Re: We really need a forum?

[Admin]

When we talk about thousands of players, we are not totally right. Belgium, in an history that started in 1948 (!) has had maximum 350 "paying" members and that was 25 years ago. OK, Spain, Italy and even France and Germany had many more in the past but how many were "real players". By "real player", I'm talking about somebody who is ready to travel 100 km to go to a tournament. Even now, what is the percentage of players who play more than 3 tournaments per year? When we talk about "numbers", you can't have a real image. When there are 30 players in Finland but they are "active", I'm happy about Finland even if I hope one day they will be 300. Same for every country. But FISTF can not do miracles. As long as there won't be more local organizers, people who work in schools (like Olivier Père or some people in Spain and Italy), it will be almost impossible. In France, 50% of the players are from the club of Pau but it looks like their "organizer" is going to move to another city for work and... that probably means the club will die.

When I report the difference between Mons and Bologna, there are some unbelievale things to me: how comes Bolognino, Bertelli and many more play in Mons and not in Bologna? There was only 1 (one) Italian in the quarter-finals in Bologna this year? This is out of logic, don't you think?

(it's also out of logic the U19 final of Bologna is still not played, by the way)

I also agree there is a problem with the size of the big tournaments. This problem did not exist 10 years ago and it only became important over the 2-3 last few years and only for Mons and Bologna (because Mattersburg and Amsterdam are still "small" Majors"). I agree there should be 2 tournaments, one for the elites players (for instance 32 top players in 8 groups of 4 or 40 players in 8 groups of 5) and another tournament for the "weaker" players but at the same time, some people go to the Majors because it's a great chance to meet top players (in particular from other countries) and that's something we can't forget.

Consolation tournaments must be a priority but many organizers still say "it's too complicated to run". Till 3 years ago, Belgium was definately 3 classes over any other country for the management of tournaments. Now, apart from Mons and Stembert (and maybe Brussels), the level of "sports management" is weaker and people still think it's too complicated to organize a consolation tournament from 1.00 pm (!!!).

Another point: in some regions or countries, players are not interested to play FISTF events and that's OK. We must respect that. But then the same people should not complain that they don't get help from FISTF. For instance, the USA refuse to become members of FISTF but they wanted FISTF money to organize the "America Cup" (which in reality is a tournament for players from the East Coast of the USA). In that case I'm sorry but we (FISTF) can not help them!

[Guest]

agree with you Vincent.

What we are saying the same thing from two different view.

Your view from the top (players and organizers of major tournaments) and I from below (the new beginning, the unofficial tournament).

The football table has to have (as well as tennis, golf and many other individual sports) an elite playing, and if professional travels better, and a majority who play in your city or neighborhood.

How many people know that riding a bicycle? And how much the fine running of the week? And how to be 100 km run? Surely many but in the right proportion.

we must help those who want to create unofficial events, promotional, educational, training. I do not think work is the FISTF, but if that can make lines FISTF teachers.

The discourse on the United States fits all. No country, not a member of the FISTF can arrange FISTF. It seems logical and normal in all the federations in the world