Post by: Rantings on June 02, 2003, 11:01:40 PM
Edited on 6/3/2003 2:20 PM
Edited on 6/3/2003 2:56 PM
Post by: mumzie on June 03, 2003, 03:04:19 PM
--------------------
I start each day with yoga and meditation. I put my right foot under my left thigh. I put my left foot under my right thigh. I arch my back as much as I can, and then I begin my mantra: Ouch, oh, that hurts.
Post by: Rantings on June 03, 2003, 03:11:02 PM
Post by: Bill Thomas on June 04, 2003, 06:22:04 AM
Post by: Rantings on June 04, 2003, 11:45:45 AM
Thank you for replying. I wonder if the lack of replies on this post is due to the fact most bowlers don't realize what is going on in the world of bowling politics and what their implications are to bowling as we now know it. And is it because most of us don't want to know and will continue to bury our heads in the sand.
Post by: MI 2 AZ on June 04, 2003, 12:11:17 PM
Post by: mumzie on June 04, 2003, 01:45:00 PM
I think it's stupid to have three organizations that do exactly the same thing, just with a different logo based on age or gender.
And - I think that a governing body does need to exist for this sport.
And - I was very disappointed that the merger vote failed - and by the feedback I've heard from some of the delegates to BOTH conventions, one of the main reasons it failed is because of the comments "We don't want to work with the {men/women}!". How juvenile is that??? The SMO proposal did have some points that not all could agree with, but it was the best start to date, and would have helped keep the sport alive a little longer while they worked the bugs out.
I think that the merger is critical to the continuation of the sport as we all know it, so that it doesn't degrade into the "merely recreational".
--------------------
I start each day with yoga and meditation. I put my right foot under my left thigh. I put my left foot under my right thigh. I arch my back as much as I can, and then I begin my mantra: Ouch, oh, that hurts.
Post by: Smash49 on June 04, 2003, 02:29:32 PM
Smash49
--------------------
Smash49
robert@bowlersslidesock.com
www.bowlersslidesock.com
Post by: Pinbuster on June 04, 2003, 02:34:13 PM
) the USGA. One organization holding championships for youth, men, women, and seniors. It’s still largely a power struggle between the groups and no one wants to give up theirs. I haven’t really kept up on it, but my biggest issue was that it seemed that dues would increase significantly and the allowed the organization to raise dues indiscriminately. The other issue I have is that it appears to me that the bowling industry itself starts having a say. This should be a governing body that doesn’t answer to any business interest, only to the health of the sport.
Unfortunately I think we have already headed down the path to being purely recreational I don’t know if we could stop the momentum.
Post by: Tex on June 04, 2003, 05:29:49 PM
The main reason the current did not get approved is based on two main ideas and neither are gender related. 1) The delegates demand to retain the power do set dues. and 2) The delegates will not give up the power to approve constitutional issues. This is why the Dallas board voted NO and why all of the others I know voted NO. If the national board of 25 had the power to control the constitition, then they could at any time eliminate all delegate power and set all the rules and regulations without input from anyone outside Greendale. Now that is a frightening thought.
In not one single meeting did I ever here a board member say they would vote against this because of the Women. It will be a difficult transition in many areas, but since the men do %90 of the work in our area, we will actually end up with more help and volunteers. It seems that the womens local board has it in there constitition that they can not go to a league or meet with any league officials unless asked or invited to do so. They are strictly reactive to requests, do not offer help or become proactive in anyway. So, since we are proactive we would actually gain help and this would be another positive for our area.
Post by: jimsey on June 04, 2003, 07:10:00 PM
tex - I understand the thought process behind maintaining the delegates authority over dues and constitutional concerns. However, because I know that you were at last years convention, do you believe that the majority of the delegates are informed enough on the issues to make intelligent decisions in these areas? I had a tough time getting a significant number of our association board to read the USBC proposal and certainly very few attended any of the area whistle stops to learn first hand the explanation of the entire concept. I have a great deal of respect for our association board in the areas of volunteer services and dedication. However, they are largely uninformed about how a national organization needs to function. To expect them to acquire sufficient information over a 2 day period during a convention is ridiculous. I have seen nothing from other delegations at the convention to lead me to believe that most of the other associations are any better. I have more confidence in the ability of national board of 25 individuals, directly involved on a full time basis, to make decisions affecting the future of the sport of bowling.
Edited on 6/4/2003 7:15 PM
Post by: Tex on June 05, 2003, 12:14:21 AM
Post by: 9andaWiggle on June 05, 2003, 01:35:45 PM
Someone mentioned a fear of jacking up the sanctioning dues. Any smart governing body will realize the bowlers will only pay so much in dues, and that they will have to see VALUE in becoming member - otherwise they stand to lose existing members and discourage new ones. Since people can still band together to form nonsanctioned leagues, or just open bowl, they could not risk getting too greedy right away.
--------------------
9-
Why, WHY won't the last one just fall?? It's WIGGLING for cryin' out loud!!
Post by: Tex on June 05, 2003, 03:12:38 PM
Post by: Rantings on June 05, 2003, 03:52:52 PM
Post by: Tex on June 05, 2003, 04:42:57 PM
Post by: jimsey on June 05, 2003, 06:38:46 PM
Unfortunately, under the current system, any type of alternate membership or membership test needs to be approved by the delegates and that makes the life cycle of any type of change as long as 2 or sometimes 3 years. This renders a national board almost powerless and ineffective.
Stormlefty - you make so excellent points and I agree with your thinking for the most part. There is one problem with the start combining at the top and work our way down theory. One of the major benefits of a single organization is to the mixed league. Sanctioning for them would become a single form and single one sanction card. If they were to go that direction, would collects the fees? Do they get handled by the local ABC association since it can currently sanction men and women? Would that leave the women's association to operate only on fees generated by women's league's. I don't know if I would want to hear the whining that would cause.
Post by: Rantings on June 06, 2003, 03:47:36 PM
This sounds like communism to me...Let's force those unsanctioned b@$t@rds into
the USBC...
Edited on 6/6/2003 3:52 PM
Post by: Tex on June 06, 2003, 05:14:44 PM
As far as the list of ideas. Yea, right. They would basically find themselves with no volunteers from the current local associations and no one to promote the programs. So, they would have to hire full time employees in each of the regions and would ultimately lose money. At least that is what I think would happen. On the lane condtion, don't expect any change on that in the near future. It is like the new teacher that comes into a school. You must be extra tough at first, because if you are easy you can never get tough later. The current generation will no stand for tough conditions. Not that I would not mind seeing something, heck I just wish they would enforce what we have now.
Post by: jimsey on June 06, 2003, 05:45:13 PM
Yes, a lot of changes are well overdue but a bowling free for all? I think we'll need to call this new single membership plan the stormlefty armegedon.
Post by: jimsey on June 09, 2003, 04:33:59 PM
I have always believed that the proprietors should be responsible for the awards program. In that way, if a house wants to put out an easy shot, they are financially responsible for the number of rings or trinkets that will be distributed. The associations should be responsible for the lane and condition inspections and should give the house a rating for the lane condition(s) that it uses. That would give us a truer basis for rating a bowler when competing in a tournament on a different condition.
I do like the theory of sanctioning per game bowled, although I believe it should be based more on schedule for the league rather than games bowled since I rarely see two leagues that handle subs / replacements the same way. Your thinking is right, however, on continuing to pay a sanction for each league bowled since the services increase with the multiple league members.
Where I still see the biggest stumbling block is in getting the delegates to agree to make a drastic change. That appears to be one of the flaws in the current system. Many delegates seem to develop opinions on partial truths and a limited number of facts. They react to rumors and often have a distrust of the national boards who work at these issues on a full time basis.
I have read some articles on the concept that BPAA plans on getting much more involved and may offer some plans of its own for single membership. That organization realizes how important this is and may get impatient waiting for the ABC and WIBC to make their move. What they decide may soon force the issue.
Keep up the great posts, you have some great ideas that provoke others to think and debate this important issue.