The fuddy-duddy image

A snowHead

PG, I respect your passion for ski racing and your support of your daughter's interest.

My own position on ski racing is largely one of disinterest. Yet I love recreational skiing. How representative am I? I don't know, but I would have thought that turning those (like me) with an interest in the sport in general into supporters of a particular branch of it would be a major first step if we were ever going to be major international players.

My disinterest is fuelled by the nature of the sport, I do not find one-by-one racing against the clock exciting. There are few recognisable names that I can relate to. It is difficult for me to discern any difference (visual and technical) between one competitor and another. I only watch now to see what the snow conditions are like on the adjacent mountains. Again, I do not know how representative my own views are, but to my mind, to attract more support to the sport, these issues would need to be addressed.

While in other sports (even those that I was never any good at), I want us to do well as a nation, I don't feel that way about skiing and question why should we as a nation even bother to try to compete on the international scene? We have no mountains to train on, we virtually have no snow these days, there will never be an international event in England. I can see the major health advantages of getting the nation off of our derrieres and into some skiing activity generally, but do not see why we should bother to compete against those nations with the facilities on their doorstep. Should we not encourage our talented youngsters to take up some other sport that can be supported more readily - Chemmy Allcot herself said that had she not done skiing she would have had a go at tennis or something else?

Personally, I think that one of the really great things about skiing is that you can just enjoy it. Unfortunately with many sports, unless you really excel you can be made to feel a failure and be put off for life. In most sports there is little emphasis on just doing things for fun and as a result, kids can give up too readily. Has this resulted in our fat nation? Personally, while I would support getting more disadvantaged kids out on the mountains to enjoy skiing, I am not bothered that ski racing has a low emphasis and interest level in this country and do not see that as a situation in need of changing.

This isn't meant as a dig at you, as I said at the start, I respect what you have done personally, I guess that I just don't share the interest.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

[All This thread's been the subject of discussion by the moderators. Argument is best advanced by dealing with the issues and facts concerned, not the personalities or pursuits of those presenting them. Lawyers and politicians may, of course, disagree with this.
Merry Christmas!]
[Update: Following that comment, a PM has come in from a snowHead saying that comment inevitably reflects 'personalities and pursuits', but saying that it's specifically a question of avoiding personal attacks. Fair point, and that's really the point that was intended.]

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Totally agree with David Goldsmith's point. Looking at the time of postings, maybe a few too many drinks were to blame?

Personally I think the thread title was chosen badly. The whole criticism could have been framed in a much more friendly, as opposed to adversarial, way. I think if PG is honest he will admit that he made a few jibes himself. One in the title, one in the first post about little darlings and one about push starting SCGB personnel. In view of that he shouldn't really get too precious about jibes thrown his way. Calling him a coward, of course, was uncalled for.

So should the SCGB be more involved in racing? Well it seems to me that their involvement is greater than perhaps PG realised in the beginning. He even admits in his first post that they are interested in greater involvement. I think he is slightly derogatory about the efforts they do make.

So as they are involved in racing and thinking of more involvement then surely their vote on Snowsports GB is valid. Are they not forming a bridge between the recreational and the competitive sides of skiing?

Just my observations.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Sorry Tim Brown, but no 'gibes' on my part. Despite the lack of apologies from those concerned.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Alright, 'gibe'.

You won't be getting an apology from me for asking you a perfectly fair and pertinent question! I refer you to the moderators comments, which I believe backs me up. But I totally agree that Beck should offer you one for his/her personal attack on you.

But, like I said, don't be so precious.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

anyone know the name of that website the SCGB set up for a younger audience? is it still going strong?

After all it is free

DavidS, it was ski and board, but the address just bounces you back to the ski club site.

Thanks Elizabeth B. Wonder what happened to that then...

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

snow reports

Right PG, I have had enough of your attitude. Small children ask impertinent questions and ?? year old men don't. Not even if they only have 20 posts while you have 4k plus!

Beck showed that the SCGB is directly involved in the finance and promotion of racing. Enough to satisfy this snowhead that they hold a valid position on Snowsports GB.

It seems to me, however, that Snowsports GB is overly focused on racing but is still managing to fail in that regard. So let us open a forum on here to talk all about Snowsports GB. I trust you will take part fully and call a spade a spade in the process?

Let me ask you one more pertinent question:

You won't go easy on Snowsports GB just because you might need their funding one day, will you?

I Saques, Laughing

Tim Brown,

You know it makes sense.

Actually I did read what you said and I though it was a pile of waffle! All you really said was that the SCGB should pump more of its members money into racing. Firstly to justify its position on SSGB and secondly because that *might* make it look less fuddy-duddy.

You waffled that the SCGB wasn't doing enough, when it looks like it is to me.

You waffled that the SCGB wasn't doing enough at the grass roots level.

But!

You actually said yourself that the SCGB is thinking of more involvement, only to turn your nose up at the non completive nature of that involvement. Thus choosing to use a gibe where a bit of praise would have been much more appropriate! So where you said there were no gibes from you, you were being forgetful!

You waffled that SCGB is neglecting its responsibilities, when in fact it has no responsibility for racing but still promotes and finances it anyway. You waffle that arguably the SCGB has accepted responsibility for racing by being part of SSGB, but then say it has no such responsibilities and that it's a redundant member as a result.

Unfortunately for your argument the SCGB's involvement isn't 'negligible' and is probably proportional to its voting rights - which are what, btw?

You waffled that the likes of the SCGB are leaching resources from SSGB and then back off, later in the thread, with yet more waffle when presses by Beck to back your waffle up.

You flip-flop from one bit of waffle to the next, back-pedalling to correct yourself where necessary.

You have totally failed to prove any of your points. It was pointed out to you in another thread that all you do is moan about the SCGB and this pile of waffle is the ill-considered result.

One question for you:

How many registered racers (of all ages) are there in the UK skiing population?

Lastly, looks like you are giving SSGB a mild kicking over on snowracers. Fair play to you.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

I saques

Let me address some questions to you.

Is the SCGB doing enough to promote and finance racing?

Is it the SCGB's job to do that?

Is its place on the SSGB justified by what it does do?

Does it need to do anything along those lines to justify its voting rights?

Would the SCGB's image be improved by having pushy mummies and daddies and their little dahling racing miniatures signing up as members?

To any SCGB members:

Is it an old fuddy-duddy club?

I've been aware of the clubs existence for a fair few years. I've not joined because I've always thought they were a little too young and thrusting for me!

But now I'm told its a fuddy-duddies club! In that case I'm off to join!

See you at the bar, dahling, last one there has to drink a pimms straight down!

A snowHead

Have read this thread with a mixture of incomprehension and incredulity. One question: How do people know that Beck Daross is a man?

A snowHead

pam w, care to have a stab at the questions I asked of I Saques, above?

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Moderating comment Please note the comments above.
For the benefit of one or two participants in this thread, here's an extract from snowHeads' registration conditions. Please keep it friendly, and free of personal attacks or abuse. Thank you:

Quote:

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should they see fit.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

maggi, my money is on Beck being a woman. You girlies always fight dirty. snowHead

You'll need to Register first of course.

Tim Brown, Fight dirty? I don't fight at all. I get a man to do it for me Little Angel

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Pam a good question and I thought there was a clue in the name. Is this another example of people jumping to conclusions? Or was it that nobody thought to check?

I Saques I finally waded through that last essay of yours back on page 1 and I have to say it would more fittingly have been drafted by Ball Saques.

After all it is free

I put my argument in good faith, respecting proper debating etiquette. As I Saques pointed out, that has not been a two-way street. The bastardised interpretation two posters have made of my argument, together with an element of indirect abuse and occasional specific ad hominems throughout their contributions has spoiled the fair discussion of what was and remains a interesting question. Why does a 'non-excellence' body retain involvement in the decision-making process of the sport's governing authority.

In a debating chamber such spoiing tactics would be jumped on immediately. In a forum such as this, in my view, it 'only' casts a blight on the generally good natured tone of discussion that takes place. There is no law against it indeed, but I would put money on neither of them making certain comments to my face. Which I enthusiastically invite them to do should they venture into the Tarentaise.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

[headmarker D 00:47]

Beck Daross et AL, fer f* sake will all you slappers get a grip!

1. the SCGB is punching above its weight in snowsport and should put up, shut up or bug out and relinquish its vote
2) We're expecting too much from the SCGB
3) The SCBG is expecting too much from us
4) Change will only come from within - time to join, just think of the benefits we can bring with a more inclusive attitude
5) An old bitch will always fight the hardest, even if the pups are dead
6) Sometime an old bitch is worth saving (but there should be a benefit)
7) The club talks the talk but does it walk the walk?

GET OVER THE PERSONALITIES AND START ADDRESSING THE ISUES!

Is it me or is it a mindset, but all argument aside, why do all the club spokespeople who turn up here appear to read from a script?
rolling eyes

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Who was it that said "Lets not let facts get in the way of a good argument"?

PG's question of "Why does a 'non-excellence' body retain involvement in the decision-making process of the sport's governing authority" is a perfectly valid question to ask.

Surely the best way to answer that question is by disseminating the facts? Otherwise all that will result is an argument between us all based on entrenched viewpoints. Apart from some financial statistics from Beck D, facts have been in short supply on this thread.

Some of the questions that need to be answered before anyone can voice an objective opinion would be:

1. What is SCGB actual role in Snowsport GB?
2. Is this function still required or do any other bodies also provide this?
3. Do SCGB fulfil their obligations?
4. What else do they do beyond their specific role to further Snowsport GB?
5. Would SCGB continue to raise funds or sponsor athletes if they were not part of Snowsport GB?
6. Any other questions?

I do not believe that anyone here can provide the full answers to those questions, and further input and clarification from the respective bodies must be sought. This would mean contacting them directly, as they are not going to join in our forum.

Only then can there be a proper informed debate.

snow reports

Ray Zorro, The "financial facts" only refer to two promotion drives where funds from third parties were contributed to the functioning of the elite level athletes, plus a third where qualification as sponsorship may be accurate, but is still support of a skiER as opposed to skiING. They include the promotion of an alternative telecoms provider, and an auction/raffle. Neither of these constitute sponsorship in my view. The third refers to the support of Edward Drake, another elite athlete and current British team member, although the sums/support involved are not mentioned.

From my initial post it was clear that I was referring to the promotion of the sport to children, the 'grass roots', and not to the elite who receive the lion's share of funding.

The role of the SCGB has been discussed elsewhere. As one of the member bodies they sit on various cross-discipline and membership communications working group committees. To save time, I'm afraid I shall have to quote Arnold Lunn again, who casts a little more light on the subject (from another snowHead thread where this was discussed previously):

http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?p=54208#54208

You know it makes sense.

PG something's gone horribly wrong with the above quotes from Arnold. Loads of repetition. Can you clean it up, please. BTW are you monitoring for replies on this topic ? I'm getting a fleeting error message when I post including something about a tiscali email address....
<<< Edit - this error message problem is now resolved. TKS Admin. Garbling ????? >>>

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

kuwait_ian, Tried several times. Very odd. I post a precise quote and it repeats itself (and mixes up sections). So for the time being have just linked to the original thread. Very strange about the tiscali address. Could you PM me with details? Thanks.

A snowHead

PG, OK someone else was complaining about garbled postings - see latest Skier Profile for Scarpa. A generic problem, Admin ?? WILCO re PM

A snowHead

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

PG, dont give them the time of day.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

PG, are you a bit handy with the old fists then? Laughing

If Becks is a woman what then?

Ray Zorro,

"PG's question of "Why does a 'non-excellence' body retain involvement in the decision-making process of the sport's governing authority" is a perfectly valid question to ask."

Hmm, not really the subject of the thread or the opening argument. But I'd say it's there because of its pivotal role between competitive racing and recreational skiing. The true grass roots of racing is recreational skiing and SSGB must keep an eye on that aspect. Could it be doing that through the SCGB? Just a guess, so I'll email SSGB to find out.

PG, back to you. When you opened this thread I immediately thought you were on a whine because of a lack of funding available for your own kids. So, what do I do? Ask the question? Carry on thinking the same? Or give you the old benefit of the doubt?

Well, I can do whatever I like, actually! It's called freedom of speech and freedom of thought. My question was perfectly valid.

You did make a couple of gibes against the SCGB. REAL people work for them, you know! And it looks like at least one was insulted by your remarks.

On the 'Rumblings' issue, I will send an email quoting you to both the SCGB and SSGB, to get that one clarified.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Tim Brown, allow me to address you on a personal level, both in mod and non-mod capacity.

In the interests of snowHeads, which you may or may not wish to uphold, there's a feeling (expressed more formally in the terms and conditions of the site) that personal attacks are negative and corrosive.

I'd ask you, on a personal level, to desist from winding up your dispute with PG in public. If you want to pursue it, do it outside the kitchen, please.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Ski racing is not something which SCGB should put much of its resources into. I am sure that racing is of real interest to only a small proportion of members, and the Club is a members' club whose function is to serve it's members interests. It's hard to see how racing benefits recreational skiers, who presumably are the vast majority of its members.

The club should take a modest interest in racing and help out financially a bit when it can, perhaps by having the occasional dedicated fund raising effort, so that those who want to support racing can do so.

I have nothing but admiration (and envy, obviously) for racers and I find it reasonably entertaining on the TV (better than footiball, not as good as rugby), but it seems to me to be something which can 'stand on its own two feet'. Racers should be able to fund themselves, through sponsorship or whatever, or not do it. That's tough on UK racers, but it's also tough on racers from all the other countries where you can't ski (much), like Mali. If SCGB wants to spend money on kids, would it not do better to bring rereational skiing to a wider audience by subsidising ski hols for kids who might not otherwise be able to have them?

BTW, feel free to call me a hypocrite, a coward or anything else; I don't care.

After all it is free

David Goldsmith, of the options i had i could choose whichever one i liked. I've broken no law.

Tim Brown, I think David was suggesting that perhaps you (and others) were coming close to breaking the rules of the forum., and as such, youall could expect your posts to be moderated or deleted if it persists.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

David Goldsmith, I think you may have shot the wrong fox! Beck Daross has made personal attacks of a much more direct kind than Tim Brown. And what about PG's implied invitation to fisticuffs at dawn?!

Help!!

The fuddy-duddy image

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Ski Club of Great Britain