Maybe it is time for an european association under FISTF

What do you think about it

Yes, an "amateur" federation

In principal this should have been the structure from day one.
continental associations under FISTF

but, since almost every active nation is in europe, would the europeans allow other associations , with only a couple of countries, and maybe a handfull of players have an equal say in TF matters?

think about the Italian claim within FISTF. some might say it is legitimate that a nation with many members/players can claim more votes than a small one.

I don't see a problem if there is an european association existing and the other continents don't have something like that. for those continents FISTF is the direct contact.
in europe some areas which needs to be defined are done by the european association the rest remains in the responsibility of FISTF.
of course the european association also could have a totally different voting system than FISTF currently has.

Heinz

panagios wrote:In principal this should have been the structure from day one.
continental associations under FISTF

but, since almost every active nation is in europe, would the europeans allow other associations , with only a couple of countries, and maybe a handfull of players have an equal say in TF matters?

think about the Italian claim within FISTF. some might say it is legitimate that a nation with many members/players can claim more votes than a small one.

People are not prepared to have another association while FISTF problems are not solved.

Look on the current situation Luis. I would understand if we "only" need to discuss about statutes, but we have problems in the calender, we have problems with the EC, players and one club (at the moment) are not allowed to play international tournaments, players join other associations that they can play again.

How long should people wait Luis? It won't happen over night that a continental association will be created.

Luis Filipe Horta wrote:
People are not prepared to have another association while FISTF problems are not solved.

Luis Filipe Horta wrote:
People are not prepared to have another association while FISTF problems are not solved.

They are not prepared for that current desaster, too. So what...

Are you ready for a calling of a new EGM and/or elections ?

I couldn't find a reason for doing this.

I could find reasons against this. For example:

- the FISTF at the moment is a european federation
- this would be more important for europeans, so others would definitely be out of any activity, even more than now
- who would do the work in two federations, no one and the other (FISTF) would struggle

If the reason is change in some things, it's much better to do in FISTF. The sky is the limit for possible solutions. The only thing needed is the knowledge of what different people need and want. And of course the will to do things considering those needs and wants.

von K. wrote:I couldn't find a reason for doing this.

I could find reasons against this. For example:

- the FISTF at the moment is a european federation
- this would be more important for europeans, so others would definitely be out of any activity, even more than now
- who would do the work in two federations, no one and the other (FISTF) would struggle

If the reason is change in some things, it's much better to do in FISTF. The sky is the limit for possible solutions. The only thing needed is the knowledge of what different people need and want. And of course the will to do things considering those needs and wants.

quite right!

You should ask all those questions to the current board.
Don't say that an european association would be FISTF, that's not the sense of such an association. Honestly I think the time has come to ask if the system of associations as members is the correct one. Currently I think associations only should "manage" the national tablesoccer but they shouldn't have anything to say in international topics, because let's have a honest look on the situation.
There is one representative from a country who can vote for a board. This representant should represent the board and the players of an association. Do you really think that there was a voting in a single country about it, to whom such a representative should give his vote? They are all instructed by the board or even only the president. Additionally I think that in many countries there are people only in a board that the association still exists. not the best condition.
FISTF should work for players and clubs, so maybe the clubs should be members and be allowed to vote for the FISTF Board, instead of associations. The clubs are travelling around and play international tournaments, not the presidents of an association (in most cases).
The boards of associations should only concentrate on the national level, I think that's enough work to do. I also think that you will find more interested people in clubs to work in FISTF, because if the clubs are your contact you reach much more people than now, if you send something to a president of an association without knowing if the message will come to all members of that association too.

Do you think something like that will be realized in FISTF?
What do you think about that?

That's only an idea, I don't know if the majority of people like it or not, but I still think about it what can be improved for the future and that I post here. Maybe that could also be an input for the council!?

von K. wrote:I couldn't find a reason for doing this.

I could find reasons against this. For example:

- the FISTF at the moment is a european federation
- this would be more important for europeans, so others would definitely be out of any activity, even more than now
- who would do the work in two federations, no one and the other (FISTF) would struggle

If the reason is change in some things, it's much better to do in FISTF. The sky is the limit for possible solutions. The only thing needed is the knowledge of what different people need and want. And of course the will to do things considering those needs and wants.

It's a good opener for discussion, Heinz. I haven't digested and thought enough about it, but this sort of innovational ideas are needed in FISTF (or TF in general). They don't all need to happen, but they make people think and maybe create even better ideas.

I was in the Council at the start, and the working system needed to be created. I lifted up the idea, that better decisions in many (not all) questions are made if they are not based only on federations official opinions. So I had the idea of the Council having some sort of contact network (survey group) for the many different level/style clubs and players. I don't believe that in the bigger countries (not always either in the smaller countries, of course) the federations views can represent everyone, or even the majority in many subjects (the same problem as in democracies in politics).

I think I would still be in favour of involving more people in the work of the associations (their choice) and FISTF. It increases the interest in the whole thing, if you can be part of it. But at the moment I would create this system without a new federation. Just as a consulting group whose voice has real meaning.

The same problems as in the membership discussion appear also here, if the clubs are the voters. It would be the same as if in FISTF the big countries would have votes based on amount of players and clubs. The decisions would be different, but the main problem (countries are different) still exists.

But again, this is a very interesting idea to develop in some way. I think the main point is to involve the clubs (and players) more in the international decisions.

Heinz Eder wrote:You should ask all those questions to the current board.
Don't say that an european association would be FISTF, that's not the sense of such an association. Honestly I think the time has come to ask if the system of associations as members is the correct one. Currently I think associations only should "manage" the national tablesoccer but they shouldn't have anything to say in international topics, because let's have a honest look on the situation.
There is one representative from a country who can vote for a board. This representant should represent the board and the players of an association. Do you really think that there was a voting in a single country about it, to whom such a representative should give his vote? They are all instructed by the board or even only the president. Additionally I think that in many countries there are people only in a board that the association still exists. not the best condition.
FISTF should work for players and clubs, so maybe the clubs should be members and be allowed to vote for the FISTF Board, instead of associations. The clubs are travelling around and play international tournaments, not the presidents of an association (in most cases).
The boards of associations should only concentrate on the national level, I think that's enough work to do. I also think that you will find more interested people in clubs to work in FISTF, because if the clubs are your contact you reach much more people than now, if you send something to a president of an association without knowing if the message will come to all members of that association too.

Do you think something like that will be realized in FISTF?
What do you think about that?

That's only an idea, I don't know if the majority of people like it or not, but I still think about it what can be improved for the future and that I post here. Maybe that could also be an input for the council!?

von K. wrote:I couldn't find a reason for doing this.

I could find reasons against this. For example:

- the FISTF at the moment is a european federation
- this would be more important for europeans, so others would definitely be out of any activity, even more than now
- who would do the work in two federations, no one and the other (FISTF) would struggle

If the reason is change in some things, it's much better to do in FISTF. The sky is the limit for possible solutions. The only thing needed is the knowledge of what different people need and want. And of course the will to do things considering those needs and wants.

You are right that clubs wouldn't be allowed to play national events in that system too, but on the other side the associations wouldn't be able to decide which team or player can play FISTF tournaments.
In case of problems, it is better to play for another club, than joining another federation.

von K. wrote:The same problems as in the membership discussion appear also here, if the clubs are the voters. It would be the same as if in FISTF the big countries would have votes based on amount of players and clubs. The decisions would be different, but the main problem (countries are different) still exists.

Heinz Eder wrote:You should ask all those questions to the current board.
Don't say that an european association would be FISTF, that's not the sense of such an association. Honestly I think the time has come to ask if the system of associations as members is the correct one. Currently I think associations only should "manage" the national tablesoccer but they shouldn't have anything to say in international topics, because let's have a honest look on the situation.
There is one representative from a country who can vote for a board. This representant should represent the board and the players of an association. Do you really think that there was a voting in a single country about it, to whom such a representative should give his vote? They are all instructed by the board or even only the president. Additionally I think that in many countries there are people only in a board that the association still exists. not the best condition.
FISTF should work for players and clubs, so maybe the clubs should be members and be allowed to vote for the FISTF Board, instead of associations. The clubs are travelling around and play international tournaments, not the presidents of an association (in most cases).
The boards of associations should only concentrate on the national level, I think that's enough work to do. I also think that you will find more interested people in clubs to work in FISTF, because if the clubs are your contact you reach much more people than now, if you send something to a president of an association without knowing if the message will come to all members of that association too.

Do you think something like that will be realized in FISTF?
What do you think about that?

That's only an idea, I don't know if the majority of people like it or not, but I still think about it what can be improved for the future and that I post here. Maybe that could also be an input for the council!?

von K. wrote:I couldn't find a reason for doing this.

I could find reasons against this. For example:

- the FISTF at the moment is a european federation
- this would be more important for europeans, so others would definitely be out of any activity, even more than now
- who would do the work in two federations, no one and the other (FISTF) would struggle

If the reason is change in some things, it's much better to do in FISTF. The sky is the limit for possible solutions. The only thing needed is the knowledge of what different people need and want. And of course the will to do things considering those needs and wants.

Ι like your dialogue. I sent the summer in this forum a proposal for european federation.
But now if i understood your words your discussion is because you have problem to ask elections by this BoD so you are thinking to create new european federation for to do new FAIR AND LEGAL elections.

I think that is more simple to ask electons in Fistf than to create new federation.
You must solve at first the problem if the national asssociations have players or club for members.
After we can talk for the rest

The discussion is really interesting but in my opinion useless ...

As long as we are not able to have a stable and reliable BoD within our GLOBAL federation we should avoid all discussions and futuristic plans about an european one.

Just a simple question: are there alternatives (persons) to the current BoD ??????? Who should be in the european board and what would be the aim of it ?

Janus

von K. wrote:I couldn't find a reason for doing this.

I could find reasons against this. For example:

- the FISTF at the moment is a european federation

I couldn't agree more. For me it's as simple as the following:

FISTF = European Federation

Zach Walker wrote:

von K. wrote:I couldn't find a reason for doing this.

I could find reasons against this. For example:

- the FISTF at the moment is a european federation

I couldn't agree more. For me it's as simple as the following:

FISTF = European Federation

I don't know how many have received or read the emails by people from Brazil, Argentina, USA and South Africa.

But if those mails and thoughts go unanswered and without interest, then FISTF can just change its name to FESTF.

I saw very important thoughts and willingness to participate in and organise international TF. After that it's useless to say they are not interested.

I know that Finlands view is that this sort (or in general extraeuropean) of activity is to be supported and we want to see FISTF do something to show it's a global federation. We support the idea of important competitions also outside Europe.

At the moment the situation is a disgrace.

von K. wrote:

Zach Walker wrote:

von K. wrote:I couldn't find a reason for doing this.

I could find reasons against this. For example:

- the FISTF at the moment is a european federation

I couldn't agree more. For me it's as simple as the following:

FISTF = European Federation

I don't know how many have received or read the emails by people from Brazil, Argentina, USA and South Africa.

But if those mails and thoughts go unanswered and without interest, then FISTF can just change its name to FESTF.

I saw very important thoughts and willingness to participate in and organise international TF. After that it's useless to say they are not interested.

I know that Finlands view is that this sort (or in general extraeuropean) of activity is to be supported and we want to see FISTF do something to show it's a global federation. We support the idea of important competitions also outside Europe.

At the moment the situation is a disgrace.

I agree with Von K 100%. Sadly in my 10+ years of playing this wonderful game, I haven't seen FISTF aka FESTF, do anything serious about growing the game outside of Europe, other than the occasional European player travelling to a tournament abroad or by having those outside countries host "FISTF" tournaments.

Actions speak louder than words. The day the "FISTF" World Cup is held outside of Europe is the day I will actually take "FISTF" seriously....

Zach, the same discussion again.
It would be interesting to get your answer to the following questions.
What should FISTF do, that the game in a country grows?
Do you think 1 World Cup helps the game in America?
Do you think only FISTF has to go towards ASA?
The american association also could support FISTF with organizing FISTF events, then more american players would be in the WR and the events would get better and better.
Generally I think that every association is responsible for its own development.

Heinz

Zach Walker wrote:

von K. wrote:

Zach Walker wrote:

von K. wrote:I couldn't find a reason for doing this.

I could find reasons against this. For example:

- the FISTF at the moment is a european federation

I couldn't agree more. For me it's as simple as the following:

FISTF = European Federation

I don't know how many have received or read the emails by people from Brazil, Argentina, USA and South Africa.

But if those mails and thoughts go unanswered and without interest, then FISTF can just change its name to FESTF.

I saw very important thoughts and willingness to participate in and organise international TF. After that it's useless to say they are not interested.

I know that Finlands view is that this sort (or in general extraeuropean) of activity is to be supported and we want to see FISTF do something to show it's a global federation. We support the idea of important competitions also outside Europe.

At the moment the situation is a disgrace.

I agree with Von K 100%. Sadly in my 10+ years of playing this wonderful game, I haven't seen FISTF aka FESTF, do anything serious about growing the game outside of Europe, other than the occasional European player travelling to a tournament abroad or by having those outside countries host "FISTF" tournaments.

Actions speak louder than words. The day the "FISTF" World Cup is held outside of Europe is the day I will actually take "FISTF" seriously....

Therefore, what the Italians say about Germany is correct?

Heinz, it's not about the game in USA, it doesn't need help. It's about listening to the needs and wants of the players and associations outside Europe. But you know perfectly well that all the important FISTF tournaments (majors, Europa Cup, World Cup) are held in Europe. And nothing is done (now or previously) to help the non-europeans participation.

It's a well known fact (if I know it, it must be) that USA has many years asked for more games in the World Cup, and games in individuals for all team members. This (individual competition format, 48 or 64 etc) is always decided at the last moment, which is a problem also for us in Finland. Many people don't want to travel for 2 games.

Why not organise the World Cup every 2 years individual, every 2 years team? And both competitions lasting 2 days, would mean the possibility of many games for all players. The World Cup could also sometimes be held outside Europe.

And why not create a (fifth) Major (or another very interesting tournament with lots of ranking points) that goes around the world outside Europe?

It's hard to see any motivation for USA to pay for membership or organise FISTF events, when non of their hopes or views are considered.

Finally a question. Is there someone who doesn't know what emails were sent from Brazil, Argentina, USA and South Africa some time ago? Those emails gave a clear indication that the will is there, if the will is here.

The game in North America has always been something difficult to organize because of the distances between players. Even when they organize a Grand Prix, an Open or the "America Cup", they struggle to have players from different regions. Almost all te time, there are almost only players from the East Coast.

I can point out the fact there is no real circuit organized in North America, maybe because the Canadians are not really involved in the game anymore. I believe having a north american circuit (under FISTF banner) copuld benefit the game over there as long the tournaments are organized in different places (let's say one in Washington, one in St-Louis, one in California,...).

It's true there is no Major in North America but I believe it's a normal thing as long as Americans don't really make somethng attractive to get more Europeans. I believe the USA would have more credit if at least they accpted to become FISTF members so that they could run a Grand Prix that could really be something attractive for Europeans.

If the Masters was still organized as it used to be (with the top players of the world rankings), it could be easy to give a wild card to the winner of the North American circuit (I believe it would be a good step to encourage the game in North America) but.... there must be a North American circuit.

About Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, Singapore, .. everybody knows helping the small associations was my priority as president. But it looks like the current Board (and the Italians in general) are against all principles to get smaller nations involved (look how they consider Monaco, Australia, India,...).

I have never see the UEFA tellng they would prevent Liechtenstein, Andorra or the Faroe Islands to play international competitions "because they are meaningless".

Vesa, they play the North American championship every year, it is the same like the Europa Cup, but they only play individual, we play only team in Europe.
When they told us that they are very interested to play the Europa Cup because they are not having the number of clubs to organize the same abroad, we were open to welcome them of course. We want them to play team competitions.
People also must understand that we can't realize all the needs of the associations abroad, at the point when they ask for different rules, we have to say no, because it is against the principles of FISTF (even if they seem to be lost currently).

Heinz

von K. wrote:Heinz, it's not about the game in USA, it doesn't need help. It's about listening to the needs and wants of the players and associations outside Europe. But you know perfectly well that all the important FISTF tournaments (majors, Europa Cup, World Cup) are held in Europe. And nothing is done (now or previously) to help the non-europeans participation.

It's a well known fact (if I know it, it must be) that USA has many years asked for more games in the World Cup, and games in individuals for all team members. This (individual competition format, 48 or 64 etc) is always decided at the last moment, which is a problem also for us in Finland. Many people don't want to travel for 2 games.

Why not organise the World Cup every 2 years individual, every 2 years team? And both competitions lasting 2 days, would mean the possibility of many games for all players. The World Cup could also sometimes be held outside Europe.

And why not create a (fifth) Major (or another very interesting tournament with lots of ranking points) that goes around the world outside Europe?

It's hard to see any motivation for USA to pay for membership or organise FISTF events, when non of their hopes or views are considered.

Finally a question. Is there someone who doesn't know what emails were sent from Brazil, Argentina, USA and South Africa some time ago? Those emails gave a clear indication that the will is there, if the will is here.

I cann't understand why you spend so many time writing in a forum for a so simple problem.
The distances out of Europe is very big.
In Europe there are 99% of active players.
So we need another organisation for Europe and another organisation for rest world.
If we ask by players to europe to travel to Australia S.Africa Argentina and Usa then we will see tournament with 10 maximum players.
So the out of Europe countries will must continue growing before ask real World Cups.
I propose in Europe to take place as now every year a Europa cup for players and National teams.
To stop organising Master every year. To keep the money of masters and every two or four years to organise W.C and to give these moneys to countries of outside of Europe. To help them to decide to travel.
A big happening with ALL countries participating in a aythentic W.C.
It is so simple but i didn't ever hear a proposal like this in past. I am not manager but i cann't believe that so many people in BoD the last years never think to find solution for the countries where is far away by Europe.
How many years we lost and how much moneys spended in Masters without reason.

Kostas only 2 small comments to your post.

1. The Masters is not organized every year
2. The american association has about 200 members registered. Imagine they ask from each member 20 EUR each season. That makes 4000 EUR every year and would be a great help to travel once or twice to Europe every season. I don't see any reason to spend FISTF money as long as they refuse to ask for 2 EUR from their players every month.
An association works only if the community is willed to support the association with a small amount, more players means more money for the association.
It doesn't sound very popular, but every association needs money, and so they have to gain that money. As long as there aren't sponsors, they need the money from their members. Associations need to be attractive that members are willed to pay a small amount. I don't think that people will stop playing if the association is well organized and the board asks for a financial support.

What will you tell those players from european countries, who have to buy expensive tickets to come to the WC?

Your solutions are maybe simple, but they are not always fair. Having 500 EUR every year by cancelling the Masters doesn't really help the guys from Africa, Asia, North and South America, because they will laugh to FISTF if we give each of them 50 EUR to come to the WC, which cost them about 500 or 1000 EUR.
I also don't think that money will help that people outside of Europe will understand why they have to travel every second year to Europe to play a World Cup.

kechris wrote:I cann't understand why you spend so many time writing in a forum for a so simple problem.
The distances out of Europe is very big.
In Europe there are 99% of active players.
So we need another organisation for Europe and another organisation for rest world.
If we ask by players to europe to travel to Australia S.Africa Argentina and Usa then we will see tournament with 10 maximum players.
So the out of Europe countries will must continue growing before ask real World Cups.
I propose in Europe to take place as now every year a Europa cup for players and National teams.
To stop organising Master every year. To keep the money of masters and every two or four years to organise W.C and to give these moneys to countries of outside of Europe. To help them to decide to travel.
A big happening with ALL countries participating in a aythentic W.C.
It is so simple but i didn't ever hear a proposal like this in past. I am not manager but i cann't believe that so many people in BoD the last years never think to find solution for the countries where is far away by Europe.
How many years we lost and how much moneys spended in Masters without reason.