C I AGM 2015

wav1

Didn't see a thread on this already so i'll kick start it again.
AGM takes place on Sat Nov 7th in Crowne Plaza Hotel Santry Dublin.
No idea what anyone has sent in as motions etc,but with all the discussion on here throughout the season re A3s and super juniors etc I presume there are a few.No motions etc have been released as of yet.Anyway if you would like to submit a motion you are already a week late.
Our club have stuck in a few,and among them is this.
''That the points requirement to upgrade from A3 be reduced to 10,and that the first eight actual A3s are given a full allocation of points''Tried this before and was deemed unworkable but has to go through this time I hope.
I believe there are 3 candidates for president.The incumbent Denis Twomey plus 2 more.

Eamonnator

Who are the other two candidates?

zurbfoundation

So if an A3 finishes 11th and is beaten by 10 juniors, he gets 8 points - a couple more and he is an A2?

that's a handy upgrade.

wav1

Ciaran Mc Kenna and Anthony Mitchell AFAIK

wav1

zurbfoundation wrote: »

So if an A3 finishes 11th and is beaten by 10 juniors, he gets 8 points - a couple more and he is an A2?

that's a handy upgrade.

Rants on here all year that its impossible to get out of A3 category,so its a workable suggestion IMO and only that.[a suggestion]And its not as handy an upgrade as taking the amnesty,As I said its only our suggestion but somebody has to do something in this regard.

Leroy42

Seems entirely sensible to me. Surely A3 should have it's own race. If it means that juniors need to be included then fine, but they should be judged differently. Why would anyone have a difficulty with that?

zurbfoundation

My main concern is in the case of the hypothetical situation i outlined earlier - a fella will be "racing" A1's while a couple of weeks earlier he couldn't get near the head of a combined race.

An amnesty for upgrading is hardly a good idea either

If you want A3's upgraded based on where they finish in relation to other A3's as you are describing, at least raise the points threshold to say 20 - 25?

As far as i recall about 10 years there were few juniors of any ability and A3's used to have lots of success in combined racing to get upgraded - it was 15 points, but only 6 to 1 points awarded (depended on distance but generally this was the case) - so you would need three excellent results to get up quickly - after that lads were generally fine racing at the higher level.

Incidentally A3's used to complain about the Vets mopping up the points 10 years ago as to why they couldn't get upgraded - sound familiar?

Lusk_Doyle

Is it too late to nominate C Kelly for ethics officer?

Leroy42

But isn't the whole point of the grading to allow people of similar level to compete against each other. If someone, be it a junior of a vet is better than the rest they should be moved up.

A3, like all categories, is a stepping stone, not a destination. For many, it will be the final level, but for those that have the right level they can push on.

What is the point of holding an good A3 back in A3 just because there are now better juniors blocking his way. The juniors are included to give them experience and drive them on, not to hold the others back.

So if an A3 gets upgraded with a few A3 placings and find himself in A2 or above then they simply have to push harder to stay at that level or else drop back down.

stecleary

Leroy42 wrote: »

But isn't the whole point of the grading to allow people of similar level to compete against each other. If someone, be it a junior of a vet is better than the rest they should be moved up.

A3, like all categories, is a stepping stone, not a destination. For many, it will be the final level, but for those that have the right level they can push on.

What is the point of holding an good A3 back in A3 just because there are now better juniors blocking his way. The juniors are included to give them experience and drive them on, not to hold the others back.

So if an A3 gets upgraded with a few A3 placings and find himself in A2 or above then they simply have to push harder to stay at that level or else drop back down.

You're somewhat contradicting yourself, what's the point of allowing someone who has earned an upgrade to drop back down. if you're good enough to upgrade surely you're too good to be in the lower race. self downgrading makes a class a destination not a stepping stone

wav1

If you finish 11th behind 10 of the current crop of juniors,well then yes,it is an excellent result.When A3/Jun racing was introduced at AGM in 2011,there had been 2 full seasons where the junior category didn't exist.IMO the reintroduction of the category,and racing as they are has brought the numbers,and talent up.I know we are probably somewhere along the line get a motion or drive to upgrade the juniors as per several threads all year.Huge mistake I feel.They have ample chances to ride with the big guys as they are,and if they were ''forced''up.I wonder how many of the crop we would have lost along the way.If our motion is successful A3 will get the streamline through the category as a lot of them appear to long for.

Leroy42

stecleary wrote: »

You're somewhat contradicting yourself, what's the point of allowing someone who has earned an upgrade to drop back down. if you're good enough to upgrade surely you're too good to be in the lower race. self downgrading makes a class a destination not a stepping stone

Yes, I didn't mean easily drop down. Maybe a full season without any placings or whatever. Anyway, slightly different topic.

If you are A3 then you should be racing A3. The introduction was, I believe, in order to allow strong juniors to race against seniors of similar ability. However, if a group of juniors is winning then something is wrong.

You either move the junior up or give points to placings for A3. I agree that moving the junior up to A2 for many will be too much and may lead to drop out etc so that leaves option b.

Why would A3 guys keep racing if strong juniors keep taking the places and the points. So you end up with a lopsided category. Strong junior, and nearly as strong seniors that haven't been quite enough to beat the juniors.

Jack Joll

The current points system is a farce, Should give all categories a limit of 15! Including A4's these boys are coming through too quick. Upgrade Juniors after they reach 30 points, if your good enough your old enough!
Currently the points for the juniors is only a determinate of a league table for Juniors in Ireland, wasted in a regard as the Junior cant go anywhere with them yet taking from A3's.
I'd have no issue racing juniors as I consider if I'm good enough I should be able to upgrade on my own merit. What I have a problem with is attacking and a junior coming with and sitting on my wheel, not taking a turn expecting me to pull them around all day. Major uncool!:mad:

zurbfoundation

Would it be possible to get the numbers of A3 riders that earned an upgrade, through race results last year? And for the last ten years. I would be interested to see how many are progressing and if it's been less and less in recent years - I know you have said that there have been lads on here banging on about how difficult it is to earn an upgrade because of the good juniors that are about, but like I said, a few years previous it was the "super vets" lads use crib about. If we had the numbers - we could see the reality of what's happening. I personally don't think it's any more difficult to get upgraded now than it was 8,9,10 years ago and to be honest, if you can't get a result in a combined race, u really don't want to be racing against A1 riders.

slow

I understand that there is a motion going forward to allow second year Juniors with 50 points from this season to upgrade to A2 if they wish (which most do).

greenmat

wav1 wrote: »

Didn't see a thread on this already so i'll kick start it again.
AGM takes place on Sat Nov 7th in Crowne Plaza Hotel Santry Dublin.
No idea what anyone has sent in as motions etc,but with all the discussion on here throughout the season re A3s and super juniors etc I presume there are a few.No motions etc have been released as of yet.Anyway if you would like to submit a motion you are already a week late.
Our club have stuck in a few,and among them is this.
''That the points requirement to upgrade from A3 be reduced to 10,and that the first eight actual A3s are given a full allocation of points''Tried this before and was deemed unworkable but has to go through this time I hope.
I believe there are 3 candidates for president.The incumbent Denis Twomey plus 2 more.

I'd totally support this motion but would leave upgrade at 15 points. The strongest Juniors should move to A2 after maybe 30 points, madness some of the have over 150-200 points in a season.

Junior Rider Rankings 2015. Top 10. How many A3's could get upgraded with those points?

1. 253 points
2. 187
3. 138
4. 137
5. 125
6. 124
7. 116
8. 116
9. 100
10.89

wav1

slow wrote: »

I understand that there is a motion going forward to allow second year Juniors with 50 points from this season to upgrade to A2 if they wish (which most do).

I assume that means guys who are 2nd yr juns next yr and have accumulated 50+ points as first yr juniors?A compromise I suppose but the important part of that motion is ''if they wish''

Beasty

The juniors/A3 issue should never go near the AGM. I appreciate there are issues with no youth or road commissions capable of dealing with this. It should, however, never be down to a popular vote. Leave it to people who know something about youth development which is certainly not me nor probably 90% of so of club delegates (that remaining 10% are very knowledgeable though!). This is a matter for coaches and not the rank and file membership

lennymc

Beasty wrote: »

The juniors/A3 issue should never go near the AGM. I appreciate there are issues with no youth or road commissions capable of dealing with this. It should, however, never be down to a popular vote. Leave it to people who know something about youth development which is certainly not me nor probably 90% of so of club delegates (that remaining 10% are very knowledgeable though!). This is a matter for coaches and not the rank and file membership

I think this particular issue (certainly what we put forward as a club) is about the seniors rather than the juniors. Is there even a road commission at the moment?

lennymc

wav1 wrote: »

I assume that means guys who are 2nd yr juns next yr and have accumulated 50+ points as first yr juniors?A compromise I suppose but the important part of that motion is ''if they wish''

A junior who has accumulated 50 points in his second year as a junior, can currently take an A2 licence when they become a senior.

Beasty

lennymc wrote: »

I think this particular issue (certainly what we put forward as a club) is about the seniors rather than the juniors. Is there even a road commission at the moment?

There's not. My wider point is the AGM should not be discussing "operational" matters. What would be much better is a discussion on how we engage membership in a way that facilitates the resurrection of road and junior commissions. That's where any grading discussions should take place and certainly not at a limited company's AGM (and to be clear that's not the sort of stuff thst dhoulf be voted om at any AGM of any company)

buffalo

I won't make it this year, due to a holiday clash. Looking forward to all the reports though!

lennymc

where should it be discussed in the absence of a road commission? If memory serves, there were motions around grading and categories for the past couple of years at the AGM but no talk of a road commission. Even taking last year as an example, the CI board proposed a change in the maximum distance of road events. I would have thought that would normally come under the road commission.

I understand it is the AGM of a limited company, and there are specific legal requirements, however, I am not aware of any other place to discuss changes.

(I did see in the technical regs that motions to change the tech regs or general guidelines can be put forward at any time of the year, so I guess putting them forward at the agm could be covered by that?)

Junior

lennymc wrote: »

where should it be discussed in the absence of a road commission? If memory serves, there were motions around grading and categories for the past couple of years at the AGM but no talk of a road commission. Even taking last year as an example, the CI board proposed a change in the maximum distance of road events. I would have thought that would normally come under the road commission.

I understand it is the AGM of a limited company, and there are specific legal requirements, however, I am not aware of any other place to discuss changes.

(I did see in the technical regs that motions to change the tech regs or general guidelines can be put forward at any time of the year, so I guess putting them forward at the agm could be covered by that?)

I think Beasty's point is that an AGM isn't really for nitty gritty debates, it should be something (semi) formal to process what the Company did for the year. Technical Questions, general day to day running should be handled by the relevant commissions and the fact that these topics keep occurring at the AGM is proof enough that there is enough work for independent working commissions.

lennymc

yeah - i get his point, and understand the legalities of the AGM, but CI don't seem to provide an alternative forum to talk about these things, and have set a precedent by dealing with and raising road specific related motions at previous AGMs. I guess until there is somewhere specific they are going to come up time and time again at the AGM. On a positive note, at least they are coming up somewhere.

Beasty

Swim Ireland have a yearly congress where such matters can be discussed but no binding decisions can be made. The AGM deals with corporate matters as required under company law. They can be held on the same day at the same location but the decision making powers are different.

Obviously it's far better if we have working commissions and that's one of the issues that I think could be usefully discussed at the AGM. Bottom line is the need volunteers although I am hopeful more members will consider putting their names forward for such roles

lennymc

Vote Beasty?

wav1

Junior wrote: »

I think Beasty's point is that an AGM isn't really for nitty gritty debates, it should be something (semi) formal to process what the Company did for the year. Technical Questions, general day to day running should be handled by the relevant commissions and the fact that these topics keep occurring at the AGM is proof enough that there is enough work for independent working commissions.

In the old days we used to have what we called a Congress.Perhaps we now need an AGM to comply with company law and accounts etc,and a return to congress to discuss only sporting matters.I would agree with Beasty to an extent re major decisions being taken by delegates with a limited knowledge of the facts.

Leroy42

wav1 wrote: »

major decisions being taken by delegates with a limited knowledge of the facts.

Yeah, democracy is a b1tch. Better to just let the people who know everything and are therefore always right to make decisions!

A motion is put forward, arguements for and against are made, and its up to those proposing the changes to convince the rest of the merits of it.

I think the last whohaa with McQuaid proved the CI probably shouldn't just be let get on with operational stuff themselves

Lusk_Doyle

lennymc wrote: »

Vote Beasty?

Jesus NO!

wav1

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yeah, democracy is a b1tch. Better to just let the people who know everything and are therefore always right to make decisions!

A motion is put forward, arguements for and against are made, and its up to those proposing the changes to convince the rest of the merits of it.

I think the last whohaa with McQuaid proved the CI probably shouldn't just be let get on with operational stuff themselves

Taken out of context.How many delegates will be there that wont give a sh1t about how the junior and youth system evolves and can/will make decisions that would/could have a huge bearing on their development?And nowhere did I suggest letting CI get on with it.Quite the opposite in fact.

CramCycle

Is there an expected date for when the submitted motions will be released or expected to be released by?

wav1

CramCycle wrote: »

Is there an expected date for when the submitted motions will be released or expected to be released by?

Not sure,but I think theres a 28 days thing.Which would be approx. next weekend.

Beasty

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

Jesus NO!

Is Jesus standing?

Lusk_Doyle

Beasty wrote: »

Is Jesus standing?

No. He's walking. On water. What's your party trick? Oh, and he rose from the dead too so don't even think about playing that card!

CramCycle

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

No. He's walking. On water. What's your party trick? Oh, and he rose from the dead too so don't even think about playing that card!

At least you can show Beasty died and came back. You ask the Jesus crowd for proof and they lose the rag.

Lusk_Doyle

CramCycle wrote: »

At least you can show Beasty died and came back. You ask the Jesus crowd for proof and they lose the rag.

If Beasty can turn the water in my bottles to wine then he has my vote for 21st century Jesus.

wav1

FYI.Mr Ciaran Mc Kenna who is one of the candidates for president at the upcoming AGM will host an information meeting in Thatch Bar Donore Rd Drogheda on Thur next 15th at 8pm.Its basically for clubs and delegates to see what he is about pre AGM.All clubs in the general area more than welcome.

wav1

Nominations and motions published today.

ednwireland

wav1 wrote: »

Nominations and motions published today.

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/uploads/CI_AGM_15_Final_Notice.pdf

buffalo

That a properly structured road commission/committee be put in place by Cycling
Ireland before commencement of 2016 road season. This body is also to have full
control over any propose national league or national series. Any complaints re events
etc also to be dealt with directly by this body'

Well done Drogheda Wheelers!

FrankGrimes

I see there's another motion by Drogheda to reduce the cost of the photo finish camera hire to reduce cost for race organisers, which seems reasonable. If there's only one such camera for hire, have common commercially available SLR cameras and camcorders yet reached a stage where they could act as reasonable substitutes (e.g. many cameras now exist with 4K 60 and 100 frames per second video)? Might increase the number of races where photo-finish reviews could be reliably employed if so.

That Cycling Ireland reduces the cost of hiring the photo finish camera by 50% to €30/£25per event to encourage more promoters to avail of the facility and also to lessen the burden on already hard pressed road race promoters.

lennymc

I think there are three photo finish cameras available from CI. I'm not sure if SLRS/High speed cameras can capture the same frame rate and detail as a photo finish camera.

Lumen

lennymc wrote: »

I think there are three photo finish cameras available from CI. I'm not sure if SLRS/High speed cameras can capture the same frame rate and detail as a photo finish camera.

The Sony RX100 IV will do as slow as 960fps if there's enough light, but finish line photography is also about the workflow. The CI set up (camera + laptop) produce a single horizontally-scrollable still image rather than a video file.

Dunno whether that can be done with the output of a regular consumer camera like the RX100.

But maybe video analysis would be fine too.

lennymc

Given the amount of traffic that the issue regularly generates on here, I am personally interested to hear people's views on the other proposals that deal specifically with the A3/Junior points issue.

There have been a number of motions put forward in relation to Juniors and grading:

Motion 1:
In the case of a 2nd Year Junior (U.18) rider that has amassed 30 points or more from the previous racing season, he then moves up to Senior A2 category

Motion 2:
2. (a) With the exception of juniors as defined in T4.A2.2 A junior on reaching senior grade will be categorised as A3 unless they have amassed 50 points or more in their last year as a junior in which case they may opt for an A2 licence.

Motion 3:
That the number of points currently required to upgrade from A3 to A2 be
reduced from 15 to 10, and that full A3 rider points allocation carries forward to
the next racing year. The first eight actual A3 riders are given a full allocation of points in a combined A3/Junior race. Juniors still to accumulate points in the
normal way''

Motion 4:
Youth riders on reaching Junior grade will be graded as A3. Riders of junior age on joining Cycling Ireland for the first time will be graded A4. Junior riders who, at the end of their first year, have accumulated 50 or more grading points may apt for an A2 licence with zero points carried forward. Junior riders so graded, who, at the end of their second year have 15 or more points will be graded as an A1 or if a member of a UCI registered team A+, with zero points carried forward. The rationale is to assist in the development of our better juniors.

Leroy42

Lumen wrote: »

The Sony RX100 IV will do as slow as 960fps if there's enough light, but finish line photography is also about the workflow. The CI set up (camera + laptop) produce a single horizontally-scrollable still image rather than a video file.

Dunno whether that can be done with the output of a regular consumer camera like the RX100.

But maybe video analysis would be fine too.

Yeah, but we are talking about the finish to amateur races here, do we really need the best technology? Of course, go for the best, but if alternatives are available and much less cost then I would prefer to have something rather than nothing.

Option 1 go for the finish line technology and try to reduce the costs
Option 2 if costs remain too high, then substitute something cheaper
Option 3 Have no technology and simply let the comms decide.

Option 2 gets my vote (for nationals etc then the CI should be making the technology available for free anyway)

Beasty

lennymc wrote: »

There have been a number of motions put forward in relation to Juniors and grading

I personally do not think anything affecting juniors should be the subject of a popular vote, and would not support any such motions unless they clearly have the support of the relevant coaches

Chips Lovell

Beasty wrote: »

I personally do not think anything affecting juniors should be the subject of a popular vote, and would not support any such motions unless they clearly have the support of the relevant coaches

Agreed. The Board's motion on it it says "the rationale is to assist in the development of our better juniors".

However, the technical regs already state that juniors can ride higher classification races with permission from the "appropriate Development Coach". Not sure why a rule change is needed.

duffyshuffle

Would it be a case that if the newer A3 points and places came in and we see lots getting promoted to A2, then there would be more A2 standalone races rather than A2/A1 combined? Then with the A2 only races we will see more A2s scoring to get promoted to A1 etc...

Beasty

duffyshuffle wrote: »

Would it be a case that if the newer A3 points and places came in and we see lots getting promoted to A2, then there would be more A2 standalone races rather than A2/A1 combined? Then with the A2 only races we will see more A2s scoring to get promoted to A1 etc...

The issue then is whether there are enough A1s to have standalone races

Maybe we need to find a way of rejigging the grading - perhaps A1 and A2 could be combined with A3 and A4 being spread across 3 grades, as currently the races at A1 level are probably too small, but at A3 and A4 may are way too big

wav1

lennymc wrote: »

Given the amount of traffic that the issue regularly generates on here, I am personally interested to hear people's views on the other proposals that deal specifically with the A3/Junior points issue.

There have been a number of motions put forward in relation to Juniors and grading:

Motion 1:
In the case of a 2nd Year Junior (U.18) rider that has amassed 30 points or more from the previous racing season, he then moves up to Senior A2 category

Motion 2:
2. (a) With the exception of juniors as defined in T4.A2.2 A junior on reaching senior grade will be categorised as A3 unless they have amassed 50 points or more in their last year as a junior in which case they may opt for an A2 licence.

Motion 3:
That the number of points currently required to upgrade from A3 to A2 be
reduced from 15 to 10, and that full A3 rider points allocation carries forward to
the next racing year. The first eight actual A3 riders are given a full allocation of points in a combined A3/Junior race. Juniors still to accumulate points in the
normal way''

Motion 4:
Youth riders on reaching Junior grade will be graded as A3. Riders of junior age on joining Cycling Ireland for the first time will be graded A4. Junior riders who, at the end of their first year, have accumulated 50 or more grading points may apt for an A2 licence with zero points carried forward. Junior riders so graded, who, at the end of their second year have 15 or more points will be graded as an A1 or if a member of a UCI registered team A+, with zero points carried forward. The rationale is to assist in the development of our better juniors.

It amazes me that with discussion after discussion on here and elsewhere re grading and upgrades etc,that motion 3 above is the only motion that attempts to deal with the overcrowded A3 situation.Said it before,no point ranting on here and come the appropriate forum do nothing.
Anyway my tuppence worth
Motion 1 This seeks to upgrade juniors who have amassed more than 30 points in their first year up to A2 for their 2nd year of being a Junior.This would have the effect of immediately upgrading 8 current first year juniors for next year who meet that criteria.
Would they be able for the step up?Yes
Will it do them any good long term?No
A lot of juniors who might have done very well as first years,may be doing leaving cert in their second year.They may only ''dabble''in racing.If this motion is successful they will have to dabble in A1/A2 races.
Even if not doing exams,to have riders of that age IMO riding with the top guys all the time,will do them no good.Possibly even lose them to the sport.I have seen it time after time.The mechanisms are already in place to have the top juniors riding specific A1 races anyway,but to compel them all the time.NO.Retention,Retention.
Motion 2 I don't fully understand the T4 2.2 bit as I cant access the technical rules.As I understand it the wording of this motion is exactly as the rule is now.
Motion 3.This has no effect whatsoever on the Juniors,but is designed solely to try and fast track A3 riders through the system and fully reward them with the points for scoring against their actual peers.
Motion 4.This is similar to motion 1.Difference being that under this motion there is a higher points requirement,and the key word is they may ''opt'' for the upgrade.
Anyway,our club will be opposing any of the above motions,that will bring the chance of an upgrade for any junior rider.In 2010 and 2011 there was no stand alone junior category at all and you had them across all the categories.It didn't work and following a motion at AGM 2011 the junior category and its A3 habitat were passed.To my mind it has worked and some pretty handy riders have come through to senior over the past 4 years.60 plus Irish riders in the last couple editions of the JT is testimony to that.You know juniors get a fair bit of mixing it with the big boys anyway,in the handicap type of races etc.If its not broken don't fix it.Certainly the A3 riders have to have a pathway through the system and motion 3 above attempts to assist that.