next exec

gnock · 01-08-2009 1:11am #1

any one got any ideas on who the next exec should be september coming fast

Greenarcher · 01-08-2009 9:17pm

Emmanuel O'Dea Pres.
Deirdre Lennon Tres.
Brendan Conroy Sec.
Tara Purcell Child off
Gerry Deegan Vetting
Keith Colton Dev off.
Pat Lyons Vice P
James Ryan PR
Richard Dalaney C/Bow
Cian O'Sullivan Coll rep
Keith Hanlon Rec off.

A committee that would work for the members.:eek:

Renegade_Archer · 03-08-2009 11:51pm

My thoughts:

Greenarcher wrote: »

Emmanuel O'Dea Pres. <-- hurrah
Deirdre Lennon Tres.
Brendan Conroy Sec.
Tara Purcell Child off
Gerry Deegan Vetting
Keith Colton Dev off.
Pat Lyons Vice P
James Ryan PR
Richard Dalaney C/Bow
Cian O'Sullivan Coll rep <-- Did Cian not graduate ages ago?
Keith Hanlon Rec off.

A committee that would work for the members.:eek:

Robo_Mike · 04-08-2009 1:17pm

Renegade_Archer wrote: »

Cian O'Sullivan Coll rep <-- Did Cian not graduate ages ago?

Cian is deserting the UL team for DIT and a postgrad........

Memori · 04-08-2009 2:34pm

not DIT but DCU

Robo_Mike · 04-08-2009 3:33pm

Memori wrote: »

not DIT but DCU

Woops, i really should get to training:rolleyes::rolleyes:

hotmelt · 04-08-2009 10:22pm

Greenarcher wrote: »

Emmanuel O'Dea Pres.
Deirdre Lennon Tres.
Brendan Conroy Sec.
Tara Purcell Child off
Gerry Deegan Vetting
Keith Colton Dev off.
Pat Lyons Vice P
James Ryan PR
Richard Dalaney C/Bow
Cian O'Sullivan Coll rep
Keith Hanlon Rec off.

what about
Emmanual -Pres
Tony McLoughlin, Vice Pres
Hugh Caulfield, Sec.
Sinead Cuthburt, Child Protection Officer
MacDara Glynn, Dev Officer
David O Brien, Treasurer
Gerry Deegan, Vetting Officer
Katie O Brien, Jun Rep
James Ryan, PR
Richard Dalaney, Crossbow
Cian O Sullivan, Collgeg Rep
Robert Claarke, Records Officer

Ordinary Members,also from above list.
Medical, Drug Officers-need list of qualified people to suggest someone.

philmire · 06-08-2009 6:49pm

was talking to emmanual he said quite politley he wouldn't like to be president or anything elce on the commitie

Panserborn · 07-08-2009 1:35am

Hi all,

Just a note to say that some might not like their names being mentioned on a public forum. If anyone wants post edited to remove names then just PM me.

For my tupence, I think the officers in the current positions are doing as good a job as they can. If they would like to continue in their posts (as I hope they do) then they should be supported. It takes time to impliment new ideas into an organisation and this commettee have only had a year, thats not enough time to get things rolling IMO. And to be fair, in this year we have seen success as an organisation, not least of all the appointment of one of the main personalities of world archery as our national coach. There have been some legitimate issues raised concerning the running of the organisation, but once raised they were taken on.

Just my opinion

anonymity · 12-08-2009 4:52pm

Personally I think it should be mentioned that some of the better things that have happened in the last year (such as organising a new rule book, the first mention of defibulators and other things like that) has been thanks to the previous exec and that the current one are reaping the rewards of what was sown over the past few years.

While the new exec has put forward ideas that are of merit too they are slow to take up some of the more inconvenient changes and have bent/broken their own rules.

As you can imagine I'd rather not divulge the particulars of these on a public forum.

Regards

An IAAA Archer

gnock · 13-08-2009 1:37am

have heared the dfibulators are locked in sports hq not much there if someone has a heart attack buying them is good but not having them out is crimnal

ruiner · 13-08-2009 7:52am

The judges bring one each with them to competitions or large events. One is in sports hq as a lot of IAAA meetings are held there and the sports hq doesn't have it's own one

eamo_ · 13-08-2009 5:53pm

ruiner wrote: »

The judges bring one each with them to competitions or large events. One is in sports hq as a lot of IAAA meetings are held there and the sports hq doesn't have it's own one

think that was the plan however i was told by a judge at a recent comp(when i was looking for a first aid kit mine was in the car a fair bit away) that they were not out yet

Scottish Rob · 14-08-2009 3:27pm

As those of you who are members of the Association will know there is a procedure for proposing new members to the executive; you will have received notification of this through the post by now.

It is great to have a wish list for the next committee but I would suggest that the more sensible course of action would be to follow the wise example of Philmire and ask members first if they are willing to take on positions of responsibility. Hopefully, many on the lists so far suggested might offer their services to the Association; although I do understand that it is virtually impossible to be a competitive archer and an active committee member at the same time. There are just not enough hours in the day!

I , by the way, am Robert Clarke, the current secretary of the Association, if any of you were in doubt, and I don’t feel it necessary to create an anonymous pseudonym to hide behind to discuss the current executive.

Although this moves away from the original purpose of this thread I would like to take the opportunity to clarify the position on defibrillators.

As Ruiner rightly observes two were bought to be carried by the judges to competitions and one to stay in Sports HQ for use at meetings, for National Training and on Archery Leaders Courses. Judge Tony carries one, ( and a full medical kit) with him in his van and Judge Gerry has still to be issued with/collect his from the stores; although he may have done so already as he has full access to it. By the way, the plans to provide large scale training in the use of defibrillators to all archers as well as first aid training are one of the areas where more rapid progress would have been hoped for.

I would like to thank Panserborn for his words of encouragement but go on to address some of the comments made by Anonymity.

The current executive obviously has built on the hard work of the previous one and being/having been a member of both I am in a position to see this clearly. A lot of progress has been made this year such as the purchase of the defibrillators, to which Anonymity refers, which were first discussed at the executive meeting of the 12th January this year by our current medical officer. On the 13th of March this year, the current executive approved their purchase after receiving three different quotes and the membership were informed of the current executive’s decision in the March 2009 Newsletter.

At the delegate meeting on the 20th July 2008 an urgent review of the rule book was proposed and a subcommittee put in place. It is worth noting that three of the five members of this committee, (including Ruiner), went on to take office in the current executive and that the chairman of this subcommittee was none other than our current President. The rule book was redrafted and brought, proposal by proposal, to the delegates for approval first at the meeting in Pobalscoil Neasain on the 14th February this year. Those five members worked particularly hard to complete the task and I thank them for their perseverance on behalf of all members of the Association.

At the same July 2008 delegate meeting in Carlow a redrafting of the Memorandum and Articles of Association was proposed and this is now complete and up for adoption, hopefully, at the AGM of the 19th September. This work has been done solely during the term of office of the current executive.

It is worth note that our current president was also actively involved in negotiations to secure a National Archery Range. These discussions are still ongoing.

The current Vice President of the Association, as you well know, the President of the previous executive committee, continues his hard work for the Association both through his duties on the committee and as head of coach education.

There are numerous other areas where the current committee, and I extend that beyond the executive on purpose, have made significant contributions to target and field archery in Ireland this year. Some of you may be aware, for example, that next summer there are plans to hold the first NIAS/IAAA joint All Ireland Target Archery Championships. Six new Archery clubs have affiliated to the Association this year. The Women in Sports Programme has been extended. Irish Record status shoots have been reviewed. Selection criteria for International events have been reviewed and a League System for clubs and archers has been proposed, to name a few of these. A committee that has worked for members, Renegade_Archer. This work has been done without reward by members of the committees and subcommittees in their free time on behalf of Irish Archery. Again, I would like to thank these individuals for their effort on behalf of all Irish archers.

Panserborn mentions the appointment of our National Coach; none other than the World reknown Vittorio Frangilli. This man has worked successfully with our recurve archers to send them to competitions in Italy, America, Scotland and Korea and has plans to develop the National Compound Squad this year as well.

One aspect of the current executive that Anonymity is no doubt aware of after the fiasco at the delegate meeting in Galway where several misleading or even untrue statements were made and later retracted at an open meeting of the full committee a week later, is that transparency in actions is one of the issues that the current executive are working hard to improve upon.

I would urge Anonymity to specify the ‘more inconvenient changes’ and state the cases of ‘bent/broken’ rules to which this anonymous person eludes to in writing and address it for my attention, or the attention of the President, at the registered office of the Association so that these issues can be put on the agenda for discussion at the next meeting of the full committee. Obviously such serious issues would impinge on the smooth running and integrity of the executive and should not remain unaddressed.

Finally, as all members who have read their AGM notification letter will be aware, the executive is actively seeking the opinion of the membership and also asking for assistance from members who are prepared to volunteer their time and expertise to further the objects of the Association. If, on reading this post, you feel you are in a position to offer assistance, the current executive, and I would suggest the one to follow the AGM, would be very happy to hear from you. Please feel free to contact us.

It is very easy to find fault, but actually attempting to improve on that fault and move forward requires hard work and commitment.

eamo_ · 14-08-2009 4:29pm

hi rob thanks for the clarification on the d-fib issue
Eamonn

Private Ryan · 15-08-2009 7:54pm

Assuming the roll of PR, (which I will indulge for this thread and this thread alone - I AM NOT PUTTING MY NAME FOREWARD), dirty laundry, stained by egos and misperceptions, should not be washed and hung out to dry in public, e.g. Boards ect. There are a lot of people hurting at the minute and is it any wonder when salt is being rubbed into their wounds.

Apart from this, regard must be placed on who else is reading this (I seem to recall posting a similar comment in the Vetting thread....)
- "I want to start archery"
- "Oh there are archery forums on Boards, I wonder if there is information on how to get started"
- "I really want to do archery now they seem like such a nice loyal friendly bunch of people"

Mac is correct in what he posted and I am aware that certain comments do leave people with no choice but to respond but the point to be emphasised is:

Never post comments simply to spark reaction or to cause offence.

It only takes one crack in the support structure and before you know it you have an entire organisation falling down around you. After the dust has settled and the pieces rebuilt, and even if you've done the right thing, regret can linger on. If we anticipate the consequences and endeavour to see situations from all possible angles not alone would the world be a better place but we would not be in this situation to begin with (i.e. the IAAA would have 1000+ members and over endowed with people wanting to serve on committees).

There is so much more I would like to say on the subject, so many euphemisms I haven't used but alas this is not the correct forum for such musings.

James

Renegade_Archer · 17-08-2009 6:07am

Man, remember when this forum was mostly college archers? I miss those days.

Ewan

[ Former college archer due to graduation, former IAAA member by choice ]

Rhood · 18-08-2009 7:04am

I talked to one of the committee members and was informed the defibulators are locked away in HQ. They were supplied by another committee member 3 months ago and the supplier was to train the judges on the use of them. No training has taken place although training was paid for about 2 months ago. As a result of this judges are not insured to use them.

Panserborn · 18-08-2009 6:04pm

Hi all, to address some of the concerns ..................

I don't believe in censorship and since I moderate this board then this board doesn't belive in censorship either so I will generally allow people to discuss what they wish as long as it ...........

a) Concerns archery, provision of archery, running of archery, or archers themselves (within reason)
b) Isn't slanderous or involve personal attacks
c) Isn't spam (you'd be surprised how much we need to delete :rolleyes:)
d) Does not go against the Forum Charter
e) ...... of course if a person asks me to delete something concerning them I will

As such, people are generally free to raise whatever issues they want, negative or positive. However, I would like to support Private Ryans statement of Never post comments simply to spark reaction

As you can see from Robs response, if someone has issue with the running of the association, all members of the commettee are but an email away and it is probably more advisable to contact them direct rather than standing on a soap box on boards.

Speaking only from my own experience, whenever I had an issue with some aspect of the association, I always recieved a fairly rapid response from whatever commettee member I mailed. Give it a try ...........

philmire · 25-08-2009 10:33pm

Rhood wrote: »

No training has taken place. As a result of this judges are not insured to use them.

If this is the case then no judge should be aloud carry one since they are not trained in the use i'm sure they could do more harm then good in untrained hands

collegearcher · 03-09-2009 7:31am

[font=&quot]Since the delegate meeting in Galway I have been watching and listening to the goings on within the IAAA after one of our members spoke out about the manner in which the association is been run. I have also talked to a lot of members and looked at emails been sent by members of the executive. [/font]
[font=&quot]First of all I would like to remind everyone the member in question spoke out at a private meeting and was perfectly correctly to do so, he did not go on a public web site which I now find myself doing in order to attempt to put a stop to this. [/font]

[font=&quot]1 A committee member has been criticized by other executives for speaking out at a delegate meeting. He was right to do so as the association belongs to the members and we are all entitled to know if there are problems with national committee. The association is run by the delegates and not the directors. [/font]
[font=&quot]2 It was one of the directors of the association that suggested a vote of no confidence in the executive.[/font]
[font=&quot]3 There are five executive within the national committee. One of them has resigned, another one proposed a vote of no confidence in the national executive, after the director suggested it, while another one seconded it. [/font]
[font=&quot]4 There was a 99% vote of no confidence.[/font]
[font=&quot]5 One of the delegates called for the person or persons responsible for the problems to do the honourable thing and step down. This did not happen. It was then suggested the executives should have a meeting ASAP and find out who is responsible and that person should step down. A meeting was held a few days later but it was stated at the meeting by one of the directors that he did not want to know which person released information, but did want to know what was said. I feel the reason for not wanting the person in question named, was because that saved any of the directors having to step down, which is not what the delegates wanted. [/font]
[font=&quot]6 If any one takes the time to look carefully at the minutes of both the delegate meeting and the executive meeting held a few days later, you will see they are very two sided. One side to make the executive committee look good, and the other side to make one member look bad. Minutes are to report an accurate account of what happens at a meeting. This did not happen, if fact it is my understanding there are ongoing problems with minutes of meetings. I have seen minutes of meetings where things are put into minutes, which were not discussed at the meeting. The reason for this it was said was to, save time. [/font]
[font=&quot]7 One of the members put a notice on boards and was then criticize for being anonymous. Would anyone blame that person for being anonymous when we see the way a member of the executive has been treated by other executives for speaking out a meeting? As a result of intimidation being received he stepped down as team manager. This is a big problem for the association as it has been said many times he was the best manager we ever had.[/font]
[font=&quot]8 One of the directors of the association put information on boards attempting to make one of our judges look bad and another one look good regarding defibrillators. The fact is there are 3 judges so if 1 carries a defibrillator and the other 2 don’t then why is only one judge made to look bad. Surely big question here is why did the directors paid a fellow committee member for somthing that was not supplied. Part of the deal to supply the defibrillators was also to train the judges in the use of them. The training has never taken place, the judges are not insured to use them, and they are not covered by car or home insurance if anyone takes them out of sports HQ and they are stolen. I have also been informed that the some members of the executive attempted to purchase 5 defibrillators at a cost of about €2000 each. The executive were informed by the member who suggested buying a defibrillator in the first place that there was no grant from the sports council but there was one from the Lotto. However no grant was applied for and the money used to buy these came from the archery budget. [/font]
[font=&quot]9 In fact while we’re on the subject of the National Lotto, they granted the association €20,000 2 or 3 years ago and neither the last committee or, the present committee have collected this money from the National Lottery.[/font]
[font=&quot]10 Another body has offered the association about €45,000 euro a year for this year and the next the next two years to cover the cost of training. Again this has not been claimed. [/font]
[font=&quot]11 On the subject of the rule book it was in fact the same man again who put the book together and brought it to a delegate meeting in Carlow. A committee was formed to complete it and it was passed by delegates. But where is it now? At the meeting in Galway the delegates agreed it should be emailed to all ASAP, but this has not happened. The rules are been quoted by the executive when it suits them but the members have no rule book![/font]
[font=&quot]12 Regarding comments about the executive braking rules all you have to do is to look at the way things are done. Under the constitution of the IAAA all decisions are made by a show of hands. This is not done; in fact we have all received voting cards in the post to vote on a new constitution, this is clearly against the rules of the IAAA.[/font]
[font=&quot]13 The national training grounds committee was set up by the last executive and have not had a meeting this year. One would question the work of this committee. If anyone looks at the grounds some of the committee members were pushing for, you will in fact see it was totally unsuitable for archery. So why was this been pushed for. It is reported that one of the committee wanted to use it for his own club who don’t have a shooting grounds. So was this about getting national grounds or about getting a cretin club in there, as a caretaker club so they would have some where to train. Some members of the sub-committee never paid a visit to the suggested grounds. [/font]
[font=&quot]14 Delegates agreed to set up a sub-committee to work on a new constitution. The committee was not formed and one person rewrote the constitution then sent out a copy of it and voting cards to be posted back to the same person. Apart from the fact the voting cards are illegal as all votes must be by a show of hands, can anyone show me the transparency in this. This has cost about €600 in postage plus the cost of printing the cards.[/font]
[font=&quot]15 The women in sports program was set up by the last committee. They held interviews for coaches and appointed 2 of them. Funding was supplied by the ISC for the program and the association is still using this money. However what is happening now is that a member of the executive is attempting to jump on the band wagon and get some of the funding for themselves. Any new schools which have come on board were in fact as a result of the coaches and nothing to do with the executive who have had no input. [/font]
[font=&quot]16 Regarding the s[/font][font=&quot]election criteria for international events this was as a result of the sub-committee set up by the last executive and not the current one. In fact the executive have never implemented the new rules although voted in by the delegates. [/font]
[font=&quot]17 As for the executive attempting to make its self look good for sending archers to [/font][font=&quot]America, Scotland and Korea. The trip to Scotland was the Euronations which we go to every year. Korea is the world championship which we send archers every time. And as for America this was started by the last committee. Now let’s look at these, there was no proper training for any of the archers going away. In the past there was sports [/font][font=&quot]psychology training however this did not happen this time around. It is my understanding that the committee did not know how much any of these trips would cost when asked at a meeting by one of the committee members. They did not know how much coaching would cost. It was a case of spend, spend, spend. I think the trip to Korea speaks for itself, we sent 7 archers to the last worlds and 2 this time. This is a major step backwards. [/font]
[font=&quot]18 As for 6 new clubs, there are only 4 new clubs listed on our web site, and the executive forgot to tell us about the 6 that have left the IAAA. We have also lost a long standing member who resigned due to the way the association is been run. [/font]
[font=&quot]19 Members of the executive said about 3 months ago that the association would be bankrupt by October at the current rate of spending at that time. [/font]
[font=&quot]20 There are no plans that anyone knows about for compound archers. Compounders are been ignored and the executive decided months ago not to send compound archers to Korea.[/font]
[font=&quot]21 The new league system been talked about, is this not the same system the colleges have been using for some years now[/font]

Aryzel · 03-09-2009 1:17pm

Sounds like there alot of hot tempers going around with how the IAAA is being run

A general rule if you want any organisation to be run well, is to find 1-3 people who are willing and capable to do the work (that might seem like very few, but if you find 3 people who are truly both willing and capable, you have worked a miracle). And who view the job in terms of responsibility, practicality and impartial fairness. If there is a single issue at any level that is not 100% perfect they should feel responsible for fixing it, now obviously they aren't going to have everything 100% perfect, they should understand and be fine with that, but the moment they stop trying to make everything 100% perfect is the moment you start keeping an eye out for someone new.

Obviously most organisations only have people like that running them at most 5-10% of the time, if your lucky. The rest of the time you just hope things keep ticking over okay, which is normally all that is needed. But if you want significant changes/revamp in how an organisation is run, then you need someone truly willing and capable. The university league has a large throughput of new leaders which makes it a good place to keep an eye out for capable people, definitely worth trying to channel the best of them into the workings of the IAAA.

But don't expect miracles. Responsibility does not just lie with those few in charge, if 'you' regardless of your level, sees any issue, 'you' should feel responsible for trying to help fix it. Lack of titles or recognition are not valid excuses, the moment 'you' become aware of an issue it automatically becomes 'your' responsibility. Ideally 99% of the time, when you point out the issue to those in charge they should be able to say that they know about it and how they are going about fixing it, but sometimes it might be that you tell them the issue, outline a solution, agree the solution and go off and implement it. Getting the job done is what is important.

Anyways, this has turned into a bit of wandering thoughts about organisations and running them, I'll finish with one final thing. People can learn to become better at anything, experience and teaching are how this happens. In an organisation, if you think someone is not running something perfectly, it is much more beneficial to help them and teach them, than it is to deride them.

Carebear11 · 03-09-2009 9:37pm

collegearcher wrote:

On going problems

I think who ever this person is needs to get more of the facts fully correct before posting, there seems to be some amount of slander going on here, I will not comment on any of the before statements but I will say this, unless you can make 100% certain that every statement you wish to make is true then you shouldent say anything. If people have a probleme with the IAAA, e-mail the president and tell him or the rest of the exec for that matter.

Ian.

Panserborn · 04-09-2009 9:46am

OK,

I think this thread has run its course. I don't want this fourm being used as a proxy for delegate meetings. The nature of a message board such as this does not really allow fair argument as there is a time delay between argument and counter-argument, and this delay can bias the opinions of readers.

I won't delete any of the posts, but I am closing the thread. We have an AGM coming up soon and that is the place to address all these issues.

In the interest of fairness, if a member of the exec wishes to leave a post here clarifying any of the points brought up by collegearcher then PM it to me and I'll place it in the thread - just so both sides have their points available.

PS, it was suggested in a post that there was some slander directed at members through boards. This is a serious issue and if anyone thinks they have been slandered then let me know the entries and I will delete them - don't just let it sit on the fourm.

Panserborn · 05-09-2009 10:58pm

Hi all,

As I said above, I will post a reply from the exec to address the issues raised in this thread. This is below. This is just so there is a fair "discussion". The thread remains closed however, if anyone wishes to persue this further then please contact the members via PM, or contact the exec directly - all details at www.archery.ie.

Mod

Response from Scottish Rob

Reply to On going problems

Robert Clarke,
Secretary of the IAAA and member of the National Executive (until 19th September 2009)

Director of the IAAA (until 31st December 2009)

The first question I asked myself on reading the post of Collegearcher was, ‘would a response to this be in the interest of archery?’. After a bit of thought and consultation with other members of the committee it was decided that as ‘transparency in actions is one of the issues that the current executive are working hard to improve upon’, a response was warranted. By their very nature the responses I will give are specific and often personal but are all supportable by written documentation or by verbal corroboration from those involved. In many cases I make reference to my own involvement to the exclusion of others but I do this only because in doing so I speak for myself and am not relying on hearsay. I would beg your indulgence with this as the following post is rather long.

On going problems

Since the delegate meeting in Galway I have been watching and listening to the goings on within the IAAA after one of our members spoke out about the manner in which the association is been run. I have also talked to a lot of members and looked at emails been sent by members of the executive.
First of all I would like to remind everyone the member in question spoke out at a private meeting and was perfectly correctly to do so, he did not go on a public web site which I now find myself doing in order to attempt to put a stop to this.

I commend Collegearcher for having the interest and commitment to follow up on issues raised at the delegate meeting in Galway and can assure him that each of the concerns detailed below has come to the attention of the executive committee; although I would remind him that as he states, Boards is a public forum, and that he would have received a similar written response if he had emailed or written to the committee directly.

1 A committee member has been criticized by other executives for speaking out at a delegate meeting. He was right to do so as the association belongs to the members and we are all entitled to know if there are problems with national committee. The association is run by the delegates and not the directors.

The member was criticized for bringing the matter to the delegates before doing so at executive level, not for speaking out about his concerns. In fact, if you reread the relevant section of the minutes of the emergency committee meeting of the 30th June, which was open to all members, you will see that even the member criticized agreed that ‘ it was not the place for it to have been said but that it had to be said’, when answering questions on vetting. He was also criticized for implying, by his use of words, that there had been a leak in confidential vetting information which he affirms is not and never has been the case. On matters regarding communication, it is again on record that the same member agreed that the matter had already been discussed within the committee and on this matter action had already been taken. The third statement made by the member was a personal opinion with regard to the resignation of the Treasurer and again, would have been better addressed to the executive first, who are tasked with the day to day running of the Association, (article 29 (b) of the current constitution). Delegate meetings are there for nominated delegates from each club to bring issues to the attention of the executive or to approve changes to the byelaws of the Association. The Association is a limited company and as such the legal responsibility for it lies with the three directors.

2 It was one of the directors of the association that suggested a vote of no confidence in the executive.

The three current directors are Tony Walsh (President), Pat Lyons (Vice President) and myself, Robert Clarke (Secretary). Under normal circumstances the Treasurer rather than the Vice President would be a director. After a barrage of comments regarding implied mismanagement of the Association it was I that asked the assembled delegates whether they were suggesting a motion of no confidence. This was then proposed and seconded by two members present but overruled by the voting delegate from their club; under the current constitution (article 29 (e)), clubs may send two delegates to delegate meetings but only one of these may vote and any other members from the club present are there as observers only and not entitled to contribute to the discussions. One of the Ordinary members of the executive then proposed that a motion of no confidence be raised at an EGM held before the AGM on the 19th of September this year and this was seconded by the other Ordinary member. The EGM will proceed on the 19th of September for the sole purpose of addressing this proposal.

3 There are five executive within the national committee. One of them has resigned, another one proposed a vote of no confidence in the national executive, after the director suggested it, while another one seconded it.

I believe this matter has been answered in my previous comments, save to say that the resignation of one of the executive members was for personal reasons and not in any way connected to the discussions at the delegate meeting, as far as is my understanding.

4 There was a 99% vote of no confidence.

This is factually incorrect as no vote has yet taken place.

5 One of the delegates called for the person or persons responsible for the problems to do the honourable thing and step down. This did not happen. It was then suggested the executives should have a meeting ASAP and find out who is responsible and that person should step down. A meeting was held a few days later but it was stated at the meeting by one of the directors that he did not want to know which person released information, but did want to know what was said. I feel the reason for not wanting the person in question named, was because that saved any of the directors having to step down, which is not what the delegates wanted.

The delegate called for the person responsible for leaking confidential vetting information to step down. An emergency meeting of the full committee was demanded by the delegates within a seven day period to address the issues of concern raised and to resolve what was going on. This meeting was held three days after the delegate meeting with the five executive members present, joined by seven of the national committee members and three club observers. At this meeting it was confirmed by the vetting officer himself that there had not been a leak of confidential information. He went further and stated that there could be no leak as he was the only person with access to vetting information and that the issue he had been referring to had been in regard to individuals who refused to comply with vetting procedures; such individuals are in breach of the agreement they signed to on their membership forms, which refer to a commitment to abide by the rules of the Association and comply with vetting. If you reread the minutes of the emergency meeting, which were widely circulated, you will see that the reference to one of the directors not wanting to know names actually refers to the vetting officer’s insistence that identities be protected because of ‘confidentiality issues’. A show of hands was called for to determine whether the committee and then the observers were happy that the matter had been resolved and both were unanimous. I quote, ‘ It was resolved by the full committee of the Association that there has been no leak in confidential Vetting information and that as a consequence the statements made at the Delegate Meeting are without foundation’. Who then should step down? and for what?

6 If any one takes the time to look carefully at the minutes of both the delegate meeting and the executive meeting held a few days later, you will see they are very two sided. One side to make the executive committee look good, and the other side to make one member look bad. Minutes are to report an accurate account of what happens at a meeting. This did not happen, if fact it is my understanding there are ongoing problems with minutes of meetings. I have seen minutes of meetings where things are put into minutes, which were not discussed at the meeting. The reason for this it was said was to, save time.

This is, in my view, a personal interpretation and I would urge members to reread the two documents for themselves and come to their own decision. As for ongoing problems with the minutes this is an issue I would refute; but then as I write them you would be entitled to argue that I am biased. In the last two sentences of this section Collegearcher identifies himself as one of ten people, other than myself, who were present at the committee meeting of the 25th of May 2009 where selection to the Junior Euronation squad and correspondence regarding North/South partnership were discussed, along with sixty eight other agenda items. The additions to the minutes were the inclusion of one junior’s name who should have been on the list but had been overlooked and not mentioned during the meeting and a sentence stating that correspondence from the Association regarding North/South Partnership had been passed by the President, Vice President and two members of the Irish Sports Council before being sent, again not mentioned at the meeting. I was brought to task by one committee member over these additions and have been vigilant to make sure that I have not repeated the infringement. Incidentally, I have never claimed that they were added to save time.

7 One of the members put a notice on boards and was then criticize for being anonymous. Would anyone blame that person for being anonymous when we see the way a member of the executive has been treated by other executives for speaking out a meeting? As a result of intimidation being received he stepped down as team manager. This is a big problem for the association as it has been said many times he was the best manager we ever had.

The Team Manager resigned from that position two days prior to the departure of the Junior Squad to Aberdeen to compete in the Junior Euronations quoting health issues as his reason. The suggestion that intimidation was an issue is scurrilous, if not slanderous.

8 One of the directors of the association put information on boards attempting to make one of our judges look bad and another one look good regarding defibrillators. The fact is there are 3 judges so if 1 carries a defibrillator and the other 2 don’t then why is only one judge made to look bad. Surely big question here is why did the directors paid a fellow committee member for somthing that was not supplied. Part of the deal to supply the defibrillators was also to train the judges in the use of them. The training has never taken place, the judges are not insured to use them, and they are not covered by car or home insurance if anyone takes them out of sports HQ and they are stolen. I have also been informed that the some members of the executive attempted to purchase 5 defibrillators at a cost of about €2000 each. The executive were informed by the member who suggested buying a defibrillator in the first place that there was no grant from the sports council but there was one from the Lotto. However no grant was applied for and the money used to buy these came from the archery budget.

There are several issues that need addressing in this paragraph. Firstly, it was I that posted the response on boards and it was, as Collegearcher states, in reference to defibrillators. I stated that ‘Judge Tony carries one, (and a full medical kit) with him in his van and Judge Gerry has still to be issued with/ collect his from the stores; although he may have done so already as he has full access to it’. The only way that this could possibly be construed as ‘attempting to make one of our judges look bad’ would be if I was aware that Judge Gerry had refused or plans to refuse to carry either the defibrillator or medical kit with him to competitions. On the second point I can categorically state that no committee member was ever paid for anything in regard to the supply of the defibrillators. The medical officer sourced information on and quotes for defibrillators from three different suppliers and with one of these managed to persuade the firm to throw in some free training, (they threw in three free training defibrillators and three mannequins as well). This training hasn’t taken place yet because of problems agreeing a mutually convenient time but the executive are looking at dates in November at the moment when sessions for twelve people at a time being planned. It was decided by the committee that even though training hadn’t taken place it was in the best interest of all archers and officials for the defibrillators and first aid kits to be carried to events. The reasoning behind this is that at many of these events trained personnel are present, for example the civil defense archers from Cuchulainn, and that even if this were not the case it is my understanding that the emergency services could instruct a ‘good Samaritan’ in use of the fully automated system we have purchased. The reference to five defibrillators is from the committee meeting of the 12th January this year where I, as Devil’s Advocate argued that we should have one for each of the three judges, one for coach education and one to stay in Sport HQ. It was never a serious suggestion because of our budgetary constraints. The Lotto funding issue will be addressed in the next paragraph.

9 In fact while we’re on the subject of the National Lotto, they granted the association €20,000 2 or 3 years ago and neither the last committee or, the present committee have collected this money from the National Lottery.

This is indeed a strange one. There is personal recollection on behalf of a member of the committee that the Lotto allocated €20,000 to the Association either two or three years ago. The individual who was Treasurer at the time and our own recently retired Treasurer both actively tried to identify and claim this funding for the Association. I, myself, have also made contact with their officers on several occasions to try to and obtain this funding. The National Lottery Officers state that they have no record of the allocation and have requested a reference code from us. At least five people have trawled through the correspondences and files looking for the number for obvious reasons with no success. We have also searched the published lists of beneficiaries in an attempt to spot our name and claim the allocation, again with no success. The simple truth of the matter is that, for what ever reason, the National Lottery denies any knowledge that they ever made an award to the Association and members of the Association, both past and present, are unable to corroborate the claim. It is with regret that we have to accept that, short of a miracle, this money is gone. If any of you out there know any different then please make contact as €20,000 would make a huge difference to our development plans.

10 Another body has offered the association about €45,000 euro a year for this year and the next the next two years to cover the cost of training. Again this has not been claimed.

This is incredible. By that I mean unbelievable rather than amazing, though if it were true I would happily reconsider my use of the word. If Collegearcher could email, phone or write to me with details of this offer I will guarantee to all members of the Association that I will tirelessly pursue this offer of funding with even greater enthusiasm and commitment than I have shown in responding to this thread. Incidentally, all other members of the executive and wider committee that I have spoken to since this revelation are equally in the dark. If we had this level of funding, which is nearly €20,000 greater than the support we get from the Irish Sports Council, then many of the plans that are on hold at the moment could be activated. We would probably not be looking at running the raffle that we have talked about this Autumn to try and replenish the Association’s coffers.

11 On the subject of the rule book it was in fact the same man again who put the book together and brought it to a delegate meeting in Carlow. A committee was formed to complete it and it was passed by delegates. But where is it now? At the meeting in Galway the delegates agreed it should be emailed to all ASAP, but this has not happened. The rules are been quoted by the executive when it suits them but the members have no rule book!

Judge Gerry rightly identified that the rule book had not been updated for some time and spent, no doubt, many hours compiling and adapting the best of the Australian and other Rule Books that were available online into our new Rule Book. He brought this to the executive who then instructed that a sub committee be set up to finish and formalize the work. This, as you are no doubt aware was done and accepted in full by the Delegates of the Association, at their final meeting on this, on the 8th March this year in Confey College. The Rule Book is complete and will be published as chapter 3 of our Constitutution and Byelaws should the new constitution be adopted on the 19th September. Collegearcher is right! The Rule Book should have been published by now. It hasn’t because the job of finishing it off was tasked to someone who has since stated that due to work commitments, that person is unable to complete the task. I, as will come up later, have rewritten the constitution and, I have record of all the passed proposals for the Rule Book on file on my computer and, I will add these as chapter three, should the proposed constitution be adopted. Too many jobs, too few hand!

12 Regarding comments about the executive braking rules all you have to do is to look at the way things are done. Under the constitution of the IAAA all decisions are made by a show of hands. This is not done; in fact we have all received voting cards in the post to vote on a new constitution, this is clearly against the rules of the IAAA.

Good news ! A break from justifying the position of the duly elected executive officers…. Read on:

‘You will find with this notice a ballot card to register your opinion on whether the new constitution should be accepted by the membership of the Association. I must clarify that this is for information on the opinion of the membership only and will not vote in, or not as the case may be, the new constitution as this must be done at an AGM or EGM of the Association under Article 21 (b.5) of the current constitution. Your opinion though, is eagerly sought and is the hope of the executive that you find time to complete and post the ballot or respond by email to secretary@archery.ie .’

This is a cut and paste from the AGM notification sent out to all members of the Association. It clearly and unambiguously states that the purpose of the ballot is for ‘information only’, and not a vote. This was not an infringement of the rules but a genuine attempt to elicit the opinions of members of the Association.

13 The national training grounds committee was set up by the last executive and have not had a meeting this year. One would question the work of this committee. If anyone looks at the grounds some of the committee members were pushing for, you will in fact see it was totally unsuitable for archery. So why was this been pushed for. It is reported that one of the committee wanted to use it for his own club who don’t have a shooting grounds. So was this about getting national grounds or about getting a cretin club in there, as a caretaker club so they would have some where to train. Some members of the sub-committee never paid a visit to the suggested grounds.

I am not on the National Training Grounds Committee but I have been informed of work that they have done this year and of possible developments. I cannot comment on the suitability or otherwise of any of the areas that were looked at or suggested but I can point out that Collegearcher’s reference to a club would be one from Greenhills, Dolmen, Frayne, Dublin or Dun Laoghaire Archers and that they have outdoor venues in Tallaght, Ballon, Athboy, Swords and Belfield respectively.

14 Delegates agreed to set up a sub-committee to work on a new constitution. The committee was not formed and one person rewrote the constitution then sent out a copy of it and voting cards to be posted back to the same person. Apart from the fact the voting cards are illegal as all votes must be by a show of hands, can anyone show me the transparency in this. This has cost about €600 in postage plus the cost of printing the cards.

The Constitution subcommittee was set up, as the minutes of the delegate meeting held on the 8th March in Confey College clearly show. It comprised of myself and a delegate from Dublin Archers who kindly offered his assistance. No one else offered to help and as the Dublin Archers member’s work commitments increased his contribution decreased. I did rewrite the constitution, basing it on seven documents, our old constitution and the Memoranda and Articles of Association of FITA, GNAS, IFAF, the Welsh Archery Association and the Irish Tug-of-war document that was produced this year with assistance from the Irish Sports Council. The final document was a company law document that gave advice on what needed to be present within our document. The ‘voting cards’ were printed on blank postcards which I bought from Easons at a cost of 79 cent for 25, printed on my own printer and 520 55 cent stamps were affixed to them. A total cost of €302.59. The decision to spend this money was passed at committee level as it was felt that this was a relatively small expense if it allowed us to gauge the opinion of the whole of the membership. I would remind members that if, on reading the proposed document, you wish to make alterations then you should send in resolutions to arrive at Sport HQ by the 14th September.

15 The women in sports program was set up by the last committee. They held interviews for coaches and appointed 2 of them. Funding was supplied by the ISC for the program and the association is still using this money. However what is happening now is that a member of the executive is attempting to jump on the band wagon and get some of the funding for themselves. Any new schools which have come on board were in fact as a result of the coaches and nothing to do with the executive who have had no input.

The Women In Sports Programme is an Irish Sports Council initiative and the Association receives funding from the ISC to encourage female participation in archery. There are no female members of the executive at present and so none of us could qualify for support from this fund. It would also be regarded as unethical and a conflict of interest for a member of the executive to do so. No member of the executive or wider committee is attempting to jump on the ‘band wagon’ and I am at a loss as to where this idea has come from. There have been several schools who have contacted the executive directly and asked about archery and the coaches have also worked hard to increase the numbers of schools on their book.

16 Regarding the selection criteria for international events this was as a result of the sub-committee set up by the last executive and not the current one. In fact the executive have never implemented the new rules although voted in by the delegates.

The latest draft of selection criteria was presented to the National Committee on 25th of August this year, just over a week ago. The current selection criteria have been in force since the delegate meeting of the 8th March this year.

17 As for the executive attempting to make its self look good for sending archers to America, Scotland and Korea. The trip to Scotland was the Euronations which we go to every year. Korea is the world championship which we send archers every time. And as for America this was started by the last committee. Now let’s look at these, there was no proper training for any of the archers going away. In the past there was sports psychology training however this did not happen this time around. It is my understanding that the committee did not know how much any of these trips would cost when asked at a meeting by one of the committee members. They did not know how much coaching would cost. It was a case of spend, spend, spend. I think the trip to Korea speaks for itself, we sent 7 archers to the last worlds and 2 this time. This is a major step backwards.

I do not dispute that archers are sent to competitions each year. The last World Championships were in Leipzig and the ones before in Madrid and a number of Association archers were sent to both. However, the cost of sending archers to these events was significantly less than sending archers to Korea and this unfortunately had an impact on the numbers we were able to send. Costings for the trips to Belfast, Italy, America and the two to Scotland were presented at a Finance Meeting on the 8th June and then to the full committee on the 16th June. As for spend, spend, spend, that indeed has been the case. The executive would be rightly criticized if we did not use the funds we accrue to promote the sport of archery.

18 As for 6 new clubs, there are only 4 new clubs listed on our web site, and the executive forgot to tell us about the 6 that have left the IAAA. We have also lost a long standing member who resigned due to the way the association is been run.

Ashwood, DKIT, Frayne, Athenry, Portlick, Confey. I make that six. I am puzzled over the ‘6 that have left the IAAA’ as I can only think of one. This thread shows one thing and that is that members of the Association have very strong opinions. It is correct that one of these members of long standing did resign this year quoting the way the Association was being run as his reason for doing so.

19 Members of the executive said about 3 months ago that the association would be bankrupt by October at the current rate of spending at that time.

There are times during the year when more money is spent than at others. For example, July was particularly expensive as the Association sent nearly 30 archers and officials away on four foreign trips. That level of spending, if it was continued through the year, would certainly have bankrupted the Association. Expenditure was discussed, as I have already mentioned, at a finance meeting ‘about 3 months ago’ on the 8th June and I have some recollection that one of the six members present made some comment about bankruptcy at that meeting.

20 There are no plans that anyone knows about for compound archers. Compounders are been ignored and the executive decided months ago not to send compound archers to Korea.

There have been plans in place since the selection of 9 Compound archers to A and B National Squads on the 13th July to hold training for them. It is my understanding this will take place first during the long weekend of National Training in October. The National Coach constantly monitors shoot reports and modifies the squads accordingly. Although it may appear that they have been and are being ignored, this is not the case. The minutes of the Finance Meeting of the 8th July show that I made a compound entry for Korea, along with the others, through the FITA website during the meeting.

21 The new league system been talked about, is this not the same system the colleges have been using for some years now

The new league system is a reworking of a proposal made by the previous Secretary of the Association but never implemented. The League organizer is involved with college archery and so it is hardly surprising that some of the excellent practice there has been included in her proposals. It is ‘not the same system the colleges have been using’ however. Even if it were, adapting it and extending it to the membership of the Association can hardly be a bad thing I would suggest.

If you have any issues with what I have written or wish further clarification then please write to me at the address on the contacts page, phone or email me and I will do my best to answer your queries. If you are still reading at this point then I thank you for your determination and wish you well in the sport.

Yours sincerely

Robert Clarke

next exec

Comments