Judging Controversy

[John Ferrell]

It appears to me that the AMA always has the last word on any decision. Sometimes they chose to accept the NSRCA recomendations and sometimes they do not. Any authority we (NSRCA) have is only because that authority was delegated to us (NSRCA) and can be undelegated without notice. 

The choice to ignore the Rules Survey was (IMHO) at least rude. However, it is in their domain. 
Ten years ago or so, it looked like they (AMA) were about to abandon our special interest. The NSRCA prepared to support our interests without the AMA. Since then, there has been a lot of growing on both sides of the question and AMA has selected an active role in the administration of our sport. 

There are still a lot of details to work out but the fact is that we (NSRCA) are subordinate to AMA (also We). 

Where I come from, when the Boss makes a decision that I don't agree with, I am not relieved of the obligation to try to make it work. 



John Ferrell    
http://DixieNC.US

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ron Van Putte 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 10:43 PM
  Subject: Re: Judging Controversy 



  On Sep 7, 2004, at 8:30 PM, BUDDYonRC at aol.com wrote:


    Pardon me Ron I must have missed it in your column. If that is the case then why are we all having this discussion and why is the NSRCA submitting a list to AMA for judge selection recommendations by them for the 2005 WC If this has already been determined. Or is this list for the 2007 WC? Sounds like the latest post's have confused the issue for many of us who are on the outside looking in, can you please expand on the fact's to explain what is going on with this issue since I may need to retract statements that I made in a previous post that were the results of me possibly not understanding the issue.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040908/79475abb/attachment.html