Victorian F-Class Assoc

[RAVEN]

If I have heard correctly Victoria now has its own F-Class Assoc.

www.victorianfclassshooters.com.au

Good to see another state form an association to further the long range shoot sport we love.

[John E]

Not quite right, Richard. The State hasn't started an F Class Association, and I don't believe that Victoria needs one anyway.

John

[TOM]

Whats the point with the association then?

[John E]

Whats the point with the association then?

It's Ned's brainchild -- ask him.

John

[Fireman_DJ]

Think of it as a union for F-Class shooters???
Let's all strike so we can get better scores!!!

[TOM]

Enough said.

[TTBS28]

Hello All. I am a newie to rifle shooting with less than twelve months action with F-Class in SA. To be honest i thought initially that all States in Australia would have well structured State bodies controlling the local shooting in a democratic way with a national body to represent the State bodies with the Rifle Association. Looking around the internet I quickly found that SA was the only State to form such an association which I found quite interesting. I now find that NSW have a web-site and Vic has also come on board in some shape or other. For the future good of the sport I sincerely hope that all States get on board and everybody works through their own State body for the betterment of the sport. Not sure what is going on in both NSW and Vic but I certainly hope that it is being done for the betterment of the class in both those States. It would be great to see ALL States calling meetings to elect office bearers to form official State Associations to work through in a fully democatic way. Maybe then, in time, a National body could be formed to controll the States on a National basis - would be great to see. Maybe I am missing something in my ignorance but it seems that maybe there are single individuals trying to control the sport for their own agendas - am I right with this or not?

Anyway, it works just fine here in SA and it's the way I thought it should be everywhere.

[Barry Davies]

The State structures are well in place as is the National body-- have been for decades.
Some F Class shooters in some states apparently feel isolated and neglected hence the need for a state representative body within the circle for F Class --so be it. We F Class shooters in Victoria have no such need as we are well represented in state council and have very good relations with our state body.
One Body-- TR, F Class.
Barry

[johnk]

There's arguments both ways.

The positives of associations is that they can poll their members & gain a consensus/majority view on issues of concern.

The downside is that privacy issues mean that what constitutes that association is not subject to external overview so in a hypothetical case, a ginger group with an agenda might purport to represent the whole of a region's participants.

Dealing through a state association notionally permits issues to be canvassed exhaustively, but the dissemination of information either relies on the diligence of each club's secretary or the awareness of the individuals that information is published at state & national level. Feedback in such cases must be patchy at best.

In the washup, I suspect that it might well be the switched on membership in either instance who will & should drive our disciplines' development.

John

[AlanF]

State F-Class associations seem to have come about when F-Class shooters have been frustrated by State Rifle Associations that have not met their needs. Some States have been better served than others in this respect. The situations concerning the treatment of F-Class are probably unique to each State/Territory, with the underlying reasons being quite complex. South Australia is an example of where a need was seen for an F-Class Association, and it was well supported by their F-Class shooters. And I might add that it has been a huge success because of the efforts made by some hard-working individuals.

In Victoria, can an F-Class association achieve the same success? That depends on whether the State's F-Class shooters think the VRA is meeting their needs. My impression is that most are reasonably happy. And importantly, F-Class numbers are growing, and if their representation on controlling committees increases accordingly, I don't see how they can feel disadvantaged.

The idea of a formalised structure of State/Territory F-Class Associations each with a representative on a national body has been discussed. My concern with this is that it would form a major divide in the NRAA ranks, and I believe that's the last thing we need. TR and F-Class need to stick together for the benefit of both.

Its useful to try to predict 10 years down the track - with current trends F-Class will probably outnumber TR Australia-wide. Then we might have a situation where TR shooters start losing their majority representation on controlling committees. Will the need arise for TR Associations in some States? I sincerely hope that F-Class shooters who assume powerful positions will remember the consideration and goodwill shown by MOST of their former TR counterparts, and there won't be a need for TR associations.

[bruce moulds]

alan,
what you say re tr and fclass makes absolute sense.
i now try to think of tr, f std, f open, f tr, and match rifle as all coming under the heading of fullbore.
in s a this is how things are now heading, and this has come about largely through having an fclass assn.
the main beneficiary of the assn is sara, because the bottom line is that the assn protects their rear. prior to the assn, they could never please every fclass shooter, and had nearly given up trying. now they seek advice from the assn, knowing it to be a majority wish, and the assn wears the minority.
of necessity, t r shooters had to make decisions regarding fclass, and in retrospect they did a better job than some of us thought at the time. this was mainly due to us not knowing how the cogs turned, but slowly that is changing.
the safclass assn has never been confrontational with sara, and this has earned us respect and a place on the team. it has also oiled a lot of wheels.
should tr ever need an assn, hopefully they will do it on an advisory basis as safclass does.
bruce.

[Lynn Otto]

Let's play confrontational or maybe just bluntly honest.

Hitler had the whole of Germany behind him or at least the majority of it, or did he, were the Germans ever asked if they wanted to do things his way.

Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili more commonly known as Stalin, presumably had the Soviet Union as his majority but most of them were so busy starving they didn't have time to notice that no one had asked them if they wanted to be a part of the majority.

Napolean was much the same with the French.

Just because someone says they are doing things with the support of the majority doesn't mean they are, not until they actually ask people what they want. Until people are actually asked it is only the opinion of the person saying it.

Now of course this is just my opinion...and I don't profess that have a majority to support it's legitimacy.

[bruce moulds]

lynn,
if you are referring to my post, i don't take your point.
bruce.

[Lynn Otto]

Not specifically your post Bruce, but in part this comment:

now they seek advice from the assn, knowing it to be a majority wish, and the assn wears the minority.

And in part being tired of constantly being told how the Assn is presenting the majority view when not everyone is being asked. Maybe you get asked, maybe there are others who get asked, but there are many who are never asked how they feel about things or even get told what things are being considered. Even when specific questions are asked there have been very few if any answers forthcoming.

I think if Victoria are getting along nicely without the extra level of bureaucracy they would be best served leaving it that way.

I'll get off my soap box now but honestly whether our Assn is working or not would be very difficult to gauge since it has no benchmark.

[John E]

I presume the 5 year plan is still in place, after consultation with the SA masses?

John