baf committee membership

After the discussion here's a poll on this.
The question is, in addition to the chairman, secretary and treasurer roles which people are being encouraged to put themselves up for, who should be allowed a spot on the baf committee. Should each baf affiliated club be given a spot on the committee or should there be a limited number of spaces available. As Paul suggested, running till weds.

Please note, this would mean clubs would have a chance to register and get a spot, not that only currently registered clubs get a spot.

I think having regional representitives would be a better option, seeing as we have no registered clubs, but we do have by default, 5 regions maybe 6

North East (Leeds)
North West (PPAF, Leigh PP, Wigan Warriors, Powerbeck, Freak Shop, Rossendale, Team Power)
Midlands (Bullets, Militia, Milton Keynes)
East of England (Cambridge, Bedford)
London (Slough slammers, Swindon, North London Minotaurs, London Armwrestling)
South (Sussex Armwrestling)

To have 1 person from each club, could result in a committee of 19-20 people to represent less than 200 armwrestlers nationaly.
Logistically getting such a large committee together would be tricky and how many people would actually be bothered to put in the required time and effort?

Well we do have clubs, it's just they haven't been registered yet or given any reason/incentive to do so. You're assuming the clubs will happily agree to being represented by one person from each arbitrary region, so I guess we'll see from this poll. People may not want to nominate themselves on behalf of the entire region, but may be happy representing their own club. Using your example, asking one person to represent the views of PPAF, Leigh PP, Wigan Warriors, Powerbeck, Freak Shop, Rossendale, Team Power isn't really going to make it very fair as the clubs may all be in total disagreement about an issue and thus half will end up unrepresented.

But addressing your "will they bother turning up" point, at the end of the day if all the club representatives don't turn up to arranged meetings or can't make it they won't get a say in any active discussions at the meetings and be able to input. However, if the meetings have agendas in advance posted to all members, I don't see why people can't vote by proxy if they can't physically attend and there is an important issue. The other side of the coin is some clubs may not want to register as affiliated clubs so may not even want to take a spot up on the committee.

well looks like were moving forward guys so this is positive. i personally feel that having 20 people commitee wouldnt be the best due to people always going to have there own view on things and its going to make discions much harder to sort out. having a limted number of say around 10 people who really care where the sport is going would be better than and extra 10 just voting for something because they have to represent there club and have to vote.

good to see you back on here leon.

Bradley The bomb martinez wrote:

well looks like were moving forward guys so this is positive. i personally feel that having 20 people commitee wouldnt be the best due to people always going to have there own view on things and its going to make discions much harder to sort out. having a limted number of say around 10 people who really care where the sport is going would be better than and extra 10 just voting for something because they have to represent there club and have to vote.

good to see you back on here leon.

Hey Brad. I'm not sure it would make it harder to sort out as there would in theory just be a vote with majority ruling. I think 20 is an overestimate anyway as some clubs might not want to get involved, I guess any clubs who don't/wouldn't want a committee spot will be voting no (and hoping some people actually volunteer for the spots Dan suggested).

It's good to see something actually happening and the issue moving forward though. I had a look on here earlier using the search function and a BAF committee and membership has been brought up many times, but nothing has transpired. If no one puts themselves forward or gets involved, no one can really complain about the way things go in the future.

Have you heard of "Too many chiefs, not enough Indians"? Because what you are proposing is 1 committee member per 8-10 armwrestlers,
If we had 1 MP for every 8-10 voters in the UK there would be between 3.7 and 4.3 million MP's (based on 2011 figures for registered voters at local level.)

If we have a representitive from every single club voting on the committee, we will be bogged down in beaurocracy and nothing will get done.

Democracy doesn't work in the way you have proposed.

We vote for people to make the decisions for us, this is the pricipal on which democracy is based

Parliment is made up of elected members (MP's), these MP's represent a consituency. They are voted into position via local bi elections.

Whether you agree or not, ONLY MP's get to vote in parliment, not the other candidates that didn't get voted in from their consitiuency.

Regional directors are our version of an MP and would be club representitives (candidates) that get voted into position by the members of their region, In a regional election.

ONLY elected directors can be on the committee to vote on policy changes proposed in an agenda and then based on the majority opinion of their constituents (the pullers from their region)

If a club representitive is too apathetic to run for regional director then the pullers from that region will go unrepresented, if you want your say, nominate yourself for a position on the committee, otherwise you just have to put up with what is decided by elected members.

Please feel free to tell us all what other regions exist in UK armrestling other than those mentioned by me (I ommited Scotland as they now have their own federation, and I don't beleive that a puller should be allowed to compete for 2 national titles in the same way a footballer cannot represent 2 countries at senior level) I guess Northern Ireland should be included though and Wales if we ever get any Welsh armwrestlers.

Second to all of this, a poll on a forum of 381 registered users, a large amount of whom are not armwrestlers, and a small handfull of users from outside the UK could not have any credibility.
The only way to ensure that the people who are voting are elligible to vote, (UK passport holding armwrestlers) would be to conduct the vote at the British novice.
Should a candidate run unopposed for a committee position, then a simple yes/no/abstain vote be cast. The danger here is that a role will be left unfilled and the president can then appoint as they see fit.
Anyone unable to make it can vote by proxy. The nominations will be sent out a week prior to the British novice.

dan wrote:

Have you heard of "Too many chiefs, not enough Indians"? Because what you are proposing is 1 committee member per 8-10 armwrestlers,
If we had 1 MP for every 8-10 voters in the UK there would be between 3.7 and 4.3 million MP's (based on 2011 figures for registered voters at local level.)

If we have a representitive from every single club voting on the committee, we will be bogged down in beaurocracy and nothing will get done.

Democracy doesn't work in the way you have proposed.

We vote for people to make the decisions for us, this is the pricipal on which democracy is based

Parliment is made up of elected members (MP's), these MP's represent a consituency. They are voted into position via local bi elections.

Whether you agree or not, ONLY MP's get to vote in parliment, not the other candidates that didn't get voted in from their consitiuency.

Regional directors are our version of an MP and would be club representitives (candidates) that get voted into position by the members of their region, In a regional election.

ONLY elected directors can be on the committee to vote on policy changes proposed in an agenda and then based on the majority opinion of their constituents (the pullers from their region)

If a club representitive is too apathetic to run for regional director then the pullers from that region will go unrepresented, if you want your say, nominate yourself for a position on the committee, otherwise you just have to put up with what is decided by elected members.

Please feel free to tell us all what other regions exist in UK armrestling other than those mentioned by me (I ommited Scotland as they now have their own federation, and I don't beleive that a puller should be allowed to compete for 2 national titles in the same way a footballer cannot represent 2 countries at senior level) I guess Northern Ireland should be included though and Wales if we ever get any Welsh armwrestlers.

Second to all of this, a poll on a forum of 381 registered users, a large amount of whom are not armwrestlers, and a small handfull of users from outside the UK could not have any credibility.
The only way to ensure that the people who are voting are elligible to vote, (UK passport holding armwrestlers) would be to conduct the vote at the British novice.
Should a candidate run unopposed for a committee position, then a simple yes/no/abstain vote be cast. The danger here is that a role will be left unfilled and the president can then appoint as they see fit.
Anyone unable to make it can vote by proxy. The nominations will be sent out a week prior to the British novice.

Calm down, there's no need to get hysterical.

It's all very well using the old adage of too many chiefs and not enough Indians, but I am not sure how, using your example, 20 people voting instead of the 9 or 10 you proposed is "becoming bogged down in bureaucracy", you're being a bit over excitable in my opinion. As I said I doubt some clubs will even field a representative and some may not show, their loss.

So it is clear that for whatever reason, you are dead against each club being individually represented (too hard to count 20 votes up instead of 9?) and now there is a poll where your view is currently not in front are now proposing that we should have regional elections for committee spots again.

Lets backtrack a bit; yesterday you said people needed to self nominate for the additional committee positions, and prior to that you said just 4 positions, before that it was 3 positions, so will it be something else tomorrow? I guess we'll be back down to one soon enough  Also, why do you personally get to decide on how many positions there should be or what format it takes? At least I've put something out there so people can state a preference! But really shouldn't this all be sorted out on the day?

You do have a geunine point re: who could legitimately vote in this poll in the sense that yeah some foreign armwrestlers may vote, but given only 8 have voted so far I don't think it's a massive issue and is hardly a binding poll, rather instructive.

So why don't you make the first item on your agenda that we have a vote on committee positions for clubs or for a limited no of regional representatives and let the pullers decide, you can send that our to anyone who can't attend for a proxy vote, and it can all be counted up at the meeting in full view.

Btw I missed your point about the geographic regions, I wasn't talking about Scotland or Wales, I pointed out the fact that in the regions you mentioned, some have loads of clubs and some have one (or none if you include Wales). So you think it's fair to have one representative on the committee for South (Sussex Armwrestling), and one representative for North West (PPAF, Leigh PP, Wigan Warriors, Powerbeck, Freak Shop, Rossendale, Team Power)?

I guess there's pro and cons for both views but aslong as we get a committee and people who care in the major roles I think things will take a big step forward.

We're are all talking like we think that loads of people will want to be on the committee and nobody actually knows, let's find out how many people actually want a say and would like to be on the committee because by the looks of things of posts by different people there isn't going to be that many.

As for positions that have been put up for grabs I personally won't be offering myself forward for a few reasons. My business takes up a huge amount of time and feel that you should only put yourself forward if you can give the time that each role would need, I also feel that as I only have 19 months under my belt within the sport and still a novice, I don't have the experience that some other people do and feel there are better people for these roles, however feel that I can still do my bit by travelling to every comp that's available, attend training days, share my views with my coach who in turn can bring them up at meetings if he decides that he would like to be on the committee.

There still loads of people still to give a opinion on here and I know not everyone is vocal but hearing as many views as possible for each corner of england will help this sport grow and help us all come together with ideas we have all put something into.

Get this ,you all can get left in the background well I go gym and get ready to own whoever heads my way next. Let me know the date for meeting. I'll be there only the strongest arm wrestlers should be on the committee lmao.

Leon wrote:

dan wrote:

Have you heard of "Too many chiefs, not enough Indians"? Because what you are proposing is 1 committee member per 8-10 armwrestlers,
If we had 1 MP for every 8-10 voters in the UK there would be between 3.7 and 4.3 million MP's (based on 2011 figures for registered voters at local level.)

If we have a representitive from every single club voting on the committee, we will be bogged down in beaurocracy and nothing will get done.

Democracy doesn't work in the way you have proposed.

We vote for people to make the decisions for us, this is the pricipal on which democracy is based

Parliment is made up of elected members (MP's), these MP's represent a consituency. They are voted into position via local bi elections.

Whether you agree or not, ONLY MP's get to vote in parliment, not the other candidates that didn't get voted in from their consitiuency.

Regional directors are our version of an MP and would be club representitives (candidates) that get voted into position by the members of their region, In a regional election.

ONLY elected directors can be on the committee to vote on policy changes proposed in an agenda and then based on the majority opinion of their constituents (the pullers from their region)

If a club representitive is too apathetic to run for regional director then the pullers from that region will go unrepresented, if you want your say, nominate yourself for a position on the committee, otherwise you just have to put up with what is decided by elected members.

Please feel free to tell us all what other regions exist in UK armrestling other than those mentioned by me (I ommited Scotland as they now have their own federation, and I don't beleive that a puller should be allowed to compete for 2 national titles in the same way a footballer cannot represent 2 countries at senior level) I guess Northern Ireland should be included though and Wales if we ever get any Welsh armwrestlers.

Second to all of this, a poll on a forum of 381 registered users, a large amount of whom are not armwrestlers, and a small handfull of users from outside the UK could not have any credibility.
The only way to ensure that the people who are voting are elligible to vote, (UK passport holding armwrestlers) would be to conduct the vote at the British novice.
Should a candidate run unopposed for a committee position, then a simple yes/no/abstain vote be cast. The danger here is that a role will be left unfilled and the president can then appoint as they see fit.
Anyone unable to make it can vote by proxy. The nominations will be sent out a week prior to the British novice.

Calm down, there's no need to get hysterical.

It's all very well using the old adage of too many chiefs and not enough Indians, but I am not sure how, using your example, 20 people voting instead of the 9 or 10 you proposed is "becoming bogged down in bureaucracy", you're being a bit over excitable in my opinion. As I said I doubt some clubs will even field a representative and some may not show, their loss.

So it is clear that for whatever reason, you are dead against each club being individually represented (too hard to count 20 votes up instead of 9?) and now there is a poll where your view is currently not in front are now proposing that we should have regional elections for committee spots again.

Lets backtrack a bit; yesterday you said people needed to self nominate for the additional committee positions, and prior to that you said just 4 positions, before that it was 3 positions, so will it be something else tomorrow? I guess we'll be back down to one soon enough  Also, why do you personally get to decide on how many positions there should be or what format it takes? At least I've put something out there so people can state a preference! But really shouldn't this all be sorted out on the day?

You do have a geunine point re: who could legitimately vote in this poll in the sense that yeah some foreign armwrestlers may vote, but given only 8 have voted so far I don't think it's a massive issue and is hardly a binding poll, rather instructive.

So why don't you make the first item on your agenda that we have a vote on committee positions for clubs or for a limited no of regional representatives and let the pullers decide, you can send that our to anyone who can't attend for a proxy vote, and it can all be counted up at the meeting in full view.

Yes I said people self nominate for committee positions, It isn't a given that the coach of a club would automatically be the nominee to be on the committee and yes prior to that I asked people to come forward for just 4 positions, then taking your and Pauls comments on board I suggested we add a further 5 positions to the committee. This arbitrary number as you put it so eloquently was not plucked from thin air but based on the current number of regions that make up the BAF.
It seems obvious that no matter what i suggest you are just trying to pick an argument and are resorting to insulting my intelligence and implying that i am throwing my toys out of the pram because your poll puts your idea ahead of mine.
I thought you were bigger than that but clearly not.

And further to your point about number of clubs represented per region, i'm not sure if you understand this but there is ONE MP per constituency regardless of how many people he or she represents, some are larger than others, that's just the way it is.

Lets make it simple, when we have the meeting we will vote for

President
Vice President
General secretary
Treasurer
Any other committee members.

If you wish to nominate yourself, pm me and I will make this the first point on the agenda, unless of course Leon wants us to vote for who should put the agenda together.

dan wrote:

Yes I said people self nominate for committee positions, It isn't a given that the coach of a club would automatically be the nominee to be on the committee and yes prior to that I asked people to come forward for just 4 positions, then taking your and Pauls comments on board I suggested we add a further 5 positions to the committee. This arbitrary number as you put it so eloquently was not plucked from thin air but based on the current number of regions that make up the BAF.
It seems obvious that no matter what i suggest you are just trying to pick an argument and are resorting to insulting my intelligence and implying that i am throwing my toys out of the pram because your poll puts your idea ahead of mine.
I thought you were bigger than that but clearly not.

And further to your point about number of clubs represented per region, i'm not sure if you understand this but there is ONE MP per constituency regardless of how many people he or she represents, some are larger than others, that's just the way it is.

Lets make it simple, when we have the meeting we will vote for

President
Vice President
General secretary
Treasurer
Any other committee members.

If you wish to nominate yourself, pm me and I will make this the first point on the agenda, unless of course Leon wants us to vote for who should put the agenda together.

Hey Dan, I'm sorry you say I am just picking an argument and resorting to insulting your intelligence, but I feel those are just red herrings you are chucking out there to confuse the issue and cover up your own behaviour.

Regarding your MP analogy, you seem unaware that the consitituencies for MPs are all under review by an independant body and the idea is in theory for them to be similar in representation, not for one to be 6 times bigger than another. Your number of 5 is arbitrary in the sense that you are just deciding on which regions go with the words south west north etc then saying "these regions make up the BAF", whatever that means.

You say I am just trying to pick an argument, but you are the one who is shooting down any idea that isn't your own. I am fine with your idea existing, just that I think there is a better idea and think the pullers should have their say rather than the number of positions being decided by you or by secret nominations; you're already trying to restrict the outcome of what can or will happen by bandying around phrases like "more chiefs than indians" and using straw man arguments about how awful what I am proposing would be, so I am not that confident in how impartial you are regarding others' ideas.

I personally think having one representative per club would be best, but the majority of pullers may not agree and I am fine with this; but at least give them a chance to decide!

So now we're down to 4 positions again, plus an undefined number of others.  I see you are again ignoring my suggestion to the agenda of letting people choose between clubs or a fixed no. of representatives, putting your own idea forward and saying this is what is going to happen - this is how democracy works folks!

I voted on limited numbers.

I have nothing to hide thats my opinion and just so people can see a guy from BAF voted.

My reason is cos I believe as Dan said is true, too many on committee wont work.

Lets take the sport forward and not have any bickering.

All armwrestlers would be able to talk to the guy who represents there region on the commitee anyway.

This thread has had 300 views but only 15 votes its a bit poor i thought people wanted to go forward

Yes i'm back to 4 roles, i never wasn't. A committee is made up of a president, vice president, general secretary and a treasurer, along with various other positions, and yes they are voted on.

Why don't you just come out and say that you don't want a President, vice president, treasurer and general secretary, replacing them instead with a committee made entirely of club representitives. That is what you are getting at isn't it?

So maybe this poll should really be
Votes for a structured committee with clearly defined roles vs vote for no clearly defined roles just every club having a say

One major problem, with no clearly defined roles, who does what?
Who looks after the money, who takes on the organisation of the national championships, who enforces the rules, who is responsible for finding funding.
Moreover, with no clear governing structure, how do we then become recognised as the National governing body under Sport England, therefore making us eligible for government funding.

Of course if this is not the case then what have you got against me asking everyone to vote for the 4 roles you have such a problem with me listing.

What behaviour do you refer to? I have been nothing but open with my dialogue, in fact I recall being the one that messaged you on facebook about this whole situation.

Yes my opinion is that all committee positions should be voted for, but not on this forum, the vote should be done by ballot at the meeting that was discussed by myself and a number of other guys away from the forum. This does not mean i'm shooting down anyone elses ideas.
You have a problem with people nominating themselves? That is a direct contradiction

I have posted threads to allow any member of the aw community to come forward and take an active role,  I recall you ruling yourself out of this. And as you may recall, I set a time limit, then once everyone has decided what they are doing i will send or post the nominees for each roll so everyone can then vote.

As far as regions go, I didn't decide them, nothing arbitrary about suggesting that there is a nw, ne, midland, east Anglia, London, se, sw and south, this is afterall how England is split up geographically, If your club is in Lancashire, you are in the North West.

Yes i understand there is an independant body to ensure that no one constituency massively outnumbers any other, my list of clubs was not conclusive as i'm not absolutely sure what clubs are opperating in the south. I do know that there is a club starting in the NE, just not sure who runs it or how long it has been running.

Dave, fair play, and nice one for at least speaking up. I understand you didn't want to have to pay to register/affiliate your club reading your older comments, which is understandable given how times are tight. Agreed Andy, it's shameful how people won't get involved given how much behind the scenes chatter there is.

It's worth pointing out that this was originally instigated by Dan as a way of finding funds to send the team to Worlds (from the pullers), which a lot of the travelling guys naturally seemed to support. I agree with Neil that that is not the right way forward, at least in terms of finding most of the funding and I don't think that this is the biggest issue facing british armwrestling by a long shot; I think getting a democratic structure in place, funding more competitions and growing the grassroots is far more important, at least in the longterm.

If you look up the recognised sports list on Sport England, arm wrestling is listed as a sport but isn't even listed as having a contact representative, which is terrible when there's funding available there which could grow the sport (assuming a democratic structure with the correct govenance is put in place - they will not hand out money to committees of two people and organisations with no members or affiliated clubs - I checked). If you do a search on the national lottery database you can see lottery funding has been granted to BAF previously (£5000 10 years ago), I don't see why this route couldn't be pursued again to kit out some clubs with tables or hold some regional comps.

Sadly after talking to a few people, it's become even clearer to me where this process is heading, which is to a renewal of the status quo with a minimal amount of people on a new committee, to give some legitimacy. Factor in most people saying they are reticent to speak up for fear of being blacklisted for Arm Wars (which sounds irrational but that's what people are saying unfortunately) means we once again have a bit of a weird situation.

I could argue my corner on here forever but have to face the fact that ultimately I'm not able to spare the time to stand against Neil, and would also be unlikely to receive a regional nomination given the way Dan has split up the country (and due to my outspoken nature would be unlikely to win either). I restarted my astrophysics masters in Feb early this year and alongside my family, work and musical commitments I'm pretty stacked, so I'm bowing out from here on in. Which on the upside should drastically cut down on the arguing everyone seems to find so difficult to handle!  

Despite our differences recently, best of luck to Dan in sorting everything out. I typed all this and submitted it just after you posted your response, so it doesn't take a lot of what you said into account - sorry.

EDit- you are completely misrepresenting my views with what you said in the post above, but I'm not going to explain it all again - it's clear enough from the thread I think, did you even read what I wrote? I always supported those four roles, which is evident from the first post on this thread, so I'm not sure why you've gone off on this odd rant clutching at straws stating I don't want those main roles when I do, just with the addition of club spots. Looks like the majority agree so far too, but by all means you go ahead and decide for everyone!

But without any sarcasm whatsoever, best of luck to Neil moving the sport forward when he is undoubtedly re-elected as chair/president. There's loads of things that could be done, so hopefully some of them will be once there's a small committee backing him and helping out, regardless of how it is made up.

I'll maybe see you guys at an Armageddon comp sometime, you never know!

Just one question I'd like to know!!!

What happened to the 5K ?

Leon wrote:

Dave, fair play, and nice one for at least speaking up. I understand you didn't want to have to pay to register/affiliate your club reading your older comments, which is understandable given how times are tight. Agreed Andy, it's shameful how people won't get involved given how much behind the scenes chatter there is.

It's worth pointing out that this was originally instigated by Dan as a way of finding funds to send the team to Worlds (from the pullers), which a lot of the travelling guys naturally seemed to support. I agree with Neil that that is not the right way forward, at least in terms of finding most of the funding and I don't think that this is the biggest issue facing british armwrestling by a long shot; I think getting a democratic structure in place, funding more competitions and growing the grassroots is far more important, at least in the longterm.

If you look up the recognised sports list on Sport England, arm wrestling is listed as a sport but isn't even listed as having a contact representative, which is terrible when there's funding available there which could grow the sport (assuming a democratic structure with the correct govenance is put in place - they will not hand out money to committees of two people and organisations with no members or affiliated clubs - I checked). If you do a search on the national lottery database you can see lottery funding has been granted to BAF previously (£5000 10 years ago), I don't see why this route couldn't be pursued again to kit out some clubs with tables or hold some regional comps.

Sadly after talking to a few people, it's become even clearer to me where this process is heading, which is to a renewal of the status quo with a minimal amount of people on a new committee, to give some legitimacy. Factor in most people saying they are reticent to speak up for fear of being blacklisted for Arm Wars (which sounds irrational but that's what people are saying unfortunately) means we once again have a bit of a weird situation.

I could argue my corner on here forever but have to face the fact that ultimately I'm not able to spare the time to stand against Neil, and would also be unlikely to receive a regional nomination given the way Dan has split up the country (and due to my outspoken nature would be unlikely to win either). I restarted my astrophysics masters in Feb early this year and alongside my family, work and musical commitments I'm pretty stacked, so I'm bowing out from here on in. Which on the upside should drastically cut down on the arguing everyone seems to find so difficult to handle!  

Despite our differences recently, best of luck to Dan in sorting everything out (I typed all this and submitted it just after you posted your response, so it doesn't take what you said into account - sorry), as well as to Neil moving the sport forward when he is undoubtedly re-elected as chair/president. There's loads of things that could be done, so hopefully some of them will be once there's a small committee backing him and helping out.

I'll maybe see you guys at an Armageddon comp sometime, you never know!

Your underhanded veiled attempts to make me out to be the bad guy are frankly pathetic,
I haven't instigated this to find funds soley to send a select few people to the worlds,
The lightning rod for my initial post was the fact that when the team was in Poland, they had to pay out of their own pockets for previous registration fees to Europeans they didn't attend.
I started this to put together a committee of representitives from across the country that were fairly and democratically voted into position by the nations armwrestlers. Not appointed by virtue of being head coach of a club.
I have also said on many occasions that there must be transparancy financially and that the federation should make available all financial reports to all federation members at an agm.
On my list of things that needed addressing is funding, raising money that will provide team kit for our national team, finding money to help subsidise promoting and running of regional comps, to provide help with tables and any other equipment for new clubs or existing clubs that wish to update their tables.
In 2009 in Italy, i spoke to Neil that there is no recoginsed governing body on the sport England web site, and I too have looked at the criteria for being recognised, one such criteria being the inclusion of 2 years worth of financial reports, which we won't be able to produce until we have a treasurer in place to put it all together.
I don't see why you think there would be a minimal number on the committee, I have proposed 9 places along with affiliated members and clubs, everything Sport England is looking for in terms of organisation structure.

Again, I DID NOT divide the country into regions, they existed before I started armwrestling, and geographically speaking, they existed before any of us were alive.

Which people are concerned about being off the ArmWars cards? None of the guys i have chatted with, if Neil were that petty, then everything i have written would have been taken by him as a way to undermine his authority and I would have been off the card faster than you could blink.

if it aint broke don't fix it...everybody on here seems like they like conflict and petty discussions while wasting valuble training time
I will continue to armwrestle and nothing more, in the time you all have written this ive just got stronger ...by ARMWRESTLING....MY LOVE AND PASSION

Joking aside I voted for a limited committee, because I simply think 9 people voted in can get the job done. I have put myself down to be on the committee.

I think it time to stop now and have your meeting on the day. You keep going on about the the good of armwresling what good do you think this is doing. If was a newcomer to this site and seen this I would run a mile. Neil has done more for armwrestling than anyone and this meeting should be to find the right people to assist him not hang him lets leave it at that now and get back to training

This thread was started to see what the popular opinion was behind the committee places. It wasn't intended to get so heated and turn into a blazing row but that's the nature of these things. It's made a lot of people uncomfortable, so in order for everyone to move forward and save it for the meeting, I'd be more than happy if terry or nick deleted it.

I would have voted to have one vote/representative per club but the voting is closed. BTW, this is how the WAF and EAF do it (each country has a vote/representative).

Hey guys , what's up with you all ? Your supposed to a united front wanting to move forward in a sport your all passionate about , all this seems to be about is two men bickering ! If you want to move forward ,make yourself known ,write your views and ideas or don't moan when it's too late ,I don't know much about Neil , but one thing I do know is that he's put a lot of time and effort into a sport he loves Its time everyone stopped looking into the past and started looking to the future Arm Wrestling is all about pulling and that means pulling together Good Luck Guys