inherently connected to participation at every club
across the World - but why so dependent on the Competitions.

The bottom line is that we are moving to a point where, I guess most
sports eventually get to, that individual skills no longer are good
enough to get you to a World Championship. It's whether your
Gliding Association has the funding, marketing and sponsorship pull
to make it viable for you to enter.

I'm making the point that the IGC is collectively creating that
situation and they may not feel it's their responsibility to resolve but
until they do I see not the best entering but those who can afford -
even for the Club Class.

The biggest way to help the situation is to put World Championships
on a more sensible rotation now that we have 10 Classes to support.

I am alarmed that this isn't obvious and if the Eastern European
countries need, not want, to run World Championships - why so?

Isn't that the question that should be answered.


10 Classes?

One pilot per class would help lower costs - and get rid of the unfair
advantage of the wealthy and geographically small nations able to
practice team flying - does soaring really need to be/should be a 'team
sport' ?

May depend on where you fly.

In the US, the current rules basically outlaw team flying or ground info.
Worlds, from what I gather, may be incorrect, seem to favor coordinated team pilots and ground info.
Thus, the US is already a step or so back. Not saying a good pilot can't do well, but they're starting off sorta in the hole. A couple days or so practice in a new environment is not great. Look at US sports teams that do their showcase "best of this sport" game. While they may do well with their team, they tend to suck in one game since they have not worked together.