BOF CEO

[RS]

'the one thing they care more about than the programme being good/crap is being selected. They're pretty nervous about picking a fight with the selector.'

This is what I was referring to.

[buzz]

The most urgent reform is to return to an independent selection process.

Got to disagree with you there Buzz.... My view is (always has been) that selection should be the responsibility of the Head Coach & that the Head Coach should stand or fall by results... i.e. crap results then get a new coach........

It depends what you mean by 'results'. If you're only interested in a talent and performance programme that produces medals at internationals in the short term then in principle I would tend to agree with you. But if you're also concerned with the welfare of the athletes, the longer term development of athletes and the coaching system, and the contribution and impact that elite orienteering has on the sport as a whole, then I think the programme management and coaching roles are compromised by being responsible for selections.

You also have to consider whether we want an efficient or a fair selection system. For example if the squad manager is also the personal coach of a prospective team member it makes it very difficult for them to be objective.

Of course if you have a Head Coach model you don't need a selection policy, published criteria etc. We have the worst of all worlds at the moment.

[buzz]

It shouldn't matter who the selector is IF the process is transparent and objective.

A transparent and objective process is only needed if either the selectors want to base selections on specific performances or if we're concerned with fairness.

As Gross implies it may well be more 'efficient' to leave it up to the Head Coach who can then use their experience intuition etc to spot the talent and select the best athletes for the job, but then it DOES matters who the selector is.

[Sloop]

Well, after >45 years in amateur sports, I don't believe in having selectors unless you absolutely must.
For orienteering, there is no absolute must. Honours can and should be winnable, by anybody from anywhere, by performance not conformance.

[King Penguin]

Like the FCC used to do for the juniors, until BO removed auto-selection of the winners and then killed the competition completely.

[SJC]

Like the FCC used to do for the juniors, until BO removed auto-selection of the winners and then killed the competition completely.

Once the map scales debate is resolved at this year's AGM, the resurrection of the Future Champions Cup with automatic selection to the JWOC team for the winners would make an interesting proposal for the 2015 AGM.

[bewildered]

It looks as if this discussion, and some emails to Mike Hamilton may be having an effect. The BO website now shows who are on most of the various Committees now.

However, it also shows the vacuum that has been in place for most of the last 15 months, with no Performance Chair, and no minutes since Nov 2012; no development chair, with no minutes since Nov 2012 and a gap in the coaching minutes of a year (because of the delays, caused by the CEO, in producing the CNWG report).

[Oldman]

I thought Development Committee had been disbanded and replaced by a Steering Group, which is what the web site says (but perhaps only, as you say, recently). BTW, I still do not like your continuing attempts to criticise (according to what I hear is) a very hard-working CEO.

[bewildered]

I'm not sure I like your criticizing my attempts to determine what the CEO does. So I guess we are even.