Judging Controversy - Part 1 of 3

[Joe Lachowski]

Frank Granelli was unable to post this to the list due to its size and 
length. He asked me to forward this to the discussion list. I think his 
comments put this whole controversy into perspective and should appease many 
of our emotional sides to the issue. To be safe, I am posting 3 separate 
messages. This is the first.


From: <RCSkyraidr at aol.com>
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Judging Controversy
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 10:58 AM
I really, really hesitate to jump into this discussion, but I think there 
are several points that are being missed and some that are being 
misunderstood. While this may be a mistake on my part to do this, as D-1 VP 
I feel it is incumbent on me to explain as much as I know since I am proud 
to have Bob in my district. Considering Bob's many great contributions to 
our sport and its growth over an extended time period, this note fails to do 
him justice. I think I have all the facts straight and apologize for any 
misspelled names. So here goes:

First, the FAI is the sole decision maker, through one of their committees, 
as to who is sent to the WC to represent the US Judging pool. Yes, that's 
right, the FAI chooses our judge, not the AMA and certainly not the NSRCA. 
In fact, the FAI chooses ALL the WC judges based upon lists furnished the 
FAI's governing body in that country. For the US, that is the AMA.

Specifically, it is up to the AMA President alone to present a list of 
potential WC judge names to the FAI. The FAI usually selects the first name 
on the President's list unless they have a prior difficulty with that person 
or that person is somehow unavailable.

As far as I have been given to understand, in 2001 the AMA President, as a 
courtesy, asked the NSRCA President for his input about choosing the 2005 WC 
judge back in 2001. Back then, although we had a good start at an evaluation 
system based upon Derek's work, the NSRCA President consulted with the 
entire NSRCA Board via e-mail requesting nominations. Based upon the few 
answers received, three names appeared. They were Eric Henderson, Earl 
Hauary and Bob Noll.

Eric withdrew his name since he felt it inappropriate to suggest himself. 
Earl had already served well in 1999, and the then tradition was to serve 
once only. Therefore the NSRCA suggested Bob Noll, in 2001, to the AMA 
President.

At the time, it was not known that the 2003 judge selection had already been 
made. The AMA President decided to reappoint the 2001 judge, Mike Dunphy, 
for continuity reasons of his own. Mike must have done a really great job. 
In reality, the Bob Noll recommendation was, therefore, for 2005. In 2003, 
the AMA President submitted Bob Noll, the NSRCA's choice, among others to 
the FAI as potential 2005 US judges.

Since the AMA President would now be consulting with the NSRCA on WC judging 
selections, the then NSRCA President and now Tony Stillman, decided we 
needed a good method based upon judging performance in order to make more 
professional recommendations.

Tony decided that we were going to make our "consultation" as professional 
as possible.  Therefore, the task was assigned to Ron and some others who 
were already working on an evaluation system for judges. They devised a 
complex system I won't pretend to understand that does evaluate judges. But 
it is all based upon judging performance only.

And that is as it should be. The NSRCA is only qualified to evaluate a 
judge's performance in the field. Unfortunately, there is far more to being 
an effective WC judge than just having good judging abilities. But it is not 
appropriate for the NSRCA to make the additional personal evaluations that 
are so critical in choosing a good WC judge. That is the AMA President's 
job.

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.