Wcra Mandatory Rules

[Joanna]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

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

Well why don't the WCRA clarify their position for ALL to see on the website website website website website website website website!!! That is how much clearer it could be Paul

 

[Paul Chappell]

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

Contact your club secretary who should have already informed you of this letter, it is the clubs who are affiliated to WCRA and as a member of that club you will have access to any letters sent or recieved but of course that would mean you having to pick up a phone. Im sure its worth it if you realy want some answers

Happy New Year

 

[Joanna]

I'll have to ask Santa for second sight next year Paul. How do we know a new communication has been sent, do we have to become stalkers? Why can't the WCRA use the website? What are you worried about? Of course as you will know, the majority of my club voted to deaffiliate. Does that mean all GLOS club members will never be able to access WCRA info whatever their inclination?

 

[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:

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.

Not sure what memories you are on about Paul, but enlighten me by PM if you wish

The reason I am not on the committee (not that it is any of your business really), is that there were so many other people who wanted to give it a go, it wasn't necessary for me to put myself forward. There were 5 volunteers too many for the committee, (don't see the same with your lot :lol: ) and as I worked so hard with the interim committee to get the NPWRA off the ground, and I am so busy at work at the moment, there was no need for me to put myself forward Just goes to show the support we had :thumbsup:

As an ex member of the WCRA committee, it smacks as pretty desperate for you to come on here and make personal attacks on me. Why can't the WCRA (what's left of them) speak for themselves, and let the clubs know what they intend to do. The fact that they haven't suggests they are keeping schtum until the money rolls in from the clubs, then they will smack them in the face with their mandatory rules. Kim Saxby can say what she likes in a letter to the clubs - I didn't read it that they could run their opens as they wished, and even if that were so, she alone doesn't have the power to change rules willy nilly, they must be changed at a WC AGM :thumbsup: As for her warnings of clubs being open to litigation, she is just making herself and the WCRA look very silly - that brings back memories for me Paul of "intellectual property rights" (w00t) :lol: that gave us all a good laugh :lol:

 

[Markamys]

OMG we are so new to this sport, just starting out with marley and to be honest if i took notice of all the comments put on this website at times, i think we would run away and start pigeon racing . Are people really like this, because all the people we have met are really really lovely dog loving people. i know we don't know the full story but what i am reading on this site is not what i have seen so far when we have been trialing. i just hope this gets sorted soon we are sooooo looking forward to racing our first whippet next year and just hope it is the sport we think it is. All we hope for is that our Marley races against dogs he has a chance against for his sake as much as ours.

 

[BeeJay]

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

To me it is very clear. The moment a club affliates rule 6 becomes one of it's club rules. That's the facts.

If clubs affliate the WCRA may not choose to enforce their mandatory rules but that's not a fact that's a question mark. Will they, won't they. Who knows. Clubs can of course also choose to ignore the WCRA if the WCRA choose to enforce rule 6. If they aren't going to enforce that rule then remove it at The Whippet AGM.

>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,

Returning to this comment of yours Paul, what do you think would have made life easier for racers and the clubs? What do you think should have happened.

 

[Judy]

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

Well you've just demonstrated how unclear it is Paul as you yourself seem not to have understood that if "affiliated clubs can run opens to their own rules" then they have to obey rule 6 as the WCRA made it mandatory for all affiliated clubs to include it in their club rules. Sorry to have to quote rule 6 yet again but rule 6 says "The condition of entry to all opens is a valid, WCRA passport, to be shown on the day of the race meeting." That says ALL opens not just ones counting for Superstars. Therefore running to club rules doesn't help.

Can I suggest that it shouldn't be the committees that choose, but the members themselves.

 

[bertha]

Isn't it time this going round in circles stopped?

 

[peppermint lady]

Isn't it time this going round in circles stopped?

no-one is making you read it Anne, but others ARE finding it a point of interest

 

[Joanna]

Isn't it time this going round in circles stopped?

As far as I am concerned the issue is not resolved, it affects all people who intend to race at opens hosted by affiliated clubs in 2010. There needs to be a conclusive decision on RULE 6 and the WCRA should either have the rule removed from its mandatory rules or enforce it.

Frankly Ann, I think you are just arguing for argument's sake. The problems this year may not have affected you in a great way, but believe me, they have really affected people who live for the sport (and I don't include myself in that, I am more like you, an occasional racer). I have seen what has happened and feel saddened by the spilt in friendships. We have all moved on, and yes, the two organisations can run side by side. The problem arises when you may only be able to open race at a handful of clubs if you decide not to passport your dogs with the WCRA. I may be restricted to Gloucester and Oxford as it stands now. Surely we have the right to know if this is the case? It's not going round in circles, it is simply an attempt to get a straight answer to a straight question from a body who seems reluctant to disseminate information!

 

[June Jonigk]

Isn't it time this going round in circles stopped?

As far as I am concerned the issue is not resolved, it affects all people who intend to race at opens hosted by affiliated clubs in 2010. There needs to be a conclusive decision on RULE 6 and the WCRA should either have the rule removed from its mandatory rules or enforce it.

Frankly Ann, I think you are just arguing for argument's sake. The problems this year may not have affected you in a great way, but believe me, they have really affected people who live for the sport (and I don't include myself in that, I am more like you, an occasional racer). I have seen what has happened and feel saddened by the spilt in friendships. We have all moved on, and yes, the two organisations can run side by side. The problem arises when you may only be able to open race at a handful of clubs if you decide not to passport your dogs with the WCRA. I may be restricted to Gloucester and Oxford as it stands now. Surely we have the right to know if this is the case? It's not going round in circles, it is simply an attempt to get a straight answer to a straight question from a body who seems reluctant to disseminate information!

 

:thumbsup:

 

Well if we are restricted to running at unaffiliated clubs in 2010, you can bet your life they will be fun friendly well attended opens :teehee: and if clubs lose out on entries this year, they will be in no doubts as to what to do next year

 

Anne isn't an open racer, so whilst it might look like we are going around in circles to her, she just really doesn't understand the importance of the issue. :*

 

[bertha]

Isn't it time this going round in circles stopped?

As far as I am concerned the issue is not resolved, it affects all people who intend to race at opens hosted by affiliated clubs in 2010. There needs to be a conclusive decision on RULE 6 and the WCRA should either have the rule removed from its mandatory rules or enforce it.

Frankly Ann, I think you are just arguing for argument's sake. The problems this year may not have affected you in a great way, but believe me, they have really affected people who live for the sport (and I don't include myself in that, I am more like you, an occasional racer). I have seen what has happened and feel saddened by the spilt in friendships. We have all moved on, and yes, the two organisations can run side by side. The problem arises when you may only be able to open race at a handful of clubs if you decide not to passport your dogs with the WCRA. I may be restricted to Gloucester and Oxford as it stands now. Surely we have the right to know if this is the case? It's not going round in circles, it is simply an attempt to get a straight answer to a straight question from a body who seems reluctant to disseminate information!

 

:thumbsup:

 

Well if we are restricted to running at unaffiliated clubs in 2010, you can bet your life they will be fun friendly well attended opens :teehee: and if clubs lose out on entries this year, they will be in no doubts as to what to do next year

 

Anne isn't an open racer, so whilst it might look like we are going around in circles to her, she just really doesn't understand the importance of the issue. :*

 

I do understand the problem, why dosen't somebody ASK the WCRA what they intend to do?????? Surely one of you who are going on and on could ask?

 

[June Jonigk]

Isn't it time this going round in circles stopped?

As far as I am concerned the issue is not resolved, it affects all people who intend to race at opens hosted by affiliated clubs in 2010. There needs to be a conclusive decision on RULE 6 and the WCRA should either have the rule removed from its mandatory rules or enforce it.

Frankly Ann, I think you are just arguing for argument's sake. The problems this year may not have affected you in a great way, but believe me, they have really affected people who live for the sport (and I don't include myself in that, I am more like you, an occasional racer). I have seen what has happened and feel saddened by the spilt in friendships. We have all moved on, and yes, the two organisations can run side by side. The problem arises when you may only be able to open race at a handful of clubs if you decide not to passport your dogs with the WCRA. I may be restricted to Gloucester and Oxford as it stands now. Surely we have the right to know if this is the case? It's not going round in circles, it is simply an attempt to get a straight answer to a straight question from a body who seems reluctant to disseminate information!

 

:thumbsup:

 

Well if we are restricted to running at unaffiliated clubs in 2010, you can bet your life they will be fun friendly well attended opens :teehee: and if clubs lose out on entries this year, they will be in no doubts as to what to do next year

 

Anne isn't an open racer, so whilst it might look like we are going around in circles to her, she just really doesn't understand the importance of the issue. :*

 

I do understand the problem, why dosen't somebody ASK the WCRA what they intend to do?????? Surely one of you who are going on and on could ask?

 

They are not really known for answering any correspondence! Many of us have written letters on occasions, and we never had replies or even an acknowledgement. They are well aware of the situation, and aren't very forthcoming with their intentions. Truth is, I don't think they know what they are doing themselves! But, clubs need to know before they part with £50 a piece

 

[peppermint sue]

Isn't it time this going round in circles stopped?

As far as I am concerned the issue is not resolved, it affects all people who intend to race at opens hosted by affiliated clubs in 2010. There needs to be a conclusive decision on RULE 6 and the WCRA should either have the rule removed from its mandatory rules or enforce it.

Frankly Ann, I think you are just arguing for argument's sake. The problems this year may not have affected you in a great way, but believe me, they have really affected people who live for the sport (and I don't include myself in that, I am more like you, an occasional racer). I have seen what has happened and feel saddened by the spilt in friendships. We have all moved on, and yes, the two organisations can run side by side. The problem arises when you may only be able to open race at a handful of clubs if you decide not to passport your dogs with the WCRA. I may be restricted to Gloucester and Oxford as it stands now. Surely we have the right to know if this is the case? It's not going round in circles, it is simply an attempt to get a straight answer to a straight question from a body who seems reluctant to disseminate information!

 

:thumbsup:

 

Well if we are restricted to running at unaffiliated clubs in 2010, you can bet your life they will be fun friendly well attended opens :teehee: and if clubs lose out on entries this year, they will be in no doubts as to what to do next year

 

Anne isn't an open racer, so whilst it might look like we are going around in circles to her, she just really doesn't understand the importance of the issue. :*

 

I do understand the problem, why dosen't somebody ASK the WCRA what they intend to do?????? Surely one of you who are going on and on could ask?

 

come on Bertha do you honestly think we would get an honest answer or any answer come to that ?

they are very good at ignoring the racers thats the problem

 

[bertha]

Isn't it time this going round in circles stopped?

As far as I am concerned the issue is not resolved, it affects all people who intend to race at opens hosted by affiliated clubs in 2010. There needs to be a conclusive decision on RULE 6 and the WCRA should either have the rule removed from its mandatory rules or enforce it.

Frankly Ann, I think you are just arguing for argument's sake. The problems this year may not have affected you in a great way, but believe me, they have really affected people who live for the sport (and I don't include myself in that, I am more like you, an occasional racer). I have seen what has happened and feel saddened by the spilt in friendships. We have all moved on, and yes, the two organisations can run side by side. The problem arises when you may only be able to open race at a handful of clubs if you decide not to passport your dogs with the WCRA. I may be restricted to Gloucester and Oxford as it stands now. Surely we have the right to know if this is the case? It's not going round in circles, it is simply an attempt to get a straight answer to a straight question from a body who seems reluctant to disseminate information!

 

:thumbsup:

 

Well if we are restricted to running at unaffiliated clubs in 2010, you can bet your life they will be fun friendly well attended opens :teehee: and if clubs lose out on entries this year, they will be in no doubts as to what to do next year

 

Anne isn't an open racer, so whilst it might look like we are going around in circles to her, she just really doesn't understand the importance of the issue. :*

 

I do understand the problem, why dosen't somebody ASK the WCRA what they intend to do?????? Surely one of you who are going on and on could ask?

 

come on Bertha do you honestly think we would get an honest answer or any answer come to that ?

they are very good at ignoring the racers thats the problem

 

If that is the case, nothing will be resolved.

 

[jinnyfizz]

OMG we are so new to this sport, just starting out with marley and to be honest if i took notice of all the comments put on this website at times, i think we would run away and start pigeon racing . Are people really like this, because all the people we have met are really really lovely dog loving people. i know we don't know the full story but what i am reading on this site is not what i have seen so far when we have been trialing. i just hope this gets sorted soon we are sooooo looking forward to racing our first whippet next year and just hope it is the sport we think it is. All we hope for is that our Marley races against dogs he has a chance against for his sake as much as ours.

I do so sympathise with this post!

I have lurked around reading about the contentious issues for what seems like years now (although it's not that long :lol: ) and, to be perfectly honest, I have changed my plans for possibly racing my whippets to lure coursing and fun racing instead.

I didn't make this decision lightly as I have friends who race their whippets and it would have been great to join in with them, but I just couldn't bear all this bickering and bad feeling

Luckily I have had a wonderful time so far competing three of my whippets and my lurcher at lure coursing and will continue to do this in preference to racing.

Maybe when the WCRA and NPWRA have put their differences to rest I will reconsider racing, but until then I shall remain a confused bystander :wacko: !!!

Can I take this opportunity to wish all my K9 pals and their beautiful whippets a VERY HAPPY AND PEACEFUL NEW YEAR AND THE BEST AND SAFEST OF RACING IN 2010 :cheers: :cheers: :thumbsup:

 

[Dar Khan]

Fun racing or trialing ,its all about getting the dogs a run ,happy new year

 

[June Jonigk]

Fun racing or trialing ,its all about getting the dogs a run ,happy new year

Will look forward to meeting you finally at Gloucester when we start back in February Happy New Year!

 

[Smiffy@VeronnaV]

As far as I am concerned the issue is not resolved, it affects all people who intend to race at opens hosted by affiliated clubs in 2010. There needs to be a conclusive decision on RULE 6 and the WCRA should either have the rule removed from its mandatory rules or enforce it.

 

Why? You have your national federation at which you will only run. Why should any governing body - aka The Whippet Club - bow to the wishes of you, or any other person for that matter? They are not there for your benefit, they are there for the benefit of the whippet breed. So taking a run off the end of the peir and into the lifeboat in order to maintain the integrity of racing was a good move in your view. You and those like you have done what you believe to be the right thing. Conversely, the Whippet Club have done what they consider to be the right thing, through the auspices of the sub committee for racing, the WCRA.

 

Frankly Ann, I think you are just arguing for argument's sake.

 

By this, one could read, you are not singing from the same hymn sheet as me/us. People MUST be able to disagree, and without the 'fear' of personal ridicule/insult without it no ideas/suggestions/alternatives are exchanged.

 

The problems this year may not have affected you in a great way,

 

really? You know this, do you? It has had an efffect ON ALL OF US in one way or another.

 

but believe me, they have really affected people who live for the sport (and I don't include myself in that, I am more like you, an occasional racer).

And what difference does that make I ask myself? And isn't this the root of the problem really?? That those who 'live for the sport' deem themselves to have a more vested interest in racing than everyone else and thus to be the only ones whose views have any credibility? No wonder people don't join in droves!! If this is indeed the case, then how come they didn't know about the mandatory rules, I did/do, and I am a club racer only I don't 'live for the sport'?? I will answer that one for you, is it because they never took the trouble to find out what were the rules of the game because they 'only want to race my dog'?

 

I have seen what has happened and feel saddened by the spilt in friendships. We have all moved on, and yes, the two organisations can run side by side. The problem arises when you may only be able to open race at a handful of clubs if you decide not to passport your dogs with the WCRA.

 

Why is this a problem? You have, as the old saying goes, 'made your bed, and now you must lie on it'? I must assume that all the information available was considered by all 110 persons who now belong to the new race body. That each and every person, having considered the evidence, decided that they wished to race their dogs on 'level playing fields' only. Having made that intellectual decision, I am at a loss to know why they would have any concerns about what the WCRA affiliated clubs may, or may not do when organising their open meetings . It seems straightforward to me, if you want to race at those meetings, then your passports/s will have the necessary sticker.

 

I may be restricted to Gloucester and Oxford as it stands now. Surely we have the right to know if this is the case?

Your CLUB, if it affiliated, has the right to know this. But as I understand it, Gloucester has disaffiliated, so no, it doesn't have the right to know!

 

It's not going round in circles, it is simply an attempt to get a straight answer to a straight question from a body who seems reluctant to disseminate information!

I keep saying it, and I will say it again. The WCRA is a sub committee of The Whippet Club. That means it only has the 'power' given to it by the Whippet Club. The Whippet Club would/is/will be (sounds like our Catechism!) responsible and answerable for any problems arising as as result of actions taken or written responses by any of its sub committees. Contrary to the general consensus of opinion, you, I, or any other person in this beloved land or ours is subject to all the laws of this land, so you do not need to have a degree to work out that the Club will have very strong feelings on actions taken on its behalf. Because the WCRA is a sub committee, it is subject to the rules of its 'mother club' and should, before resonding to any controversial correspondence, confere with its 'mother'. As a member of the Whippet Club I would be very unhappy if this was not the case!

 

For those of you who do not know, the CLUB, and not the club members, or their dogs, are the MEMBERS of the Whippet Club it is what the affiliation gives the club, membership of the WCRA. By signing up to affiliation, the Club agrees to abide by the rules of the WCRA. If you don't like what they are doing, then should your club members have the same opinion as yourself, your club can disaffiliate. By doing this, as I said above, your club has negated the need of the WCRA to keep your club informed.

 

I LIKE the Whippet Club. I LIKE the idea that when there is a serious problem they keep an open and unhurried mind when dealing with situations. I ADMIRE them for their fairmindedness. I APPRECIATE their determination to help people to do what they like to do with their whippets in a safe and well governed way. If you don't LIKE them you now have an alternative which was not there before. Which is a good thing. As the meerkat says, 'it's simples' you get a sticker from an affiliated club and you may race at WCRA events.

 

[Joanna]

May I wish you a Happy New Year Carmel.

Many thanks for singling out my post to pick apart, I am actually well aware of all the points you have raised and do understand the workings of the Whippet Club, I am still a member of this organisation.

I think you have missed the essence of my post. Nobody knows if rule 6 will be enforced, it does affect all of us who wish to open race and the decisions that other clubs will be taking with regard to affiliation in 2010.

"I may be restricted to Gloucester and Oxford as it stands now. Surely we have the right to know if this is the case?

Your CLUB, if it affiliated, has the right to know this. But as I understand it, Gloucester has disaffiliated, so no, it doesn't have the right to know!"

The issue has been raised during 2009 when Glos was fully paid up to the WCRA.

There isn't much point in going over every sentence you have written, it would be futile since we are clearly of different opinions, which of course we are entitled to. It is a shame that you have made this slightly personal a general response to the issues raised in the topic may have been more appropriate.