IGC - a force for good or a failing institution

Some see EASA as the bête noire for gliding but many don’t shine a
light
on
the IGC and costs of collaborating with that organisation.

The outcome of yesterday’s plenary meeting just underlines how far from
reality this organisation has become.

An objective of the FAI Gliding Commission is to further the development
of

gliding sport and to encourage its spread to more countries.

It should be congratulated in its attempts to do this through its
promotion
of
World Championships in main stream and social media but so far the decline

of gliding membership across the globe continues.

The only bright spot is the Gliding Grand Prix which is moving into an
entirely
different spectrum of professionalism, sponsorship and marketing which
isn’t
costing or impacting on member Associations.

The impact of complying with complex rules, technology requirements and
attendance of myriad world championships is not sustainable if we want to
attract more into the grassroots of British Gliding.

The decision yesterday to continue with a 10 Class 2 year cycle of
competitions is another nail in the coffin in the financial support of our
British
Teams. It’s ignoring the harsh reality of maintaining an Associations
membership to financially support teams going to these Championships (and
I haven’t even mentioned Europeans).

If more people took an interest in how the IGC functioned then we might
actually have a chance of supporting our teams through coaching and
mentoring in a more structured and self funded way.

The IGC need to realise that supporting the top of the sport is impacting
new
entrants at the bottom.

Hi Neil

I can understand your frustration regarding the decisions taken by the IGC. The problem there lies in the fact that it is one Country one Vote. This is what has to be addressed in the first place and the Voting should be balanced in favour of Membership in each Country. At the moment there is a large Block of small countries with small Memberships which have a high interest in Holding Championships as it is a considerable source of Income for them.

I agree with you that we should have major Word Championships only every 4 years (same as Olympics) and Continental Champions every 4 years in between
these.

However I do not agree your statement about EASA as most of the negotiations with EASA are done through the European Gliding Union EGU which works closely with the European Air Sports Organisation.

Further the IGC is mostly involved in the Badges, Records and Competitions and has never done much to develop Gliding at Grass Root Level. That is supposed to be done by the Clubs and their National Gliding Organisation and in Europe partly by the EGU which unfortunately are mostly concerned with Regulatory Matters.

Bruno Ramseyer
IGC Delegate Ireland

Well the world and IGC doesn't revolve around UK team finances. Many small countries have absolutely no chance of supporting any team, so all costs are covered by participants. Yet they have no problem with this. Going for 3 or even 4 year cycle for WGC events, and with one event in southern hemisphere every now and then (effectively bumbing the budget for participating from 5000 to 20000+ euros, meaning you would have to skip the event), means that these pilots would get chance to compete once in decade.

It's always very convenient to blame IGC for everything, and always say that this and that decision makes gliding as a sport smaller and smaller. That's convenient way of outsourcing the blame. IGC has absolutely no way of promoting the sport in a way that you and your club should do locally at your country. Everyone know this.

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.

On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 1:01:25 AM UTC-7, krasw wrote:
Well the world and IGC doesn't revolve around UK team finances. Many small countries have absolutely no chance of supporting any team, so all costs are covered by participants. Yet they have no problem with this. Going for 3 or even 4 year cycle for WGC events, and with one event in southern hemisphere every now and then (effectively bumbing the budget for participating from 5000 to 20000+ euros, meaning you would have to skip the event), means that these pilots would get chance to compete once in decade.

It's always very convenient to blame IGC for everything, and always say that this and that decision makes gliding as a sport smaller and smaller. That's convenient way of outsourcing the blame. IGC has absolutely no way of promoting the sport in a way that you and your club should do locally at your country. Everyone know this.

"with one event in southern hemisphere every now and then (effectively bumbing the budget for participating from 5000 to 20000+ euros, meaning you would have to skip the event), means that these pilots would get chance to compete once in decade."

Sounds like what the US Pilots face almost every WGC, $20,000 to $25,000 or more.

If the goal of Worlds is to choose the best pilot in the World, why we need 10 Classes to do that?
The best pilot will win the Worlds in any Class, be it Standard, 15m, 18m, 13m, Club…whatever. Class doesn’t matter.
To me it looks like glider manufacturers need The Worlds in 10 Classes, not the pilots or their national federations.
And yes, the king is kind of naked.

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.

On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 20:45:07 UTC+2, 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.

IGC vote on UK proposal for new competition calendar was not downturned by eastern "block vote", the proposal was unpopular among other countries too.

Yes it is true that more active competition pilots should act as country delegate, and probably they deserve to be rotated more. But this is democracy, you just cannot cry that delagates who has wrong opinion should be kicked out of IGC. Just an idea: If your country has a great proposal, introduce it to delegates early on, lobby for it and ask for comments and input. It incredibly simple way of selling an idea is totally ignored. Currently most proposals are just handed to delegates at last minute, any confusion (there is a lot, invariably) means they will probably not vote for it.

And btw, if I try to introduce new members to our sport last thing I would mention is badges and WGCs. Potential new members do not care about WGC calendar.

The WGC events sure are big and require a lot of volunteers. These volunteers are easily found from Eastern Europe, but not so at other parts of the world. Pilots also like the very low living costs of these countries, and for most European pilots it's only day's drive to location. It is not hard to see why most of the competitions go to same countries.

A bit of history: when increasing number of classes and events (18m, 13.5m, 20m), it was argued that more competitions and more champions giver better pr and visibility to our sport. Recent proposals of decreasing number of participants and events was based on EXACTLY same argument