Open letter from the italian and spanish associations

"Per ultimo il board. Io l'avrei voluto cosi:"

Vincent, missing the first sentence, I was talking to the past ...

Since I wrote that this board is now impossible.

Like I thinking a long time ago: is wall against wall ...

One solution: FISTF remains frozen as now and countries who work, continuous to make, after, we can count countries that slowly die ...

Admin wrote:
Also, who can be better than Olivier Père or Heinz Eder as sports director? Nobody for sure.

Vincent i think that you are doing now the same mistakes of past. These mistakes were responsible for the result of last elections.
For me Olivier was a very good sport director but now he failed to control Catania's co. Why he accepted to be again sport director?
Heinz maybe is good for other positions but as sport director was a disaster. I apologie to Heinz for my comments but i cann't say lies.
So Vincent how are you sure that the rest persons in subbuteo community are not good for sport directors? I don't want to speak for me but i think that Marcus Tilgner doing good job in Berlin. Ron Corsten, Jeremy Bradley, Manuel Gorgette are also good organisers.
I cann't accept that the best sport directors are only 2 persons. OK WHO IS THE BEST PLAYER IN BELGIUM?
the last ten years Dominique David Gil were champions but i think that now Dijardin is better. So propably now we can find a better sport director!

p.s Pierro before one year you believe that ex BoD was disaster. You vote against them. Now you think that the new BoD is also disaster. You must vote against them. But because last year your proposals failed (Catania's BoD) now please GIVE YOUR HELP NO TO "PROFESSIONALS" but to real all time lovers of table soccer.
Table soccer is like sex. It is better for a pair fall in love that a pair of gigolo and geisha. The second pair are professionals but i prefer an amateur in my bed!

kechris wrote:Table soccer is like sex.

When you don't have good partners, you just need a good hand to do the job!

Of course those soft facts are not the deciding factor. But neither can pure numbers be. Numbers say that anyone from a bigger country is better than anyone from a smaller country. Most real sports don't think like this. Why should we? Having balance means compromises and understanding. Not unequal voting based on dodgy numbers (that can be counted in many ways).

The whole thing calls for respect for the biggest countries, as well as respect for the smallest. This means persons who are not "contaminated" to be in the higher positions. And those who are "contaminated", but have a lot to give, should be working for commissions under the calming effect of the "non-contaminated" directors.

If they don't accept to work for the best of the game, if they are not directors, they are certainly not worthy of being directors either.

This whole thing also calls for more people to be involved. It's a scientific fact that people are more happy and accept the decisions better, if they feel that they have some possibility to affect things.

I really don't get this idea of having 5-6 people to decide on everything without any consultation. It's absurd especially in our game. It is what generates unhappiness and defensive attitudes.

Heinz Eder wrote:Soft-facts like activity or interest in international matters will bring much bigger problems.
Who should decide about it?
What happens if the "wrong" people decide about that?

With the same number of vote for all you won't satisfy the bigger countries, the results are ideas like we can read it in the letter. Introduce stronger obligations for associations to become member to "get out" the smaller countries. Currently the smaller countries are those who turn the balance and that's a problem for bigger countries. The CoN shows it clearly I think.
I don't say my idea is the solution but you must start at a point to come closer to a compromise.

von K. wrote:

Heinz Eder wrote:
I think we need a new system of voting generally too. I can particullary understand bigger nations, but maybe they need to see how big they are in reality, so my proposal for a voting system is the following. The number of payers in the WR related to the number of population in a country should show how many votes an association should get at a Congress. Only to give you all an impression, if we would say an association gets for each % 1 vote, all association would stay on 1 vote.

Not good. China or India compared to Monaco. In China 100000 players would equal Monaco's 30 players (based on rough inaccurate estimations of population). What would be the possibility to have 30 monegasques participating in a FISTF event even abroad compared to 100000 chinese!

Of course you 1% limit would mean it will never be an issue, unless the Vatican will start registering players.

But the example of these countries highlights the unrealistic nature of anything based on pure numbers. There have to be other deciding factors (activity and interest in international matters for example), if we want to have different amount of votes for countries (in itself stupid idea for a global federation that wants to grow).

Otherwise I think you had many good points.

kechris wrote:
Table soccer is like sex. It is better for a pair fall in love that a pair of gigolo and geisha. The second pair are professionals but i prefer an amateur in my bed!

Wise man!

Admin wrote:

kechris wrote:Table soccer is like sex.

When you don't have good partners, you just need a good hand to do the job!

Very good Vincent.

von K. wrote:

kechris wrote:
Table soccer is like sex. It is better for a pair fall in love that a pair of gigolo and geisha. The second pair are professionals but i prefer an amateur in my bed!

Wise man!

good one , except that a gigolo would never flog a geisha. Who would pay whom?

To returm to the original point of the post:

some say that this board is a disaster etc. some name and blame certain people. some ask for an EGM. who is the candidate to lead FISTF? what is his plan?

Please ask the question to your CoN representative, those people surely already thought about that. If not we are all positive that they will find those people till the elections.

panagios wrote:To returm to the original point of the post:

some say that this board is a disaster etc. some name and blame certain people. some ask for an EGM. who is the candidate to lead FISTF? what is his plan?

It will be difficult to get people together to make a new Board. At least there are priorities for the next Board:
- have the FISTF circuit being run again (and well) as before
- have communication again (newsletter & website)
These are the top priorities, much more important that talking about the unique goalkeeper or having sponsors or to say that "we must be a sport"...

panagios wrote:who is the candidate to lead FISTF? what is his plan?

The main idea is to involve people mainly everywhere accepted. Share of "North/South" = 50/50 (if possible!). That means clearly involvement of NEW names. Example: even if I am one of the main players in this issue right now you wouldn't find my name on the list.
There are some names but as long as we don't have a confirmed meeting date we won't publish names. The list is not completed yet, we are still looking for some names ...

The main aim of the new board should be to calm down the whole situation and to bring back stability into the daily work to be done. I am not sure how long that will take but a new board won't be for four years. It is planned to have new and regular elections after one or two years (that depends on the path to calm down the situation).

Janus Gersie

What is the reason that I have to wait for the board of FISTF that I will get some information from the austrian representative about the names of the candidates for an EGM which is already called?

There is nothing to calm down I think. Some people address the issue of separation of the gerne into sport and game. This is not a bad thing. Any board should set this as a top priority. I also think that the guys of "old subbuteo" should be contacted and included in the discussion. There is nothing bad if FISTF has 3 different versions of the game under it.

You just need seperate rules and disciplines

I believe that before the EGM date and place is officialised, not many people are interested in writing programs. It could be waste of time.

I'm a little confused, though. Janus, you have said before that the elections should be without any blocks. But is the Council now creating a block? I probably misunderstood.

panagios wrote:There is nothing to calm down I think. Some people address the issue of separation of the gerne into sport and game. This is not a bad thing. Any board should set this as a top priority. I also think that the guys of "old subbuteo" should be contacted and included in the discussion. There is nothing bad if FISTF has 3 different versions of the game under it.

You just need seperate rules and disciplines

This is in fact very true!

We do have many sports and games that have different disciplines under the same organisation. Of course it would require better written statutes to prevent problems with financing etc.

But basically it's stupid to have 3-4 different games separated completely, when overall they have less than 10 000 players.

In Finland we had until recently all the skiing sports under the same roof. Alpine, cross country, ski jumping, nordic compined and I think even freestyle (with it's own different disciplines).

von K. wrote:I'm a little confused, though. Janus, you have said before that the elections should be without any blocks. But is the Council now creating a block? I probably misunderstood.

It is not the CoN creating anything. To be honest I don't know how far the CoN is as I didn't take part in the discussions for weeks. I don't want to spread the reasons for that. Anyway it is hard for the CoN to discuss matters as the platform used is not the best choice. But on the other side I didn't hear anything from anybody in the last weeks so I think anybody is doing anything in the CoN right now.

No, the idea for an EGM was created in another way. And it happened outside the CoN. Votings in the EGM should be without blocks. Elections shall take place man by man. But to realise elections we should have a proper list of candidates. Everybody else should be able to be candidate as well. I am totally for elections as written in the statutes.

Janus

Ok, Janus. This clarified that I understood wrong. Thanks!