30 Dec 2006 17:15:09

David Biddulph

SARA EGM result

From http://www.scottish-rowing.org.uk/News.html: "30 December SARA EGM: At today's EGM there was, as intended, a lengthy debate around a number of issues relating to buoyancy, in particular regarding the final sentence of the existing code which relates to the buoyancy requirements for older boats. After some discussion, the meeting agreed in principle with the existing Water Safety Code and voted unanimously to retain the first two sentences of the existing code but to amend the final sentence. The Water Safety Code will therefore be updated from Monday 1st January 2007 to read: "Boats constructed or delivered after 1st January 2007 shall meet the FISA Guidelines for Minimum Flotation: A boat when full of water with a crew of average weight equal to the design weight stated on the boat's production plaque, seating in the rowing position, should float such that the top of the seat is a maximum of 5cm below the static waterline. Clubs shall take reasonable measures to ensure all other shells shall have similar buoyancy." From an umpiring perspective, this has implications when acting on Control Commission duties. The SARA Umpires' Commission issued the following guidelines in May 2006, which were unanimously endorsed by the meeting. "It will no longer be acceptable to have the space below the seats completely open - umpires will look to see that some attempt has been made to achieve additional buoyancy e.g. compartmentalisation or securely fitted buoyancy bags". For clubs who have not yet retrofitted their shells, advice is available from a number of clubs and companies - contact the Executive for further information." -- David Biddulph Rowing web pages at http://www.biddulph.org.uk/

30 Dec 2006 12:20:28

Charles Carroll

Re: SARA EGM result

David, Sorry to be such a nuisance but residing on the other side of the pond I am not sure I understand what happened. Could you translate? Cordially, Charles

30 Dec 2006 20:30:14

David Biddulph

Re: SARA EGM result

"Charles Carroll" <charles_carroll@comcast.net > wrote in message news:zfydnUMVEPOPVAvYnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@comcast.com... > > David, > > Sorry to be such a nuisance but residing on the other side of the pond I > am > not sure I understand what happened. Could you translate? As I read it, the EGM decided to retain the wording that said: "Boats constructed or delivered after 1st January 2007 shall meet the FISA Guidelines for Minimum Flotation: A boat when full of water with a crew of average weight equal to the design weight stated on the boat's production plaque, seating in the rowing position, should float such that the top of the seat is a maximum of 5cm below the static waterline." The proposal to be debated at the EGM had been: Boats constructed or delivered after 1st January 2007 -insert:- "must show on their production plaque whether the boat meets" -delete:- "shall meet" ... which would have made their wording similar to FISA's wording at bye-law 1.11 to rule 31 at http://www.worldrowing.com/medias/docs/media_350586.pdf There was also a proposal: -delete:- "All other shells shall be required to have similar buoyancy below each seat by 1st January 2007 with compartmentalised buoyancy at each seat being retrofitted if necessary." and in this case they changed the wording to: "Clubs shall take reasonable measures to ensure all other shells shall have similar buoyancy." with the additional guidance as follows: From an umpiring perspective, this has implications when acting on Control Commission duties. The SARA Umpires' Commission issued the following guidelines in May 2006, which were unanimously endorsed by the meeting. "It will no longer be acceptable to have the space below the seats completely open - umpires will look to see that some attempt has been made to achieve additional buoyancy e.g. compartmentalisation or securely fitted buoyancy bags". For clubs who have not yet retrofitted their shells, advice is available from a number of clubs and companies - contact the Executive for further information. SARA should be congratulated on their efforts. I am not aware of any other national federation which has introduced rules as strong as this, but I'm sure that all rsr readers would be grateful to hear what the situation is in the various federations around the world. -- David Biddulph Rowing web pages at http://www.biddulph.org.uk/

30 Dec 2006 13:12:34

Re: SARA EGM result

David Biddulph wrote: > SARA should be congratulated on their efforts. I am not aware of any other > national federation which has introduced rules as strong as this, but I'm > sure that all rsr readers would be grateful to hear what the situation is in > the various federations around the world. Thank you David, for taking the time to circulate the outcome of the meeting. As I expected, it made a bit of a nonsense of some earlier comments posted recently. In all my dealings with the Scottish ARA, I have never experienced anything other than good practice, common sense and a genuine willingness to make the sport as safe as it can be. It is a fact that I see more situations south of the Scottish border rather than north, that can, and have, led to loss of life and injury and this is in great part due to the efforts of the Scottish ARA, SARA Club officials, Umpires and others who have safety at the foremost of their minds. Ken Hastie Group Owner NE Rowing Yahoogroup

30 Dec 2006 13:19:38

Charles Carroll

Re: SARA EGM result

David, As I read it, "shall meet" means boats must meet FISA Guidelines. I take it this is a victory for those who advocate full buoyancy? Cordially, Charles

30 Dec 2006 14:04:54

steveh

Re: SARA EGM result

Charles Carroll wrote: > David, > > As I read it, "shall meet" means boats must meet FISA Guidelines. I take it > this is a victory for those who advocate full buoyancy? > > Cordially, > > Charles As i read this that is not the case. As I read it what the SARA clubs have agreed to is that any boats use for racing where there is normaly good safety cover boats .must be buoyant whilst boats that are use just at the clubs where there is normaly less safety cover need not be buoyant.? Steve

30 Dec 2006 23:01:59

Richard Packer

Re: SARA EGM result

On 30 Dec 2006 14:04:54 -0800, "steveh" <stephenhitchen2002@yahoo.com > wrote: >As i read this that is not the case. As I read it what the SARA clubs >have agreed to is that any boats use for racing where there is normaly >good safety cover boats .must be buoyant whilst boats that are use just >at the clubs where there is normaly less safety cover need not be >buoyant.? I think you've misread it then. This appears to be the wording SARA have agreed on, and it says nothing about any differences between competition and training or any other activity. "Boats constructed or delivered after 1st January 2007 shall meet the FISA Guidelines for Minimum Flotation: A boat when full of water with a crew of average weight equal to the design weight stated on the boat's production plaque, seating in the rowing position, should float such that the top of the seat is a maximum of 5cm below the static waterline. Clubs shall take reasonable measures to ensure all other shells shall have similar buoyancy."

30 Dec 2006 15:31:53

steveh

Re: SARA EGM result

Richard Packer wrote: > On 30 Dec 2006 14:04:54 -0800, "steveh" <stephenhitchen2002@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > >As i read this that is not the case. As I read it what the SARA clubs > >have agreed to is that any boats use for racing where there is normaly > >good safety cover boats .must be buoyant whilst boats that are use just > >at the clubs where there is normaly less safety cover need not be > >buoyant.? > > I think you've misread it then. This appears to be the wording SARA > have agreed on, and it says nothing about any differences between > competition and training or any other activity. > > "Boats constructed or delivered after 1st January 2007 shall meet the > FISA > Guidelines for Minimum Flotation: > A boat when full of water with a crew of average weight equal to the > design > weight stated on the boat's production plaque, seating in the rowing > position, should float such that the top of the seat is a maximum of > 5cm > below the static waterline. > Clubs shall take reasonable measures to ensure all other shells shall > have > similar buoyancy." Richard You may well be right & I may well be being spliting hairs but why change the origanal text which was a requirement to a guideline. Steve

30 Dec 2006 23:39:16

David Biddulph

Re: SARA EGM result

"steveh" <stephenhitchen2002@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1167521513.874543.91890@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com... > > Richard Packer wrote: >> On 30 Dec 2006 14:04:54 -0800, "steveh" <stephenhitchen2002@yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> >> >As i read this that is not the case. As I read it what the SARA clubs >> >have agreed to is that any boats use for racing where there is normaly >> >good safety cover boats .must be buoyant whilst boats that are use just >> >at the clubs where there is normaly less safety cover need not be >> >buoyant.? >> >> I think you've misread it then. This appears to be the wording SARA >> have agreed on, and it says nothing about any differences between >> competition and training or any other activity. >> >> "Boats constructed or delivered after 1st January 2007 shall meet the >> FISA >> Guidelines for Minimum Flotation: >> A boat when full of water with a crew of average weight equal to the >> design >> weight stated on the boat's production plaque, seating in the rowing >> position, should float such that the top of the seat is a maximum of >> 5cm >> below the static waterline. >> Clubs shall take reasonable measures to ensure all other shells shall >> have >> similar buoyancy." > > Richard > > You may well be right & I may well be being spliting hairs but why > change the origanal text which was a requirement to a guideline. What is the original text to which you refer, Steve? As I understand it, the resolution passed by SARA in 2005 was as follows: " The Water Safety Code be updated to include the following: Boats constructed or delivered after 1st January 2007 shall meet the FISA Guidelines for Minimum Flotation: "A boat when full of water with a crew of average weight equal to the design weight stated on the boat's production plaque, seated in the rowing position should float such that the top of the seat is a maximum of 5cm below the static waterline." All other shells shall be required to have similar buoyancy below each seat by 1st January 2007 with compartmentalised buoyancy at each seat being retrofitted if necessary." -- David Biddulph Rowing web pages at http://www.biddulph.org.uk/

30 Dec 2006 15:47:41

bookie

Re: SARA EGM result

> Richard > > You may well be right & I may well be being spliting hairs but why > change the origanal text which was a requirement to a guideline. > because it allows people to continue to not bother doing anything abuot boat buoyancy if they want; a requirement would mean they would HAVE to do make the changes to conform a guideline is just that and does not require or impel anyone to conform. If someone does not conform they will just look a bit bad for not conforming but they are not breaking any rules as such and so won't be thrown out of the organisation of which they are members and which have set out these 'guidelines', whereas if they did not conform to 'requirements' then they could be kicked out. or that is how i see it anyway.

31 Dec 2006 17:26:02

Carl

Re: SARA EGM result

bookie wrote: >>Richard >> >>You may well be right & I may well be being spliting hairs but why >>change the origanal text which was a requirement to a guideline. >> > > because it allows people to continue to not bother doing anything abuot > boat buoyancy if they want; a requirement would mean they would HAVE to > do make the changes to conform a guideline is just that and does not > require or impel anyone to conform. If someone does not conform they > will just look a bit bad for not conforming but they are not breaking > any rules as such and so won't be thrown out of the organisation of > which they are members and which have set out these 'guidelines', > whereas if they did not conform to 'requirements' then they could be > kicked out. > > or that is how i see it anyway. > I agree: why change the original rule in any way? It was clear. It was unequivocal. No room for argument or doubt. However, having read & re-read the amended version (until I had spots before my eyes), it does not seem so bad to me. The Devil lies always in the detail. The revised final paragraph is clumsy, but its requirement that "reasonable measures" be taken by clubs to modify existing boats "to ensure all other shells shall have similar buoyancy" seems open to very little dispute. I would think that a court - given what has been so widely published & discussed (including the South Manchester Coroner's verdict) & may thus be taken as common knowledge on the vulnerability of crews of so many present shells to the dangers of swamping-induced sinking, & given the known ease of rendering those shells fully buoyant - would only read the intention to be that existing boats should match or exceed the FISA guidelines. And "reasonable measures" would describe conversion methods already proposed &, in some cases, already applied to render shells fully buoyant. It would, of course, be most helpful for the SARA executive promptly to confirm their interpretation of the rule, to forestall queries from clubs & lawyers. It might have been helpful in to all had a clause been inserted to provide a set period of grace (say until 1 April 2007?) for clubs to make up lost ground in converting their boats to full buoyancy for the coming season. It would have been invaluable had SARA already published links to those sources of information on buoyancy conversion to which its website statement says it possesses. I trust SARA will make this information available without delay? If I am right, then it appears that Scotland will indeed lead the way on fully-buoyant shells. This gives the strongest possible support to NE Region's own decision to go fully-buoyant. And it neatly rolls the ball back into the court of the ARA & its other regions. So I congratulate all who attended that meeting - members & executive alike - on jointly achieving this positive outcome. There could hardly be a better way to mark the 6th anniversary of Leo Blockley's death, & of the campaign which bears his name, than the swift implementation of full shell buoyancy in Scotland. 3 Cheers - and a very Happy New Year to all! Carl -- Carl Douglas Racing Shells - Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JY, UK Email: carl@carldouglas.co.uk Tel: +44(0)1784-456344 Fax: -466550 URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)

31 Dec 2006 21:54:20

David Biddulph

Re: SARA EGM result

"Richard Packer" <usenet@rjSURNAME.org.yookay > wrote in message news:esrdp2d5rbdfkm5tt7uqtvf2tjlomnilgg@4ax.com... > On 30 Dec 2006 14:04:54 -0800, "steveh" <stephenhitchen2002@yahoo.com> > wrote: > >>As i read this that is not the case. As I read it what the SARA clubs >>have agreed to is that any boats use for racing where there is normaly >>good safety cover boats .must be buoyant whilst boats that are use just >>at the clubs where there is normaly less safety cover need not be >>buoyant.? > > I think you've misread it then. This appears to be the wording SARA > have agreed on, and it says nothing about any differences between > competition and training or any other activity. > > "Boats constructed or delivered after 1st January 2007 shall meet the > FISA > Guidelines for Minimum Flotation: > A boat when full of water with a crew of average weight equal to the > design > weight stated on the boat's production plaque, seating in the rowing > position, should float such that the top of the seat is a maximum of > 5cm > below the static waterline. > Clubs shall take reasonable measures to ensure all other shells shall > have > similar buoyancy." The SARA website has added further clarification: "N.B. Clubs should note that the Water Safety Code applies to racing AND training. Any boats which do not comply with the buoyancy requirements should not be used until they have been retrofitted." -- David Biddulph Rowing web pages at http://www.biddulph.org.uk/

02 Jan 2007 01:51:19

coach

Re: SARA EGM result

> The SARA website has added further clarification: > "N.B. Clubs should note that the Water Safety Code applies to racing AND > training. Any boats which do not comply with the buoyancy requirements > should not be used until they have been retrofitted." The FISA World U23 Champs are in Scotland this summer. I would be interested to see if the FISA officials fully impliment the rules themselves. At Dorney last summer, I understand that there was some conflict during the training week between the UK requirement that Life Jackets be worn by coxes and the FISA requirements. During the racing week FISA rules applied, but not during the training week.

02 Jan 2007 02:21:39

c.anton@blueyonder.co.uk

Re: SARA EGM result

coach wrote: > > At Dorney last summer, I understand that there was some conflict during > the training week between the UK requirement that Life Jackets be worn > by coxes and the FISA requirements. During the racing week FISA rules > applied, but not during the training week. But I did see British coxes wearing life-jackets during racing. It will of course be interesting to find out if the ARA's water safety committee takes a view now that the situation north of the border has changed. There is an ARA council meeting on 10th February. Some Div reps will have changed since yesterday. The complete list can be obtained from the ARA's site. if you have views let them know.