Report to IWA Executive Committee on the ISAF 2006 Conference.

 

Four full days of meetings, from 4th to 7th November, included attending two committee meetings as committee member (Classes and Windsurfing) and three as observer/ class representative speaking on behalf of class submissions:

 

ISAF Classes Committee – Saturday 4th

Youth World Championship Sub-Committee (YWC) – Saturday 4th

Windsurfing Committee (WC) – Sunday 5th

Youth and Development Committee (YDC)– Sunday 5th

Equipment Committee (Eq.C) – Tuesday 7th

 

This report summarises key decisions made by the above committees and my ‘general observations’. However details of the class applications are considered separately.

There are a number of additional papers that could be circulated with this report (making it a rather large document!) and if not attached will be forward upon request (available)

 

I was also nominated for a Working Group established by the Windsurfing Committee to report on “Youth and Junior Pathway”- part of the Strategic Plan.

We produced a report handed directly to the ISAF Executive Committee via Vice President (VP) Fiona Barron. (available)

 

Additionally I attended several meetings with ISAF Technical Staff to discus ISA Class Rules; and a meeting with Dina Kowalyshyn (Eq.C) to try and finalise Techno 293 application.

 

 

ISAF Classes Committee

 

A full day and agenda full of submissions to be considered- note that this committee is not always the ‘reporting committee’ but we are invited to comment.

However we do not always consider those submissions directly relevant to the (existing) olympic classes – but receive the decisions of the Olympic Classes Sub-Committee.

Presentations were also made upon:

Stategic Plan – George Andreadis (VP)

In-House Certification Programme – Dick Batt. – (available)

Review of ISAF Classes - Simon Forbes ( see Eq.C report)

Insurance and Liability – Jeff Martin (with apologies –nothing to report to date)

 

Finally, committee chairman, Jeff Martin, reminded representatives of his desire to introduce a new agenda item (now 2007) – ‘ ISAF Classes and future directions of the Committee’. Clearly the Committee is very important, has ’influence’, and is an under-used (under-valued?) resource to classes.

Youth World Championship Sub-Committee

 

The main purpose of attending this meeting was in response to a request from the WC chair (Jorunn Horgen) to report on the Youth and Junior Pathway proposal, considered relevant to this committee due to the ‘Youth and Junior Events’ element of the ISAF Events Strategy -Briefing Document (available). However the draft document had not yet been considered by the WC, and it was not possible to detail a firm proposal, merely to give an outline.

 

Submissions.

The committee did not approve a proposal to fix the equipment chosen (and supplied) for a 4 year period –currently 3 years, from the approved list (Regulation 17).

The committee did agree to include the windsurfer (as with all other boats) as ‘equipment supplied’.

 

Recommendations not based upon Submissions.

The equipment recommended for the 2009 event- ‘windsurfer boys and girls’- is the RS:X with 8.5 sail and 60 fin.

A bid from Turkey to host the 2010 championship was accepted, subject to a successful site visit and satisfactory contractual arrangements. A final confirmation by ISAF of the selection of the venue in TUR shall take place after the site visit.

 

Windsurfing Committee

 

The meeting was informed of the resignation of Jorunn Horgun (due to personal/family commitments); Rich Jeffries had been re-appointed Chairman by the Executive Committee. Phil Jones approved as Vice-Chairman.

 

Submissions: RSX.

- The application for International Class status was approved, subject to meeting the requirement of Regulation 26.2.1.

Marc Cardon was requested to seek a letter of support from FFV.

- A submission from the class to make the RS:X  athlete supplied equipment at the 2008 Olympic Games was rejected. The Executive Committee recommended rejecting the proposal, Neil Pryde are contracted to supply the equipment and should be pushed to ensure the quality of equipment is to the standard expected.

- Format for Olympic Windsurfing.  Bruno de Wannemaeker took the meeting through a power point presentation-Windsurfing Format- (available) prepared by Deborah Powell, for the Working Group established earlier in the year.

The WC approved the submission from the Chairman of the Events Committee for a new format with the following amendment:

‘ a new media friendly course for the 2008 Olympic Windsurfing Medal Race is proposed. For a basic windward/leeward course a technical element should be added before the finishing line;

a)     the finishing line is as close to the beach / harbour as possible,

b)     2 or 3 extra buoys of a different colour make a “slalom part” before the finishing line,

c)      the length of the “slalom part” is predicted on the strength of the wind,

d)     organised for easy and good media and spectator coverage.

 Photo prepared by Bruno de Wannemaeker - attached

 

Other submissions – Class Applications.

Full details elsewhere (under Class reports); here is a summary of WC decisions.

Techno 293- approved subject to meeting requirements of Regulation 26.2.1.

Speedsailing- approved subject to: class name change; a fee structure for custom builders plaques; that the class rules fit the ISAF requirements.

Prodigy- not approved, as the class does not meet Regulation 26.2.1.

 

Other submissions.

Tie break-a proposal to change RRS Rule B8.8 was not approved.

Pathway- the committee felt that development of a junior and youth pathway was vitally important and reviewed a ‘Pathway Working Paper’ (available) prepared by Ceri Williams. A Working Group was established to report directly back to the Executive Committee, later that week-via Fiona Barron, when it had developed an information document on a ‘pathway’ that will help an MNA to structure Junior and Youth (windsurf) racing. The WG was Mike Dempsey (Chair), Phil Jones, Marc Cardon and Ceri Williams.

 

Youth and Development Committee

 

Despite a long meeting, I only attended the afternoon session, few submissions were before this committee. A primary function of this committee is ‘development’ and much discussion took place over its terms of reference, its relationship with other bodies established by the EC, eg Connect to Sailing, and its role within the Strategic Plan. Much frustration was expressed !

 

Submissions.

Team Racing-  the inclusion of an under 21 competition in the Worlds (a submission from Chairman of Events Committee) was approved.

Pathway- submission 181-06, attached, made by the Chairman of the WC, and subsequently withdrawn at the WC meeting, was actually approved by this committee.

 

Equipment Committee

 

Submissions-Class applications.

RS:X – Approved subject to the following consideration: the class satisfies all requirements with the exception of having only 40 (not 50) boards in one of the countries. There were in excess of 240 boards at the 2006 world championships. Council is also asked to consider whether it constitutes a special case pursuance to Regulation 26.2.1(f). (note- this regulation is only relevant to classes applying for recognised status)

Techno 293 – Approved subject to satisfactory confirmation of conforming to Regulation 26 before the Council meeting. My strategy was to prove that  well in excess of 100 boards were active in USA.

Speedsailing – Deferred pending a satisfactory resolution of the weight jacket issues.  There was also much debate about whether or not this was a ‘discipline’, like match racing, or a class.

Prodigy – not approved, as the class does not meet the requirements of Regulation 26. The letters of support received could not confirm that 30 boards were actively racing in those countries.

 

There was an overall impression that the committee felt there were too many classes and too many “world” championships /titles. Undoubtedly his reflected badly upon the Prodigy application. Later in the meeting a report was received from a Working Party chaired by Henri Samuel regarding re-structuring ISAF Classes and World Championship – the final proposal to be completed for a submission to the 2007 mid year meeting.

One of the main ‘architects’ of the proposed World Cup for Olympic classes Riccardo Simoneschi (Eq.C Vice-Chairman) was particularly critical of the current structure.

 

Other Submissions.

RSX Athlete supplied equipment at 2008 Olympic Games – this submission was also rejected by the Eq.C, commenting that the equipment quality issues must be addressed to ISAF’s satisfaction.

 

Recommendations not based on submissions.

Review of Classes. A paper by the ISAF Technical Department was circulated. An extract from Regulation 26.12 states that: “all International and Recognised Classes shall be subject to regular review by the Equipment Committee (at least once every 3 years)”.

In the review the Eq.C shall establish whether or not the class is ‘actively racing’ pursuant to the relevant requirements of 26.2.1(d) .The recommended guidelines to actively racing is considered to be at least the same number of registered boats as required for the new classes seeking designated status.

Two windsurfing classes appeared on the list: International  Mistral, with a recommendation to move to Recognised Class status;and Formula Experience, with a recommendation to remove ISAF Status.

Both classes were removed from the “danger” list after receiving updates from Marc Cardon (FE) and Ceri Williams (Mistral).

In the case of FE an annual report (2005) had not been filed –Marc rectified that.

In the case of MOD an inaccurate report had been filed – CAN (20 boards) had been listed, rather than CHN ( 100 + ?). CW confirmed that the loss of the Class’s experienced Exec Secretary had compounded the problem.

 

Windsurfing Class Applications

 

The Windsurfing Committee and Equipment Committee (reporting committee) considered 4 applications –three for International  Status (RS:X , Techno 293 and ISA) and one for Recognised status (Prodigy).

It was clear from the outset that ISAF policy was to enforce Regulation 26- tightening the rules for  ISAF Status and limiting the already vast number of “world” championships.

However there appears to be discrepancy and inconsistancy in the application of the regulations – regulations that are already “biased” against windsurfing classes.  Paper on Regulation 26 and Windsurfing – attached.

 

RS:X  & Techno 293.

 

The Council approved two applications to become “International” –one boat, one board (RS:X).

I have no doubt that both windsurfing classes should have received International status. – both are vitally important to the sport!

However both RSX and Techno were missing one letter of support (each having 5) – that letter of support confirming the class was actively racing with a minimum of 50 boards in that country.

Both classes have 2400 boards distributed worldwide in last 2 years.

RSX is clearly distributed in more countries than Techno, but struggles to hit minimum numbers specified by regulation.

Techno, however, has distributed:

30+ boards into 14 countries representing 4 continents, or

40+ boards into 11 countries representing 4 continents, or

50+ boards into 8 countries representing 3 continents.

Letters of support for Techno were received from: BEL, ESP, FRA, GBR, GER, ITA, NZL – therefore one continent was missing.

HKG would support the application but could not confirm 50 board requirement (they have approx. 40 boards, with a similar number distributed into CHN).

USA – with over 300 boards distributed – could not support the application.

The challenge, therefore, was to meet 26.2.1 d) – “ demonstrate…….by a listing of registered boat owners that it is actively racing.”

The US importer of Bic Sport  supplied a list Active Junior Sailing Programmes (25 )-(available)- that had received  a minimum of 4 boards; the JSP under pinning a Junior Olympic programme by US Sailing. This, combined with a result sheet for 2006  East Coast Championship (available) which attracted 22 Techno 293 competitors, comprised the supporting evidence provided to the Eq.C. representative.

Application not approved.

RS:X – Conversely the Eq.C. recommended Council approve this application –Council asked to consider whether it constitutes a special case pursuance to Regulation 26.2.1 (f): “ The requirements of 26.2.1e(ii) may be waived by Council, upon recommendation of the Equipment Committee, when considering a class which serves a unique aspect of sailing.”  However e(ii) refers to applications for Recognised status, not International !

Techno: special case-  During the Windsurfing Committee meeting the ISAF General Secretary, Arve Sundheim, proposed a solution for 2007. The class apply to the mid year meeting for an additional world title (for girls) –following the example set for the RS:X Class in 2006, where the class was granted a Womens World Title (Torbole, September 2006)

 

ISA application- deferred.

 

A different set of barriers were put before this application; there was no disputing that sufficient letters of support were received.

Discipline or Class?  Probably both- but according to ISAF Definitions (prelude to Regulations) –“a class of sailboard includes sailboards which conform to a physical specification intended to allow competitive racing among their class. They include sailboards with one-design, restricted, and developmental specifications as these terms are applied generally and or which there is an existing organisation to administer the class which has: an executive or similar body which administers the class, a membership which is open to all owners, and which holds a meeting of members at least once year, and gives notice of such  meetings to all members.” 

In this respect ISA was no different from other windsurfing classes with “open” class rules (IFCA, IRA, IFWC) and an acceptable constitution.

Class name and builders fees. Technical staff were not happy with the generic class name and recommended –International Speed Windsurfing Class. The class can still be administered by the International Speedsailing Associaton.

Under the auspices of IFCA the ‘class’ operated under production board rules, which included a payment (registration) structure to cover builders fees. Adoption of a “plaque” system for custom boards, similar to that previously agreed with the International Raceboard Class, was suggested.

Neither of these two issues were a barrier to approval.

Class Rules. The first draft of proposed class rules were forward to ISAF Technical staff in early July. Based upon the Funboard Class Rules and adopting the Standard Class Rules format; a couple of revisions were agreed before submitting with the application. Two further meetings during the Conference, between the WC and Eq,C meetings, with George Tallberg (Chairman Class Rules Sub-Committee) and Norbert Marin (ISAF Technical staff) produced a further revision.

Weight jackets- ultimately the application seems to have foundered on this issue, the Eq.C. recommendation to Council: to defer the application pending satisfactory resolution of the weight jacket issues.

The application can be put to the mid year council meeting in May 2007 without payment of another fee.

 

 

 

Mistral Prodigy –not approved.

With so many applications before them the Equipment Committee were not willing to spend much time upon an application that did not meet ISAF Regulations and was also rejected by the Windsurfing Committee.

The application did contain three letters of support (from two continents- CYP,TUR and TUN) but they did not confirm that 30 boards were actively racing.

Countries that did have sufficient boards unfortunately did not send letters of support from MNA’s – support from Nat Siddall representing the US Prodigy Association was not admissable. ISAF did contact US Sailing regarding this application, all that Janet Baxter (President) could confirm was that the Class had not paid its fee to US Sailing.

I have subsequently checked Regulation 26.6 (Regulations on Administering International or Recognised Classes) –“Use its best efforts to ensure that the National association is affiliated to the relevant ISAF Member National Authority”.

 

 

 

These were the key points, affecting windsurfing, that emerged from the Conference.

Full details will be published with the minutes – daily reports summarising the  activities of all committees are published on the ISAF website: www.sailing.org

 

See also- Conference Reports : Summary of the daily reports published on the ISAF website.

 

 

 

 

 

Ceri Williams.

Classes Representative to the Windsurfing Committee.