Acu Trials Forum

[bikespace]

Totally disagree as I think you will when jack does the WTC (next year), essential to drop rounds as its just not possible to do every round of evry championship.

I thought that the ACU did do a little to help the cost of competing in the Euro youth rounds

French Scorpa

Italian Beta

Spanish GasGas/Sherco

Japanese Honda

We don't have a motorcycle industry. I'm sure we'd find it easier to get funding if we did. Anyone fancy riding aRoyal Enfield next year, no wait, they're Indian.

If we had a motorcycle industry we'd have a damned site more chance of getting funding for the sport. I don't suppose there's much chance of that happening though.

We can't always blame an organisation that we pay very little to for every weakness in the sport. People don't seem to realise that much of the money we give to the ACU is for insurance, not to fund bigwigs holiday trips.

The french don't support any 125cc riders on scorpa, gubian is on Sherco Karim and cervantes Gas gas morrel sherco.

Gratterola sherco

Don't think Gas Gas support the rfme but Gomez is on that make.

Have seen a fair bit of ACU reps at most of the WTC and euros this year none appeared to be "on holiday". Now what they could do is several things but I am of the opionion that all my suggestions would cost.

Not sure if you were agreeing with me or not, but to clarify, my statement was also suggesting that the money wasn't being wasted on bigwig holidays (as has been sugested recently). Was just pointing out that not all riders are probably aware that a fair chunk of the money sent off to the ACU covers insurance.

My point with not having any British bike manufacturers was that we may be able to attract more money in to the sport, through things such as the sports council if they thought it may actually benefit a British Industry. Much easier to convince politicians and the like that our sport is a good thing if it would kill off a part of British Industry if the sport dies. Don't suppose we're likely to see a revival so probably unimportant, but may have some influence in some cases.

[old trials fanatic]

I've read the above posts and a lot of them refer to the ACU and their funding or lack of of young riders and competitors in World Rounds etc.

Am i the only one who thinks why SHOULD my ACU subs be used to fund those competitors?

Personally i dont see why the ACU should. If you want to contribute to their future careers then feel free to do so. If you want to sponsor them personally or through your company then fine but i object to MY subs being used for this.

Sorry but i want the money i contribute to the ACU coffers, however small, to be spent on grass roots trials no more no less. I know this wont be a very popular attitude but it's what i feel and believe.

You can have a British World Champion if you want but if the grass roots level of the sport collapses then SO WHAT !!! the price would be too high.

I RIDE in trials that is MY ONLY CONCERN. How those trials are organised and administered is MY concern NOT the presupposed "right" of some extremely talented person to recieve funding to attain fame and stardom in WTC. At MY expense. No way jose. You want to reap the rewards then YOU do the groundwork as Scorpa3 suggests.

On the positive side i think that by and large, it's always easier to knock than to compliment, the ACU do a thankless job quite well. After all what is the alternative???

The only complaint / suggestion / proposal that i want to see implemented as soon as possible preferably by the end of the year is a formal binding set of construction regulations for Pre 65 trials bikes that would apply to ALL ACU sanctioned events. At the moment it is total chaos as to what is or what is not allowed. Seems to depend on the club, who you are, which model bike it is, how well you know the club secretary. This is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. I know the organisers of the Scottish Pre65 will carry on doing as they like and sod everybody else along with reason and common sense but we NEED a formal list of construction specification applicable to ALL ACU sanctioned events if for nothing else than to give a level playing field.

Well thats my two pennorth so better put my flack jacket on as i sense incoming.

[bikespace]

I've read the above posts and a lot of them refer to the ACU and their funding or lack of of young riders and competitors in World Rounds etc.

Am i the only one who thinks why SHOULD my ACU subs be used to fund those competitors?

Personally i dont see why the ACU should. If you want to contribute to their future careers then feel free to do so. If you want to sponsor them personally or through your company then fine but i object to MY subs being used for this.

Sorry but i want the money i contribute to the ACU coffers, however small, to be spent on grass roots trials no more no less. I know this wont be a very popular attitude but it's what i feel and believe.

You can have a British World Champion if you want but if the grass roots level of the sport collapses then SO WHAT !!! the price would be too high.

I RIDE in trials that is MY ONLY CONCERN. How those trials are organised and administered is MY concern NOT the presupposed "right" of some extremely talented person to recieve funding to attain fame and stardom in WTC. At MY expense. No way jose. You want to reap the rewards then YOU do the groundwork as Scorpa3 suggests.

On the positive side i think that by and large, it's always easier to knock than to compliment, the ACU do a thankless job quite well. After all what is the alternative???

Well thats my two pennorth so better put my flack jacket on as i sense incoming.

I think you might find that this is a very common attitude whether people are inclined to admit it in a public forum or not.

Again, my views on whether I would contribute or not are unimportant, but if I had to make the decision whether every member of the ACU should support the top few riders then I would absolutely have to vote against it, or at least offer a referendum, or at best allow members to add a voluntary contribution to their licence fee for youth development.

It is my view that the vast majority would choose not to support it. Surely there are very few other sports which would support top sportsmen in this way.

[bdmc]

Changing the name of a company aint cheap, and will it make people think any different? The monies involved could be spent in better ways.

Having a truck travelling across Europe from April till September. Then what do we do with it. Leave it in mothballs until the next WTC the following year. Where will it be stored? Who will be driving it? Will the driver be an employee of the ACU?

Has any of you yet priced up a costs of running this vehicle. Who is going to pay for the running costs, the people who use it or all members of the ACU.

Who will decide who has use of the facillities., just championship contenders or will anyone who is a member of the governing body who happens to be 'having a go' that weekend.

Has anybody asked the importers to put in a few quid to fund it?

Someone in an earlier post wants a breakdown of the trials income and how it is spent. Even suggested there is a discussion on how it is spent. Havent we all elected persons on to the T&E committee to look after our sport, including how to spend the money. If you feel that strongly put yourself up as a Centre delegate go to the management meetings, make yourself know and have ago and geting elected onto the committee.

[atomant]

Okay suggest a name, and we can all have a vote on it. How calling it say Moto gb will improve things/ remove over age volunteers/create wonderful dynamic youthful committees awash with startling ideas and money passes me by. Please explain

Right I will take my devils advocate hat off now.

Dabster, will you make a positive contribution for once! If you cant say nothing positive, then say nowt!

[highland lassie]

Dabster, will you make a positive contribution for once! If you cant say nothing positive, then say nowt!

Pot, kettle, etc....you've been gurning on here all day!

[atomant]

Dabster, will you make a positive contribution for once! If you cant say nothing positive, then say nowt!

Pot, kettle, etc....you've been gurning on here all day!

[barrybaines]

I've read the above posts and a lot of them refer to the ACU and their funding or lack of of young riders and competitors in World Rounds etc.

Am i the only one who thinks why SHOULD my ACU subs be used to fund those competitors?

Personally i dont see why the ACU should. If you want to contribute to their future careers then feel free to do so. If you want to sponsor them personally or through your company then fine but i object to MY subs being used for this.

Sorry but i want the money i contribute to the ACU coffers, however small, to be spent on grass roots trials no more no less. I know this wont be a very popular attitude but it's what i feel and believe.

You can have a British World Champion if you want but if the grass roots level of the sport collapses then SO WHAT !!! the price would be too high.

I RIDE in trials that is MY ONLY CONCERN. How those trials are organised and administered is MY concern NOT the presupposed "right" of some extremely talented person to recieve funding to attain fame and stardom in WTC. At MY expense. No way jose. You want to reap the rewards then YOU do the groundwork as Scorpa3 suggests.

On the positive side i think that by and large, it's always easier to knock than to compliment, the ACU do a thankless job quite well. After all what is the alternative???

The only complaint / suggestion / proposal that i want to see implemented as soon as possible preferably by the end of the year is a formal binding set of construction regulations for Pre 65 trials bikes that would apply to ALL ACU sanctioned events. At the moment it is total chaos as to what is or what is not allowed. Seems to depend on the club, who you are, which model bike it is, how well you know the club secretary. This is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. I know the organisers of the Scottish Pre65 will carry on doing as they like and sod everybody else along with reason and common sense but we NEED a formal list of construction specification applicable to ALL ACU sanctioned events if for nothing else than to give a level playing field.

Well thats my two pennorth so better put my flack jacket on as i sense incoming.

Haha no offence intended but whenever i`ve read a post from you an image pops up in my head of a grumpy old man adorned with pipe and slippers and a speach bubble saying " i ride old bikes my way and thats how everyone MUST ride"

Sorry again and i`ll take any abuse given just had too share that little thought

[old trials fanatic]

Fairly accurate.

Sort of Victor Meldrew with a spatter of mud

As my only interest is "Classic trials" i take very little interest in WTC or the modern trials scene i didnt therefore feel it pertinent to pass any comments on modern trials other than why should the ACU "sponsor" riders using my subs.

I do have a concern about Pre65 elegibility though. Never ridden a modern bike so again cant comment other than i couldnt do what you and others do even in my wildest dreams so i think the phrase is "respect" ?

Thanks for the compliment. I think?

Edited September 16, 2006 by Old trials fanatic

[woody]

A genuine observation here, not criticism aimed at any individuals, just an observation.

In another post someone suggested that as no-one bothered taking up the invitation to the ACU forum to air any views, then, despite the critism aimed at the ACU on this forum, people must be generally happy with the way things are. I would agree with that. Otherwise, if things really were wrong and people felt strongly enough about it they would have gone and aired their concerns - wouldn't they? No-one took up the offer. Just one day out of the whole year but no-one went - other commitments, too far etc - even though it is never too far to travel to a trial each weekend. I'm not saying the ACU are without fault (neither do I know what they are if they have any...) but you couldn't blame them for thinking in this instance - what do we have to do to please people...?

So what are the problems that everyone says need sorting? So far, excepting a couple of other topics, it is the same thing - ACU funding and why don't they do more for youth riders etc. Suggestions that the membership fee should be increased to help support this. Hmmm - I remember a few years ago when the licence was reintroduced as the membership fee. Uproar about having to pay for a 'licence' even though it was only

[nigel dabster]

Okay suggest a name, and we can all have a vote on it. How calling it say Moto gb will improve things/ remove over age volunteers/create wonderful dynamic youthful committees awash with startling ideas and money passes me by. Please explain

Right I will take my devils advocate hat off now.

Dabster, will you make a positive contribution for once! If you cant say nothing positive, then say nowt!

Yes you are right, I didn't go to the forum this year and never intended to. But I did last year, made a contribution to a few debates, youth classic and novogar, and got something changed I felt worthwhile. The committee were open and honest I felt, I assume your name was on the cancelled list?

Where was your positive contribution then?

Also since when has it been your job to decide if my posts are positive? Just because I oppose an opionion (yours?) does not make it negative. Explaining in simple words, a name change does what? It is not negative per se it just gives a view that there needs to be more substance and reason to an online suggestion than a whimsical blue sky thought. We all have our own opinions of what we want or don't, I for one couldn't care a jot what pre 65 regs are acceptable, but to o t fanatic it is the one thing that matters.

You and I both agree that youth funding is important, but I would guess a majority do not. I would love the ACU to do some more at youth level but how could it be paid for?

Trials riders are notoriuosly tight so wheras I would be happy with affiliation at

[atomant]

Where was your positive contribution then?

Also since when has it been your job to decide if my posts are positive? Just because I oppose an opionion (yours?) does not make it negative.

I was thinking that the post was more like sardonic rhetoric as opposed to a descriptive retort

You and I both agree that youth funding is important, but I would guess a majority do not. I would love the ACU to do some more at youth level but how could it be paid for?

Trials riders are notoriuosly tight so wheras I would be happy with affiliation at

[nigel dabster]

Note you haven't commented on your contribution.

My comments were not sarcastic, and not repetitively made.

I described an alternative in my reply.

If you are inclined to use long words try accuracy.

As I have said before, rhetoric here, go ahead with the forum its good to discuss important issues but leave it open to all in some way or other.

Edited September 17, 2006 by Nigel Dabster

[Andy]

Mick,

I think an on-line forum is an excellent idea. From my own point of view (and I know you will appreciate the same) taking time out from the business is always difficult, especially at this time of year. An online debate, presentation of issues or concerns, would allow all levels of the sport to be represented. I'm sure Andy would be happy to even set up a separate link....?? Hope I've not suggested a headache for you Andy, but certain topics could be listed and replies, suggestions added thereto. (Constructively I hope).

Regards,

Caroline Sandiford - Montesa UK.

I have absolutely no problem with setting this up. I'd take little part myself as I don't ride, am not a member of a club and would have little to input. I've stated the various scenarios I could put in place previously. That would take 5 minutes with appropriate moderators put in place to ensure the content remains valid and of positive debate.

BTW, it may be some time before Mick replies. We established today in Kinlochleven the ACU lads are vampires and all the hanging upside down affects him

[bikespace]

Reckon we've got a cohesive little team thing going on here, shame not to use it