 Poster: A snowHead
|
[quote="achilles"]
| Bode Swiller wrote: |
| Despite that interest in the club forum - a very small percentage of the membership is posting, so maybe the rest don't care so much. . |
The main thread on the Ski Club website began in the main ski forum but was moved to the Ski Club forum. It was suggested to me that they were not trying to hide it but that the Ski Club forum was more suitable because it "goes back to the days of some very acrimonious arguments relating to Club policy, which non-involved members found tedious and a turn off."
Hmm.
The fact that members keep starting another thread indicates something else.
And by Ski Club standard those threads are frantically busy. Anything which produces more than one post per day is busy. More than half a dozen people posting on it is a lot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
snowball, a lot - but not a lot. I haven't counted (I have a life) but maybe 20 posters - out of a membership of 30,000 odd - are having a lively discussion about something I agree needs clearing up. Some posters I can't recall seeing before are vociferous - almost as though somebody had got his mates together to lobby - and maybe start new threads when existing ones were running. Quite understandable - but hardly a mass outcry from the membership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
snowball, just for the sake of accuracy the quote above wasn't by me. Clearly an error.
Forgetting the footie for a mo, although McDoleQueue must be worried, the over-riding concern in all this (surely) is THE TRUTH. What happened in Verbier last season? How come the detail hasn't come out? Here we are 7 months on and nobody has described, or barely hinted at, what happened. Dare I say that there's some kind of news blackout? If there was an innocent/tragic event that caused the death of a snowboarder we'd surely know by now the circumstances. Fact is, we dont know and that, IMO, is a worry. Why? What? etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Bode Swiller, When is the AGM?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Bode Swiller wrote: |
snowball, just for the sake of accuracy the quote above wasn't by me. Clearly an error.
Forgetting the footie for a mo, although McDoleQueue must be worried, the over-riding concern in all this (surely) is THE TRUTH. What happened in Verbier last season? How come the detail hasn't come out? Here we are 7 months on and nobody has described, or barely hinted at, what happened. Dare I say that there's some kind of news blackout? If there was an innocent/tragic event that caused the death of a snowboarder we'd surely know by now the circumstances. Fact is, we dont know and that, IMO, is a worry. Why? What? etc. |
The official Swiss enquiry into the accident in Verbier has not yet taken place.
That is why there is no detail and obviously there are legal implications.
Stop trying to make political capital out of a tragic accident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
richjp, I like to think Bode Swiller was more thoughtless than malicious. He could seem to have a bit of a history of being anti-SCGB - thinking of the car he called a "lamb-guzzler" which in fact runs on bio-ethanol, which comes form plants. But even that could be from ignorance rather than malice. And his mates run a snow magazine - so not surprisingly, he is not keen on S&B. This forum is like a pub chat - a lot of stuff, by its nature, is not fully thought through.
Nice to see you back in snowheads, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Stop trying to make political capital out of a tragic accident.
|
richjp, After 11 pages of discussion it seems reasonable for someone to actually ask what happened doesn't it? I'd suggest it suits your political ends to make it sound like I'm trying to make something out of someone's death. I'd also suggest that your first statement is a curve ball... there would have been an immediate investigation and no doubt there is a public record in Verbier concerning aspects of the incident - the fact that an official enquiry hasn't taken place yet (if you are right about that) suggests this must be bigger than perhaps we realise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
This forum is like a pub chat - a lot of stuff, by its nature, is not fully thought through.
|
achilles, Well said, that sentence should be stated automatically at the top of every thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| achilles wrote: |
| more thoughtless than malicious. |
Get a grip. This is a discussion forum and there's no malice in asking an obvious question. Far from thoughtless, the subject matter here is serious. On other stuff, surely, even you, can recognise tongue-in-cheek banter. By the way, has anyone spotted the Lambo yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've not contributed to this discussion thus far, and will just preface the following with a couple of points: I first joined the SCGB in 1962, have worked for it since 1978 (primarily as principal technical contributor to its magazine and/or equipment or associate editor from the mid-1980s to early-1990s), for six successive SCGB editors. I'm a former Council member of the Club. I've been involved in over 60 ski accident investigations (Law Society checked, though I've largely stopped this work) and qualified as a BASI 3 in 1975.
The public have a right to know what happened because the Club promotes trial days to non-members in ski areas, and these tasters may include off-piste skiing. The Club's interface with the general skiing public is also forged in its 1995 Mission Statement to be the "spokesbody of British skiers" and this is its media profile. I'm personally in favour of the Club reaching out to the general public and communicating with the general public, in a reasonably open way. I welcomed the public ski forum we had going from 2002-4.
That said, I personally know nothing about the Verbier accident beyond what has been published in our 2007 annual report. But I know from experience that only evidence obtained from primary sources is of any use, as opposed to gossip and tittle-tattle: eye-witnesses, instructions or guidance given to the victim, the actions/experience of the victim, a site inspection, weather data, maps, data from Televerbier, the accident report of the ski patrol, the equipment used, the status of the ski run and the topography of the terrain etc. etc. etc. Independent expert witnesses could be involved, depending on how things pan out, and a truth will emerge.
The Club has a right to be judged on the basis of what it claims to do and what it doesn't claim to do. I understand that skiers in SCGB groups are told what the Rep is there to do, and that members of groups are told that they ski (or snowboard in this case) at their own risk. From experience, contributory negligence on the part of the victim (with no suggestion at all that this occurred here) can be a factor in some cases. In law it's also possible in some cases for a defendant (e.g. the Ski Club) to name another party as a 'third party' in the litigation. That might, for instance, be the ski area itself. Above all that is the law itself (both Swiss and UK, I imagine), and the Club's waiver statements etc. may come under scrutiny.
I don't personally feel that this is crucial to the future of the Club because, as stoatsbrother points out above, about 14% of members ski with a rep in any given winter, and it's a very expensive resource to provide.
From what I understand, this incident may involve litigation on two levels, not only civil. I'm slightly puzzled, therefore, that richjp mentions no official Swiss enquiry. It would be normal, in the interim, for an inquest to take place. Are you saying that there has been no inquest yet? Surely the key evidence was collected in the first 24 hours of this very sad death?
But I agree that a proper enquiry is the only basis on which a fair judgement can be reached by all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| ............1995 Mission Statement to be the "spokesbody of British skiers" ...... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| achilles wrote: |
| snowball, a lot - but not a lot. I haven't counted (I have a life) but maybe 20 posters - out of a membership of 30,000 odd - are having a lively discussion about something I agree needs clearing up. Some posters I can't recall seeing before are vociferous - almost as though somebody had got his mates together to lobby - and maybe start new threads when existing ones were running. Quite understandable - but hardly a mass outcry from the membership. |
Yes, I agree, but then very few people use members chat anyway.
The subject of the first thread was not clear from its title and I think people have just added threads because, (as things were also moved to the Ski Club forum) they did not at once see a thread on it in the Ski forum. I don't see a mass protest but I also don't see any need to imagine an orchestrated response in what is there. Surely if there is some feeling about it in the club membership you would expect new people to find the Ski Club Chat section and start posting. I have friends who are reps and have expressed views to me, but they have not wanted to stick out their necks and so have not expressed their thoughts on line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowball, could be. Unlike David, I can envisage why the club might be constrained for legal reasons into not giving an accident report, though once legal proceedings are complete in Switzerland, I'd be interested to read the final Swiss conclusions. But the Club letter to members was poorly worded, I feel. I am hoping that information about what the reps can do is a lot clearer after the AGM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| snowball wrote: |
| ..........Yes, I agree, but then very few people use members chat anyway.......... |
Hmm. OT, but anyway ....
Active threads in the Skiing section today:
Boots too big?
Where to go - Italy
Which Touring Bindings?
5 words and 5 words only
I agree that the percentage of members posting in the forum is still very low - but posts have been picking up since more acrimonious times. Even the present reps discussion though lively and robust is good tempered, IMV.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| boredsurfin wrote: |
| Bode Swiller, When is the AGM? |
It's no good asking Swiller that question. His membership of the Swilling Club of Great Britain should not be confused with ...
From memory, the annual general meeting of the Ski Club of Great Britain is held annually on 29th February, but my memory is shocking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
David Goldsmith, Thanks David totally amusing as usual 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
David Goldsmith, I agree with much of what you say. It is obvious that there is something going on - but we need to await the results - and even googling the name of the victim I have found very little hard info. so I am sure the episode is indeed sub judice.
However - where I will part company with you is the value of the reps. I believe the research done by the club does actually suggest that the rep service is the most valued component of the membership package. Not saying the club would collapse if they totally stopped going off-piste. And indeed in North America the issue really only applies to "back country" rather than inbounds skiing which might be considered off-piste in Europe - as far as I understand. So thats when one gets a guide...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
stoatsbrother,
| Quote: |
and even googling the name of the victim I have found very little hard info. so I am sure the episode is indeed sub judice.
|
I did the same, and agree with you.
I feel very sorry for the Ski Club at the moment but, nevertheless, they must revisit the guidance they've issued so far - it is much, much too woolly. If I were a rep (ha ha!!!) faced with that guidance, I wouldn't dare to take anyone off-piste at all (in Europe) without a guide. When you think how some insurance companies have been interpreting off-piste....I even read, last year, that one company refused to pay out for an injury incurred when someone fell off a T-bar - on the grounds that he was off-piste at the time! I think that , in that instance, the insurers backed down, but the fact that they even tried to run the argument shows what a can of worms this all is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
stoatsbrother, Hurtle, interesting. I confess I also Googled this incident. I suspect most must have done the same. The detail will come out eventually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Just goes to show how little is necessarily accessible via the internet but I'd imagine that the family of Jean-Philippe Marquette have a pretty clear picture of what happened, and deservedly so. The Club's clearly having a rethink about its procedures and will have to decide whether hazards close to a piste are any different to hazards a distance from a piste.
In my experience you can find death traps within yards of the piste (like any other motorways) so the boundary of the piste - usually defined as the edge of the groomed snow - is a very important dividing line. Rocks, trees, crevasses, cliffs and holes don't discriminate about where they locate themselves in relation to the groomed run. And I'm not aware that insurers define some sort of gradation of risk, depending on how close a skier is moving to a piste.
Some highly objective thinking is needed here. The Club's assets and finances have to be ring-fenced against threats of litigation arising from avoidable risks. Perhaps best to leave off-piste leadership entirely to paid professionals - which is essentially what we've been discussing for about 4 years and which sadly precipated the closure of the SCGB open forum.
The commonsense of the general public shouldn't be underestimated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| ....... The Club's assets and finances have to be ring-fenced against threats of litigation arising from avoidable risks....... |
I know I am going to regret this- - but do tell us how you think this could be done. There are a lot of companies out there who will welcome your advice about how to avoid corporate consequences for their actions - including both criminal and civil court action - and would love to know about your 'ring-fencing' concept.
| Quote: |
| The commonsense of the general public shouldn't be underestimated. |
How about yours? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
achilles, They've already done it. Name a commercial tour operator whose 'ski hosts' take people off piste.
As for your second point, if I was teaching now with my BASI 3 ticket (and admittedly I've not done a refresher recently) I wouldn't be taking people beyond those parallel lines in the snow. In the old days, no one would have batted an eyelid. In fact, much of my BASI training on Cairngorm in May 1975 (there was tons of snow then) was done remotely to the pistes and if we were capable of cutting turns in crud and powder we'd be teaching it to pupils who wanted to play there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
boredsurfin, I think the mods and admin are enjoying the fun. And actually there is a wider interest here. The problems the reps may be facing also extend to all who ski in a group. You go out with a party of mates something goes wrong. The local police decide you are a criminal because you were seen as leader as the pack. The local court agrees - particularly as you are Johnny Foreigner. Not only do you get a criminal record - but you also face loosing your house. Your mates didn't sue you - but the insurance company of one of the deceased does. Your insurance company isn't that bothered about paying you for an incident arising from your 'criminal' activity. Ho Ho. I am not saying this relates to this specific incident, but the thoughts that arise whilst we are speculating do. And bearing in mind some of the injuries I have been aware of on-piste during my skiing, this doesn't just mean off-piste, either.
So, although this discussion has been triggered by the Verbier incident, there is food for thought for us all, I think.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Fri 23-11-07 11:35; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| achilles, They've already done it. Name a commercial tour operator whose 'ski hosts' take people off piste.... |
That has absolutely nothing to do with 'ring fencing' (ie securing against any possible seizure) of a company's assets. A company can take reasonable steps that it hopes will protect it against legal action - but ring-fencing assets from legal action is another matter. The SCGB has endeavoured to do that with Fresh Tracks (a separatebut wholly-owned company)- so if FT goes bust the SCGB does not. How successful that would be if push comes to shove, I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I think confusion may reign here, IFIRC an earlier post referred to a provision in the accounts being made because of this accident. Perfectly good practice (and tax advantageous).
The club will be insured against the result of any litigation and is being responsible by 'providing' for any costs that may come outside of their insurance cover.
Any excess and/or maximum claim limit/payout which may apply to their insurance is of course quite another matter.
Last edited by snowHeads are a friendly bunch. on Fri 23-11-07 11:45; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Quote: |
The local police decide you are a criminal because you were seen as leader as the pack.
|
achilles, as the incident took place in Switzerland, and knowing the Swiss police to be very "trigger-happy", I'd imagine that the rep concerned would have been arrested and may well indeed be facing a criminal charge. We don't know of course, but the club could well find itself fighting costly legal action on two fronts... assisting the rep on one front (I assume they wouldn't desert him/her) and fighting a civil case on the other front. Any organisation faced with this has a simple stark choice in my view... a "root & branch" examination of repping full stop, whether on or off-piste and with the certainty that the off-piste stuff would have to be curtailed. The tour ops were forced to wake up to this a decade or so ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
boredsurfin, although presumably insured for public liability, professional indemnity etc, the insurer will be whistling and staring into the middle distance with hands stuffed firmly in pockets, if a Swiss criminal court were to decide, for example, that the rep/club were criminally responsible in any way. That's a real risk!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| boredsurfin wrote: |
| ...........The club will be insured against the result of any litigation............ |
Looking again at the general rather than specific case, no person or business is insured against 'any litigation' AFIK. The only exceptions I can think of relate to driving. Your car insurance gives you unlimited liability cover from a third party claim. I do not know what cover it will give you from facing the costs of a criminal trial, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
[quote="Bode Swiller"]
| Quote: |
... as the incident took place in Switzerland, and knowing the Swiss police to be very "trigger-happy", I'd imagine that the rep concerned would have been ... |
Yes, Swiller. I'm probably not alone in having expected the next word to have been "shot".
How come a Swiss policeman carries a gun but a Swiss soldier only carries a red penknife?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Hurtle, yes indeed, not a pleasant experience and probably life-changing. Worse... imagine being the victim or the victim's family.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Whoa. I have made a couple of calls on this. From my understanding, the accident location and whether anyone was responsible for it, may be a matter of contention. It's important that no one rushes to judgement. The rep could be in the clear, as a best-case scenario.
I just think that it may be time to leave off-piste leadership, and the associated jungle of liabilities, to paid professionals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
David Goldsmith, I was arrested once by the Swiss police. Nothing ski related, I was just carrying a "small" quantity of booze in the back of the car. Stupidly I'd told the border guard that I had nothing to declare and a quick inspection revealed my subterfuge. They were vile frankly and I was given the full treatment for several hours before being soundly fined. Little Nazis they were. Still, I'm older and wiser and it wasn't as bad as the time I accidently hit a Greek policeman...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
... with a Turkish Delight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| ........ The public have a right to know what happenedt........ |
later
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| ........ It's important that no one rushes to judgement........ |
Indeed the public has a right to know, eventually. However, I am pleased to see that your tone is becoming less strident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Goldsmith, i could be wrong here but im not sure a grade 3 is considered qualified to teach off piste. i believe only grade 2 or higher is "certified" to do that these days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
skimottaret, I thnik that was his point.
Years ago, he would have done it, but now with taht qualifcation, he wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| ...........I just think that it may be time to leave off-piste leadership, and the associated jungle of liabilities, to paid professionals. |
I am not clear that the situation is that much better on-piste.
Scenario:
'Hot shot' skier in rep's party decides he can belt down the slope faster than the rep down a narrow rather icy piste winding round the side of a mountain with a very steep open face by the side (I can think of one such piste at LDA) . Wipes out small child, who is then permanently maimed from the subsequent fall down the face. I can't think that the courts/insurance company would be sympathetic because the incident started 'on piste'.
For rep read anyone of us the locals decides was in charge of a group. Times are changing - and not for the better. Glad most of my skiing was in easier times.
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Fri 23-11-07 12:42; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
