Future of Orienteering
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
Just been reading the bof agm info and although we may have missed the proposal date for the agm we could get inside BOF:
anyone for Treasurer??
would be possible with enough of a [nope] turnout.
hard work though.
anyone....anyone....
______________________
Not quite an ambiturner
anyone for Treasurer??
would be possible with enough of a [nope] turnout.
hard work though.
anyone....anyone....
______________________
Not quite an ambiturner
-
gingerwtfish - off string
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 4:32 am
- Location: Barnet
I've come to this thread a bit late (story of my life!), but there have been some great ideas. Totally agree with the image thing. I don't think BOF staff would run a mile from it either, rather the opposite. Sophie, especially, is extremely receptive to good ideas like that. However, please don't forget that the image needs to be tailored to the market. Ive started primary teacher training, and presenting the sport to parents and teachers as being well 'ard might not be too great an idea (at least initially!).; bit different for the children though!
On the BOF issue: it's the usual story of who do you mean by 'BOF'. But from my experience the officers, councillors, and professional staff are extremely sympathetic to the younger viewpoint. They would be delighted to see more younger people getting stuck in.
However, what people also have to realise is that BOF, as a national governing body, has to be seen to be doing things "correctly". Equally, if we want to make progress, or get what we need, we have to tick boxes and jump through hoops. Just because one is doing it, doesn't mean that one necessarily believes it's the best way forward, but it is a means to an end. Without the politically correct stuff in place, the funding of teams, squads, tours, development officers etc. would certainly disappear overnight. (For instance I spent several weeks last spring writing an equity policy and action plan when I would rather have been doing club/school development, not least because without it the Sport England grant would have been stopped). One of the reasons orienteering punches massively above its weight in terms of financial support, is because it is seen as a well-run, highly efficient sport (and yes it is, you should see what some other sports are like!).
One suggestion early on in the thrread was getting more professional local development staff in place. The recent adverts show that BOF is doing that, but where do the detractors think that money is coming from? Not from membership, which contributes a tiny proportion of the income (and nothing to any international or developmental work).
I gather there is a debate planned at the AGM on developmental issues. It would be a great venue to start raising the profile of some of the ideas here.
Andrew
On the BOF issue: it's the usual story of who do you mean by 'BOF'. But from my experience the officers, councillors, and professional staff are extremely sympathetic to the younger viewpoint. They would be delighted to see more younger people getting stuck in.
However, what people also have to realise is that BOF, as a national governing body, has to be seen to be doing things "correctly". Equally, if we want to make progress, or get what we need, we have to tick boxes and jump through hoops. Just because one is doing it, doesn't mean that one necessarily believes it's the best way forward, but it is a means to an end. Without the politically correct stuff in place, the funding of teams, squads, tours, development officers etc. would certainly disappear overnight. (For instance I spent several weeks last spring writing an equity policy and action plan when I would rather have been doing club/school development, not least because without it the Sport England grant would have been stopped). One of the reasons orienteering punches massively above its weight in terms of financial support, is because it is seen as a well-run, highly efficient sport (and yes it is, you should see what some other sports are like!).
One suggestion early on in the thrread was getting more professional local development staff in place. The recent adverts show that BOF is doing that, but where do the detractors think that money is coming from? Not from membership, which contributes a tiny proportion of the income (and nothing to any international or developmental work).
I gather there is a debate planned at the AGM on developmental issues. It would be a great venue to start raising the profile of some of the ideas here.
Andrew
-
awk - god
- Posts: 3224
- Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:29 pm
- Location: Bradford
I've just got home and looked at the agenda for the AGM and it looks like a lot of this child protection type stuff is going to be outlined and discussed there by the chap overseeing it all in O'. Are we actually going to go along to the AGM as a nope sport pack? I think it would be a good idea to see exactly how far they're going to take this.
Will? We've got proper fire now!
-
Becks - god
- Posts: 2633
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 2:25 pm
- Location: East Preston Street Massif
Assuming there are no problems, I'll be there. I know it'll be boring, but I'd like to see the moviation on a lot of these issues. At the end of the day, we see the final product, not the thought and criticism in producing these policies.
Now, I know you're a feminist, and I think that's adorable, but this is grown-up time and I'm the man.
-
Braddie - light green
- Posts: 264
- Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 6:06 pm
- Location: London
I'll be there - and I promise not to bang on too much about child protection - it's a pity there wasn't a bit more child protection going on at Simonside tho' - I suspect hypothermia is a much bigger threat that paedophilia.
-
Mrs H. - nope godmother
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 3:15 pm
- Location: Middle England
I am very interested in the response by awk. Many in the sport have spent a lot of effort at getting 8-12 year olds into the sport often with a lot of success but most of these juniors have been lost to the sport by the time they get to uni because of the naff image the sport has. I certainly feel that the image needs changing but I also think that people at head office would not look on some ideas favourably and that they would try to change ideas to conform with their ideas which all seem to revolve around funding. We obviously need funding but this is what will almost certainly destroy our great sport.
The only way I see forward at the moment is for the likes of us lot to do things independently of head office. There is one other way and that would be to get a major sponsor into the sport and forget about government sponsoring. We could forget a lot of the bureaucracy that is taking up so much of our time and get on with the important stuff. The problem with this line is that we would need an image that a sponsor would be happy with and at the moment we certainly do not have this. We would also need a professional who knows how to get sponsorship and there is nobody at head office with this experience. I think that if nopesport could change the image this would be the best way forward.
The only way I see forward at the moment is for the likes of us lot to do things independently of head office. There is one other way and that would be to get a major sponsor into the sport and forget about government sponsoring. We could forget a lot of the bureaucracy that is taking up so much of our time and get on with the important stuff. The problem with this line is that we would need an image that a sponsor would be happy with and at the moment we certainly do not have this. We would also need a professional who knows how to get sponsorship and there is nobody at head office with this experience. I think that if nopesport could change the image this would be the best way forward.
- Steler
- white
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 1:07 am
If you want to ignore Sports Council sponsorship, fine, but you would certainly need a very major sponsor to replace them - about £600,000 or so per annum, although this could be reduced if you reduced the bureaucracy. In that case what bits of the bureaucracy would you get rid of?
I would have thought that the only image a sponsor would be happy with for this sort of money would be one that achieved television exposure, and exposure that went beyond the occasional minority interest slot. Again, any suggestions? This is certainly an issue that has racked many brains including marketing consultants (paid for by Sports Council) with extensive experience of obtaining major sponsors and TV coverage who told us that the time and money required would not be worth our while as there was no guarantee of getting value for money or any success.
I'm also interested in this idea of getting a professional in to find this major sponsorship. How much do you think this might cost? Where would the money come from to employ this person? You say there's nobody capable of doing this in the office. Are you sure?
Sorry if I sound a wee bit sceptical. This is an issue that has been discussed on numerous occasions over the past 10-15 years, maybe longer, and the reason that BOF has gone the route it has is because of those discussions.
Andrew
I would have thought that the only image a sponsor would be happy with for this sort of money would be one that achieved television exposure, and exposure that went beyond the occasional minority interest slot. Again, any suggestions? This is certainly an issue that has racked many brains including marketing consultants (paid for by Sports Council) with extensive experience of obtaining major sponsors and TV coverage who told us that the time and money required would not be worth our while as there was no guarantee of getting value for money or any success.
I'm also interested in this idea of getting a professional in to find this major sponsorship. How much do you think this might cost? Where would the money come from to employ this person? You say there's nobody capable of doing this in the office. Are you sure?
Sorry if I sound a wee bit sceptical. This is an issue that has been discussed on numerous occasions over the past 10-15 years, maybe longer, and the reason that BOF has gone the route it has is because of those discussions.
Andrew
-
awk - god
- Posts: 3224
- Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:29 pm
- Location: Bradford
Things move on. TV is completely different business to it was 10 years ago. What about satalite, its changed everything. Who could have predicted the impact of the imternet in 1990? A profesionally produced website is worth every penny spent on it.
As far as someone at head office getting major sponsorship I don't think that there is anyone with the skills and experience. How is it the the ACE race adventure series has Ford as a major sponsor but at present no TV coverage?
I feel that the sports council route is the likely to be the way to ruin for the sport. We have got to jump through so many hoops that we will loose the plot. Clubs have to much paperwork (one club in my region had 60 pages of stuff from BOF in one month, didn't have the time to discuss it at committee, put it away for future, had similar for the following month so never looked at it). Chris James idea of simplification is a good one but not if it is just to be replaced by paperwork.
If the present route is not working then surely we have got to look at alternatives. It seems a real problem that we have so few orieteers running the M/W21, normally less than half the M/W50 (a 5 year age group compared to 14 for 21). I could see that I may have to leave this country if I want to keep up the present level of orienteering as in 20 years the present day helpers will be replaced by only one sixth their number.
What we have tried over the last 20 years has not been successful at keeping numbers up in the crucial M/W21 age group so what do we do, just carry on? NO. We oldies should realise that we are now the guardians of the sport and we should listen to the requirement of the young (its in our interests, I wouldnt want to have to learn Swedish in 20 years time).
We need to act on what the youngsters require.
Thing can happen, and quickly. It was only a few months ago that I first heard of nopesport. Now the juniors in our club are talking about it all the time. Is nopesport the most important thing that has happened to orienteering in the last 10 years? Is this the start of something big? I honestly think it is. Keep the enthusiasm, keep the independance, keep the ideas comming and you can start to change the image of the sport. Back to that 'image' thing again.
As far as someone at head office getting major sponsorship I don't think that there is anyone with the skills and experience. How is it the the ACE race adventure series has Ford as a major sponsor but at present no TV coverage?
I feel that the sports council route is the likely to be the way to ruin for the sport. We have got to jump through so many hoops that we will loose the plot. Clubs have to much paperwork (one club in my region had 60 pages of stuff from BOF in one month, didn't have the time to discuss it at committee, put it away for future, had similar for the following month so never looked at it). Chris James idea of simplification is a good one but not if it is just to be replaced by paperwork.
If the present route is not working then surely we have got to look at alternatives. It seems a real problem that we have so few orieteers running the M/W21, normally less than half the M/W50 (a 5 year age group compared to 14 for 21). I could see that I may have to leave this country if I want to keep up the present level of orienteering as in 20 years the present day helpers will be replaced by only one sixth their number.
What we have tried over the last 20 years has not been successful at keeping numbers up in the crucial M/W21 age group so what do we do, just carry on? NO. We oldies should realise that we are now the guardians of the sport and we should listen to the requirement of the young (its in our interests, I wouldnt want to have to learn Swedish in 20 years time).
We need to act on what the youngsters require.
Thing can happen, and quickly. It was only a few months ago that I first heard of nopesport. Now the juniors in our club are talking about it all the time. Is nopesport the most important thing that has happened to orienteering in the last 10 years? Is this the start of something big? I honestly think it is. Keep the enthusiasm, keep the independance, keep the ideas comming and you can start to change the image of the sport. Back to that 'image' thing again.
- Steler
- white
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 1:07 am
Blimey Steler, what hours do you keep?
I agree with the sentiments entirely. My concern is that these sentiments are not new, they've been around for 20 years or more, but its the practicalities that are the challenge.
You quote satellite TV etc. You're right - the face of TV has changed. Now, it's virtually impossible for a small sport to get free coverage: it all has to be paid for. The last time this was discussed, some time last year, my recollection is that a figure of £80k was quoted. On sponsorship, have you checked out how the Ford sponsorship was gained, and how much its for?. For a small sport its usually through personal contact, which is how quite a bit of the sponsorship that has come in to orienteering has been gained.
I totally agree with the concept of becoming more self-sufficient, and the dangers of being so reliant on the Sports Councils - another argument that was put on the Council table 8-9 years ago, and regularly raised over the past couple of years. But again, unless those who talk actually get stuck in and do something about it, it's left to those who are prepared to do the work. As someone who spent 10 years of more at various different levels trying to effect some of these changes (which may have been my own interpretation of some of them), there wasn't an awful lot of others prepared to do the same (BTW you may be in a similar position - being new here, I don't know who you are!).
Which is why I wasn't joking when putting up the thread on the councillor vacancies - there's actually a chance to get some people in who might get some of those shifts going., and it's an opportunity to do not just talk. Of course, nopesport is a result of doing, as are one or two other inititatives, but they are not (at least yet) the wholesale changes that are needed.
Incidentally, those large bulks of paper are only because when clubs don't get the blurb, they protest like mad about not being kept informed. Can't have it both ways!
Andrew
I agree with the sentiments entirely. My concern is that these sentiments are not new, they've been around for 20 years or more, but its the practicalities that are the challenge.
You quote satellite TV etc. You're right - the face of TV has changed. Now, it's virtually impossible for a small sport to get free coverage: it all has to be paid for. The last time this was discussed, some time last year, my recollection is that a figure of £80k was quoted. On sponsorship, have you checked out how the Ford sponsorship was gained, and how much its for?. For a small sport its usually through personal contact, which is how quite a bit of the sponsorship that has come in to orienteering has been gained.
I totally agree with the concept of becoming more self-sufficient, and the dangers of being so reliant on the Sports Councils - another argument that was put on the Council table 8-9 years ago, and regularly raised over the past couple of years. But again, unless those who talk actually get stuck in and do something about it, it's left to those who are prepared to do the work. As someone who spent 10 years of more at various different levels trying to effect some of these changes (which may have been my own interpretation of some of them), there wasn't an awful lot of others prepared to do the same (BTW you may be in a similar position - being new here, I don't know who you are!).
Which is why I wasn't joking when putting up the thread on the councillor vacancies - there's actually a chance to get some people in who might get some of those shifts going., and it's an opportunity to do not just talk. Of course, nopesport is a result of doing, as are one or two other inititatives, but they are not (at least yet) the wholesale changes that are needed.
Incidentally, those large bulks of paper are only because when clubs don't get the blurb, they protest like mad about not being kept informed. Can't have it both ways!
Andrew
-
awk - god
- Posts: 3224
- Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:29 pm
- Location: Bradford
The sports council funding is a very very touchy subject. Despite coaching in the Start Program I'm still not convinced it's a good idea fromthe viewpoint of keeping juniors interested in the sport. There's no denying it makes the best better from a medals point of view but it means that many more talented athletes yet to reach their full potential fallby the wayside or move the different sports. I am seeing this with someof the children I coached on Lagganlia last year.
The same is happening with the GB squad. Despite the fact accommodation was usually on hut floors and the opportunities were less, wasn't the squad always a decent sized group of people before Sports Council funding, even if it meant a lot of effort was put into fundraising. Now it's being cut and cut in size. Again,there's no doubt that with the Sports Council Funding the best are getting better - you only need to look at Jamie, but it rings a bit to me of putting all your eggs in one basket. And somemay argue that a deidcated, enthusaiastic orienteer with talent like Jamie's that is willing to devote his life to the sport would have reached the level he's at now anyway. I don't know.
I think I'm probably going to spark a lot of anger from these comments but the thing that worries me most is the Start Program causing young orienteers to move away. I think the idea is that regional squads provide the backup gfor those who get in but when you're fifteen and all the mates you made on Lagganlia aregoing off on weekends without you, you either find new mates elsewhere or get mitivated to join them. The second option, for most fifteen year olds is increasingly hard work andnot overly attractive.
The same is happening with the GB squad. Despite the fact accommodation was usually on hut floors and the opportunities were less, wasn't the squad always a decent sized group of people before Sports Council funding, even if it meant a lot of effort was put into fundraising. Now it's being cut and cut in size. Again,there's no doubt that with the Sports Council Funding the best are getting better - you only need to look at Jamie, but it rings a bit to me of putting all your eggs in one basket. And somemay argue that a deidcated, enthusaiastic orienteer with talent like Jamie's that is willing to devote his life to the sport would have reached the level he's at now anyway. I don't know.
I think I'm probably going to spark a lot of anger from these comments but the thing that worries me most is the Start Program causing young orienteers to move away. I think the idea is that regional squads provide the backup gfor those who get in but when you're fifteen and all the mates you made on Lagganlia aregoing off on weekends without you, you either find new mates elsewhere or get mitivated to join them. The second option, for most fifteen year olds is increasingly hard work andnot overly attractive.
Will? We've got proper fire now!
-
Becks - god
- Posts: 2633
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 2:25 pm
- Location: East Preston Street Massif
Top marks Becks - what worries me about the Start squad is the cult of personality and reputation. Kids may miss out on selection from Lagganlia because their faces don't fit but at least they could stand a chance of selection as 15 year olds because they could work their way in (if they hadn't got hacked off) now I understand that selection for 15 year old will be made after Glenmore that's moving the goal posts especially if the same coaches who took Laganlia last year take Glenmore this year. Kids develop at different rates - those who are busting a gut and performing at 14/15 may have little potential to go further - meanwhile the more laid back ones who need to mature into competition ( and may well end up more mature because of they have had more time to do so) may actually have more potential by the time they reach 17/18. For some time I have argued that anyone who attainted championship status at three national events should be offered start style coaching - those who achieve it in their first year will have continuous coaching and everyone has a goal to aim for(not just this 2 or 3 from each region). the turn over might be quite high but at least no one should slip through the net.
-
Mrs H. - nope godmother
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 3:15 pm
- Location: Middle England
i have to agree that it might end up putting off as many juniors as it encourages. being a top junior doesnt necessarily make you good when you get a bit older and putting pressure on people has definately turned alot away in the past. People like sarah rollins and pippa didn't even take up orienteering until university and they're still damn good!
but having said that, if you come from a region that doesn't have a good junior squad, it must be beneficial. I never went on lagganlia because they took two lads a year older than me and then next year i went to halden. My younger brother missed out on lagganlia because the north east junior squad didn't exist at the time. I also remember not being able to go to lakeside because we didn't have coaches who wanted to go! Surely when you're 13/14 etc the most important thing should be the regional junior squad. Maybe some effort should be put into helping them do a good job. When I was at the inter regionals, east anglia were last almost every year and just look at them now...one of the best junior squads in the country with both enthusiastic coaches and juniors. i think a lot could be learned from them. karen's doing a good job of resurecting the NE squad, but without her and a few others i doubt it would exist at all!
but having said that, if you come from a region that doesn't have a good junior squad, it must be beneficial. I never went on lagganlia because they took two lads a year older than me and then next year i went to halden. My younger brother missed out on lagganlia because the north east junior squad didn't exist at the time. I also remember not being able to go to lakeside because we didn't have coaches who wanted to go! Surely when you're 13/14 etc the most important thing should be the regional junior squad. Maybe some effort should be put into helping them do a good job. When I was at the inter regionals, east anglia were last almost every year and just look at them now...one of the best junior squads in the country with both enthusiastic coaches and juniors. i think a lot could be learned from them. karen's doing a good job of resurecting the NE squad, but without her and a few others i doubt it would exist at all!
-
Rach - red
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 11:13 am
- Location: Sunny Sheffield
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: buzz and 175 guests