Wcra Mandatory Rules

[Joanna]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

Bertha and Hannah,

We all know it is impossible to prove parentage of this litter as the sire is allegedly dead. This is the route of the problem and now it will never be proved one way or another. There is no evidence that is without doubt, the WCRA have made a JUDGEMENT it is not and will never be proved. I feel sorry for those ofyou who remain deluded that there is proof. Admirable to support your friends, I agree, but you, I and every-one on the outside will NEVER know the real truth. All that remains to decide is the issue of affilliation to a body who believes the tale or one who doesn't. Simple Hey!

 

[dolly]

I cannot believe the personal attacks by mainly section leaders on here, FFS people i would hate for any of you to be a jury in a court of law, no fair trial there

 

[Joanna]

I cannot believe the personal attacks by mainly section leaders on here, FFS people i would hate for any of you to be a jury in a court of law, no fair trial there

Sadly for us racers Helen, there is reasonable doubt. Luckily, we have an alternative organisation to race with, and clubs that will not affilliate to run with. There is a choice for those of us who see what is before our eyes.

 

[BeeJay]

I cannot believe the personal attacks by mainly section leaders on here, FFS people i would hate for any of you to be a jury in a court of law, no fair trial there

I've missed it what personal attacks. No one has made any personal attacks on anyone. Methinks that you must know something that I don't. Or maybe posts have been removed that I haven't seen.

I don't know what you are on about Helen and Anne. We are discussing a mandatory rule and various communications from the WCRA we aren't talking about anything else. Why would we. It's dead, it's over, it's gone.

It won't work your trying to drag us back to the misery again. We have moved on and we aren't going back to the misery. It saddens me to talk to or read articles by some of my fellow racers who are still there stuck in the mess, frustrated and upset. Most of us racers just aren't in that place anymore.

This is a good and informative topic folks (I've learned from reading others views) lets not let some board members close it because they don't understand what it's about.

 

[Paul Chappell]

Reading this topic it appears that mark roberts has answered the question asked but it seems that certain people from the NPWRA will not settle for anything less than "our way or the highway", they will not rest until they see the end of the WCRA, the WCRA seem to want to support all pedigree whippet racing regardless of who runs it, but the NPWRA want to destroy everyone who does not agree with their opinions, how difficult are the NPWRA making things for racers who just want to choose what they feel is right for their dogs, IMO the NPWRA members should just continue with what they feel is right for themselves, Im not saying they should not have an opinion but im sure constructive critisism far outways destructive comments.

LETS SUPPORT PEDIGREE WHIPPET RACING WHOEVER YOU CHOOSE TO RACE WITH

 

[BeeJay]

Reading this topic it appears that mark roberts has answered the question asked but it seems that certain people from the NPWRA will not settle for anything less than "our way or the highway", they will not rest until they see the end of the WCRA, the WCRA seem to want to support all pedigree whippet racing regardless of who runs it, but the NPWRA want to destroy everyone who does not agree with their opinions, how difficult are the NPWRA making things for racers who just want to choose what they feel is right for their dogs, IMO the NPWRA members should just continue with what they feel is right for themselves, Im not saying they should not have an opinion but im sure constructive critisism far outways destructive comments.

LETS SUPPORT PEDIGREE WHIPPET RACING WHOEVER YOU CHOOSE TO RACE WITH

You ARE being somewhat personal in your post Paul. But you are quite correct in that I don't believe that a letter can overrule a mandatory rule. I'm afraid that rules are facts, they exist and they are there for a reason.

You know the mandatory rules as well as I do, you must as you were WCRA secretary for many years.

So you are perfectly well aware that if a club affliates to the WCRA then it adopts the WCRA's mandatory rules and agrees to abide by them. Mark Roberts gave us his opinion based on his interpretation of a letter written by the WCRA to the clubs. Are you now going to put in writing that the WCRA isn't going to enforce it's mandatory rule 6 and that that rule has been superseeded. Or are the WCRA going to seek to revoke mandatory rule 6 at The Whippet Club AGM.

If you are going to put it in writing that mandatory rule 6 isn't going to be enforced exactly what position of authority in the WCRA do you hold. Racers need to know just in case they need to quote you.

I have absolutely no problem with clubs affliating and the NPWRA as an organisation have never sought to contol the clubs in anyway. I do however have a problem with club members AND committee members NOT being aware of WCRA mandatory rule 6.

Just to set the record straight. The NPWRA are 112 people who choose to race their KC registered, pedigree dogs, they are all active racers. Surely you can't believe that 112 racers want to see the end of the WCRA. That's 112 members with voting rights. 112 members with the right to ask for a National vote on anything that affects the way that they race their dogs. 112 members who can stand for election to the committee and if at the end of the year they don't like the way that the racing has been organised can vote off that committee.

The NPWRA have NOT made anything difficult for racers, what they have done is offered an alternative - basically somewhere else to race where they will be / can be listened to. In a moment of utter despair for so many racers we acted to try to change things, rather than talk about doing something or just accepting that things can't change.

We've moved on to a better place. TBH as far as I'm concerned the WCRA is an irrelevance. However my fellow racers aren't and never will be.

 

[peppermint lady]

Reading this topic it appears that mark roberts has answered the question asked but it seems that certain people from the NPWRA will not settle for anything less than "our way or the highway", they will not rest until they see the end of the WCRA, the WCRA seem to want to support all pedigree whippet racing regardless of who runs it, but the NPWRA want to destroy everyone who does not agree with their opinions, how difficult are the NPWRA making things for racers who just want to choose what they feel is right for their dogs, IMO the NPWRA members should just continue with what they feel is right for themselves, Im not saying they should not have an opinion but im sure constructive critisism far outways destructive comments.

LETS SUPPORT PEDIGREE WHIPPET RACING WHOEVER YOU CHOOSE TO RACE WITH

You ARE being somewhat personal in your post Paul. But you are quite correct in that I don't believe that a letter can overrule a mandatory rule. I'm afraid that rules are facts, they exist and they are there for a reason.

You know the mandatory rules as well as I do, you must as you were WCRA secretary for many years.

So you are perfectly well aware that if a club affliates to the WCRA then it adopts the WCRA's mandatory rules and agrees to abide by them. Mark Roberts gave us his opinion based on his interpretation of a letter written by the WCRA to the clubs. Are you now going to put in writing that the WCRA isn't going to enforce it's mandatory rule 6 and that that rule has been superseeded. Or are the WCRA going to seek to revoke mandatory rule 6 at The Whippet Club AGM.

If you are going to put it in writing that mandatory rule 6 isn't going to be enforced exactly what position of authority in the WCRA do you hold. Racers need to know just in case they need to quote you.

I have absolutely no problem with clubs affliating and the NPWRA as an organisation have never sought to contol the clubs in anyway. I do however have a problem with club members AND committee members NOT being aware of WCRA mandatory rule 6.

Just to set the record straight. The NPWRA are 112 people who choose to race their KC registered, pedigree dogs, they are all active racers. Surely you can't believe that 112 racers want to see the end of the WCRA. That's 112 members with voting rights. 112 members with the right to ask for a National vote on anything that affects the way that they race their dogs. 112 members who can stand for election to the committee and if at the end of the year they don't like the way that the racing has been organised can vote off that committee.

The NPWRA have NOT made anything difficult for racers, what they have done is offered an alternative - basically somewhere else to race where they will be / can be listened to. In a moment of utter despair for so many racers we acted to try to change things, rather than talk about doing something or just accepting that things can't change.

We've moved on to a better place. TBH as far as I'm concerned the WCRA is an irrelevance. However my fellow racers aren't and never will be.

here here........

this is why your on the npwra committee

 

[Paul Chappell]

Reading this topic it appears that mark roberts has answered the question asked but it seems that certain people from the NPWRA will not settle for anything less than "our way or the highway", they will not rest until they see the end of the WCRA, the WCRA seem to want to support all pedigree whippet racing regardless of who runs it, but the NPWRA want to destroy everyone who does not agree with their opinions, how difficult are the NPWRA making things for racers who just want to choose what they feel is right for their dogs, IMO the NPWRA members should just continue with what they feel is right for themselves, Im not saying they should not have an opinion but im sure constructive critisism far outways destructive comments.

LETS SUPPORT PEDIGREE WHIPPET RACING WHOEVER YOU CHOOSE TO RACE WITH

You ARE being somewhat personal in your post Paul. But you are quite correct in that I don't believe that a letter can overrule a mandatory rule. I'm afraid that rules are facts, they exist and they are there for a reason.

You know the mandatory rules as well as I do, you must as you were WCRA secretary for many years.

So you are perfectly well aware that if a club affliates to the WCRA then it adopts the WCRA's mandatory rules and agrees to abide by them. Mark Roberts gave us his opinion based on his interpretation of a letter written by the WCRA to the clubs. Are you now going to put in writing that the WCRA isn't going to enforce it's mandatory rule 6 and that that rule has been superseeded. Or are the WCRA going to seek to revoke mandatory rule 6 at The Whippet Club AGM.

If you are going to put it in writing that mandatory rule 6 isn't going to be enforced exactly what position of authority in the WCRA do you hold. Racers need to know just in case they need to quote you.

I have absolutely no problem with clubs affliating and the NPWRA as an organisation have never sought to contol the clubs in anyway. I do however have a problem with club members AND committee members NOT being aware of WCRA mandatory rule 6.

Just to set the record straight. The NPWRA are 112 people who choose to race their KC registered, pedigree dogs, they are all active racers. Surely you can't believe that 112 racers want to see the end of the WCRA. That's 112 members with voting rights. 112 members with the right to ask for a National vote on anything that affects the way that they race their dogs. 112 members who can stand for election to the committee and if at the end of the year they don't like the way that the racing has been organised can vote off that committee.

The NPWRA have NOT made anything difficult for racers, what they have done is offered an alternative - basically somewhere else to race where they will be / can be listened to. In a moment of utter despair for so many racers we acted to try to change things, rather than talk about doing something or just accepting that things can't change.

We've moved on to a better place. TBH as far as I'm concerned the WCRA is an irrelevance. However my fellow racers aren't and never will be.

Im very pleased you feel you have moved on to a better place, but if you truly believe that the NPWRA have not made things difficult for for racers and also clubs may i suggest you remove your head from the very dark place that it is at this moment, As you said when we spoke at Ragley Hall that the WCRA would not continue in 2010 because you had been told so. What Committe member told you that.

As you are well aware I am not on the committee so why would I put anything in writing.

Wishing you a HAPPY NEW YEAR

 

[Paul Chappell]

Reading this topic it appears that mark roberts has answered the question asked but it seems that certain people from the NPWRA will not settle for anything less than "our way or the highway", they will not rest until they see the end of the WCRA, the WCRA seem to want to support all pedigree whippet racing regardless of who runs it, but the NPWRA want to destroy everyone who does not agree with their opinions, how difficult are the NPWRA making things for racers who just want to choose what they feel is right for their dogs, IMO the NPWRA members should just continue with what they feel is right for themselves, Im not saying they should not have an opinion but im sure constructive critisism far outways destructive comments.

LETS SUPPORT PEDIGREE WHIPPET RACING WHOEVER YOU CHOOSE TO RACE WITH

You ARE being somewhat personal in your post Paul. But you are quite correct in that I don't believe that a letter can overrule a mandatory rule. I'm afraid that rules are facts, they exist and they are there for a reason.

You know the mandatory rules as well as I do, you must as you were WCRA secretary for many years.

So you are perfectly well aware that if a club affliates to the WCRA then it adopts the WCRA's mandatory rules and agrees to abide by them. Mark Roberts gave us his opinion based on his interpretation of a letter written by the WCRA to the clubs. Are you now going to put in writing that the WCRA isn't going to enforce it's mandatory rule 6 and that that rule has been superseeded. Or are the WCRA going to seek to revoke mandatory rule 6 at The Whippet Club AGM.

If you are going to put it in writing that mandatory rule 6 isn't going to be enforced exactly what position of authority in the WCRA do you hold. Racers need to know just in case they need to quote you.

I have absolutely no problem with clubs affliating and the NPWRA as an organisation have never sought to contol the clubs in anyway. I do however have a problem with club members AND committee members NOT being aware of WCRA mandatory rule 6.

Just to set the record straight. The NPWRA are 112 people who choose to race their KC registered, pedigree dogs, they are all active racers. Surely you can't believe that 112 racers want to see the end of the WCRA. That's 112 members with voting rights. 112 members with the right to ask for a National vote on anything that affects the way that they race their dogs. 112 members who can stand for election to the committee and if at the end of the year they don't like the way that the racing has been organised can vote off that committee.

The NPWRA have NOT made anything difficult for racers, what they have done is offered an alternative - basically somewhere else to race where they will be / can be listened to. In a moment of utter despair for so many racers we acted to try to change things, rather than talk about doing something or just accepting that things can't change.

We've moved on to a better place. TBH as far as I'm concerned the WCRA is an irrelevance. However my fellow racers aren't and never will be.

Im very pleased you feel you have moved on to a better place, but if you truly believe that the NPWRA have not made things difficult for for racers and also clubs may i suggest you remove your head from the very dark place that it is at this moment, As you said when we spoke at Ragley Hall that the WCRA would not continue in 2010 because you had been told so. What Committe member told you that.

As you are well aware I am not on the committee so why would I put anything in writing.

Wishing you a HAPPY NEW YEAR

Sorry Beejay it was LJH that I spoke to at Ragley, Honest mistake.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Ive set a lot of the post's invisible. ive just noticed Nigel is on so i'll now leave it to him/Judy to deal with.

just what you need at 7am in the morning.

Rae ~ the descussion between myself & Controversial was relavant to this topic and having read it back I think we both replied to each other in constructive ways (as we did in PM's Graham please feel free to correct me if im wronge)

 

[Judy]

Thanks Mark. We were out last night playing with Darcia & Robs Wii. I've made a few of the more relevant ones visible again but there were an awful lot that were too personal, not on topic and an awful lot of Pot, Kettle, Blacking so they've been left off. Posts quoting them have also had to be removed so don't feel to bad if yours was one of those.

Can I just point out that section leaders are not moderators - they are people who are able to start new topics in their particular club forums. This is why we changed the name from club moderator to section leader. We thought it might lead to less confusion amongst those who are wanting to make something of it but perhaps we were wrong.

Please keep to topic and try to remain civil to one another from now on.

 

[BeeJay]

Ive set a lot of the post's invisible. ive just noticed Nigel is on so i'll now leave it to him/Judy to deal with.
just what you need at 7am in the morning.

Rae ~ the descussion between myself & Controversial was relavant to this topic and having read it back I think we both replied to each other in constructive ways (as we did in PM's Graham please feel free to correct me if im wronge)

Thank you Mark. I agree with you re yours and Graham's discussion because you raised something that I hadn't thought through properly.

 

[June Jonigk]

Another thought I had this morning .... If clubs affiliate, then disagree with the WCRA mandatory ruling over the running of "those dogs" - if the WCRA disaffiliates them because of it, does that mean that anyone who has stickers from the club will then have passports that are not valid, as their stickers come from an unaffiliated club? :unsure:

 

[peppermint sue]

good question June do not think we will get an answer well not till the money has been counted ?

 

[Paul Chappell]

Another thought I had this morning .... If clubs affiliate, then disagree with the WCRA mandatory ruling over the running of "those dogs" - if the WCRA disaffiliates them because of it, does that mean that anyone who has stickers from the club will then have passports that are not valid, as their stickers come from an unaffiliated club? :unsure:

Destructive comments again June, sometimes you should keep your thoughts to yourself until you have something constuctive to say, why if the NPWRA have got it so right do some of their members need to continue with this endless attack on the WCRA.

Not one person has called Kim Saxby to clarify Rule 6 so it cant be that important, or has she already clearly explained this in her letter to club secs.

If your aim along with others is to influence clubs not to re-affiliate in 2010 then I think you are wrong, club committee members have their club members interests to consider and I feel they will make the right choices for them, they are not stupid and will not be influenced by people like yourself that have played a major part in the launching of the NPWRA, which I have also noticed you are not on that committee, I wonder why June.

And yes Beejay there is nothing wrong with open discussion but my god how long can you drag this one out for. -_-

P.S Nice message you sent to Bertha, bring back a few memories.

 

[Joanna]

It is incredible that this has split the pedigree whippet racing world.

I find it incredible that you are surprised this has split pedigree racing. The very fact that pedigree racing is a "sport" suggests that dogs should compete on a level playing field, sadly Ann, this ideal was shattered with the passporting of a litter that are dubious to say the least. The body we all raced under let its' member clubs down despite an almost unanimous vote to suspend passports of the litter. We are now given a choice of being told who we have to race against should we affiliate to the WCRA. Clubs have a BIG decision to make, I hope they are all aware of the rule 6 issue and how it could affect the attendance at their opens.

 

[Joanna]

Not one person has called Kim Saxby to clarify Rule 6

Why can't Kim use the WCRA website to clarify issues? We could all have fair and even access to information then. Giving information to secrataries does not ensure that club members are informed. I don't understand the need for secret squirrel, please use a medium we can ALL access, do yourselves a favour and be transparent.

 

[peppermint lady]

It is incredible that this has split the pedigree whippet racing world.
I find it incredible that you are surprised this has split pedigree racing. The very fact that pedigree racing is a "sport" suggests that dogs should compete on a level playing field, sadly Ann, this ideal was shattered with the passporting of a litter that are dubious to say the least. The body we all raced under let its' member clubs down despite an almost unanimous vote to suspend passports of the litter. We are now given a choice of being told who we have to race against should we affiliate to the WCRA. Clubs have a BIG decision to make, I hope they are all aware of the rule 6 issue and how it could affect the attendance at their opens.

good post Jo,

and as for pauls post....reads like another attack on June if you ask me

i dont really care who affiliate this year...none of the Peppermints will have stickers in their passports anyway so, so far il be running with Glouc :lol: :lol:

 

[Paul Chappell]

It is incredible that this has split the pedigree whippet racing world.
I find it incredible that you are surprised this has split pedigree racing. The very fact that pedigree racing is a "sport" suggests that dogs should compete on a level playing field, sadly Ann, this ideal was shattered with the passporting of a litter that are dubious to say the least. The body we all raced under let its' member clubs down despite an almost unanimous vote to suspend passports of the litter. We are now given a choice of being told who we have to race against should we affiliate to the WCRA. Clubs have a BIG decision to make, I hope they are all aware of the rule 6 issue and how it could affect the attendance at their opens.

Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.Rule 6.

The WCRA Sec has already stated "that affiliated clubs can run opens to their own rules if they wish. She cautions clubs to make sure that they do have the rules to support what they want to do - especially if they want to exclude dogs."

OMG. HOW MUCH CLEARER CAN IT BE

 

[peppermint lady]

Not one person has called Kim Saxby to clarify Rule 6
Why can't Kim use the WCRA website to clarify issues? We could all have fair and even access to information then. Giving information to secretaries does not ensure that club members are informed. I don't understand the need for secret squirrel, please use a medium we can ALL access, do yourselves a favour and be transparent.

also by people contacting Kim to clarify, we all know how things get twisted and bits added on as information gets passed along, would it not make more sense if it was clearly in print for us ALL to access