[rabie]

IMHO the system is in theory something like this

rider => club => centre trials sub committee => centre => ACU national council => FIM
=> T & E committee => UEM

for a variety of practical and theoretical reasons this doesn't appear to function well in practise

IMHO how can 8 people relay the view of us all when there are 21 (?) centres out there, when the scope is so wide; club to international, a plethora of championships and governing a second sport (ie a trials only centre votes on enduro issues when they don't run enduros)

how do other nations do it?

IMHO the sports committees spend to much time on "pro" (as the Americans call it) sport, ie the top level, not the issues that concerns us down here on the ground. i hear about AMA Pro Racing, have the Americans hived off the real pro stuff, freeing up the committee to concentrate on us, joe average rider?

would it help if we spent thousands £££ on having a postal ballot of all ACU members, or just all relevant (eg trials vote for trials) ACU members for the elections. would a constituency system help/work (ie alleviate the possible issue of a load of northerners voting on southern issues or vice versa)


i really don't know what the answer is, and the more i think about the pros and cons i can't conjure one up - ideas .....