| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

JcCup

Page history last edited by PBworks 16 years ago

<< Go back to previous page

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

For background reading click HERE

Jacques Cochonnet Petanque Cup

The JC cup is a little "fun" tournament which runs in the Wellington region.

Khandallah Vs Masterton (10 comments)

 

This is a permanent record of a MPC Blog posting

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Jacques Cochonnet Petanque Cup

From Fay Doyle: "Hi everyone;

It has become apparent that some clubs are having difficulty in agreeing to a date for playing Jacques Cochonnet challenges.

 

Therefore the executive has decided to put all matches on hold until a meeting can be held to review the current rules which have become 'fudged' over time. It is likely the meeting will be held early next year.

 

It is disappointing to have to take this step and I hope clubs will come to the meeting with a positive attitude towards solving the problems that have arisen.

 

Sincerely

 

Fay Doyle

WPA President

 

Editors note: The next challenge is (was) between our club (Masterton) and Khandallah on November 11th. Unfortunately this has now been scuttled by the WPA "executive" it seems. - Tom.

Update 02/11: A special meeting for all members of the Masterton Petanque Club is being called on Sunday 5th November at 3.00 p.m. at our Masterton clubrooms. AGNEDA To discuss the Jacques Cochonnet issue and all related matters. Claire Wilson - Vice Club Captain.

 

Update 05/11: Good MPC meeting. Calling special meeting with all clubs and WPA.

 

Update 24/11: Special WPA meeting: The Jacques Cochonnet challenges which were thrown into chaos by the Khandallah club and the subsequent moves by WPA was discussed and resolved at a special meeting in Wellington last night.

In my view, members of Khandallah got off lightly. Their spokesperson did give an apology of sorts for their unsporting behaviour: "He apologized for any disharmony and would like the matter to be resolved." (taken from Minutes of Special Meeting). All in all, last night's badly run meeting has left a a sour taste in my mouth. By badly run I mean that Graeme Morris was told that he was running out of time whist he was reading our Masteron statement, and Dirk could speak on behalf of Khandallah when he wanted and for as long as he wanted. What a difference a nice suite makes - it was a shambles. The real issue was never properly discussed. I hope the JC competitions will one day be played in accordance with the original spirit - which has been so badly damaged by the Khandallah club . Our game of Petanque is for me no longer the game it once was. My personal feeling is that the people who purport to work for our game, are unwittingly doing a lot of damage. -Tom.


posted by Tom van Bodegraven @ 9:55 PM 10 comments

 

At 10:07 AM, Tom van Bodegraven said...

".... the current rules which have become 'fudged' over time." Not to me. The rules are as simple as they have always been: You play on the designated date. If a club is so small that it cannot field a team just because someone is sick, or away, this club should be removed from the JC competition by the executive.

 

As I understand it Khandallah has given us (Masterton) a number of dates to choose from as the designated date of the 11th does not suit them. The dates given do not suit us. Bingo, no JC competition until next year. Go figure.


At 12:07 PM, Anonymous said...

As much as I love and respect our dear Madam President, I disagree with the contents of her letter. It is not "some clubs" that is having difficulty with the dates, it is only Khandallah. Because poor, sad little Khandallah cannot get what they want, they go running off to the WPA with their sob story.

 

Last year when we were given our challenge date for the JC it clashed with our club champs. We asked Khandallah for a date change, they said no and immediately deafulted us. Not only did they default us, some of their members took great pleasure at "rubbing it in" at the open triples a short time later.

 

Four days before this years national doubles entries closed, we were asked by Khandallah to change the date of our challenge as they had members heading to Christchurch. (these dates had been known for a long time, so why wait till the last minute). Our club captain contacted everyone who was being considered for selection for the team and asked them if a date change was possible. It was not convenient, so Khandallah were advised that we would be available on the original date which is 11 November. Khandallah then came back to us quoting minutes from a WPA meeting held in August last year where the dates for JC were discussed. At this meeting, it was moved by Brian Smith (Khandallah) that the dates be the 2nd Saturday of each month. It was then discussed that if that date clashed with an important event, then the date could be changed as long as it was agreed by both parties. This amendment was moved by Liz Rocks (Khandallah). Thank you for pointing this out to us, Khandallah, but as both parties do NOT agree on the date change for November, the status quo applies. Thats not good enough for Khandallah so they go running off to the WPA.

 

Funny that Khandallah didn't mention this meeting when we wanted to change the date due to our "important event" which was well after the WPA meeting. And, I wonder what important event made Khandallah contact Horowhenua 2 months ago and ask for a date change. Oh, thats right, it wasn't an important event, it was the just that they couldn't get a team together. A member of the Horowhenua club informs me that they reluctantly changed the date which caused considerable inconvenience to them.

 

I have looked through all the minutes of all the meetings and I can't see anything that states one rule for khandallah and another rule for everyone else. This arrogance angers me so much. All the other things that have been going on lately, the crap to do with the world champs, the way selections are made, the complaint I have submitted to PNZ about late entries being accepted for the national singles, the JC challenge - all lead back to members of the Khandallah club. Is it any wonder they cannot get a team together. I understand they lost another member in the last week or so - an up and coming young player who is showing a lot of promise.

 

I told my club mates that if we did not play the JC challenge on the 11th of November I would not longer be playing petanque. I do not want to be involved in a sport where such blatant arrogance goes unchallenged. I could not "in the spirit of petanque" enjoy a game against people that I had no respect for.

 

The letter posted this morning from the WPA president confirms my decision. I am very sad to do this. I am a founder member of the Masterton club, I love the game, I have made many many friends, but I have such a strong feeling for this that I have to do what I feel is best for me.

 

To the members of the Khandallah club, when you finally disintergrate completely, and I say when not if, you might find no-one else wants you either. You should be ashamed of the way you have conducted yourselves. Graeme Burnard


At 9:26 PM, Anonymous said...

Nothing else really to add to your comment, Graeme.

Yes, we are sharing your fustration and supporting your words.

It's a pity that we have had a WPA meeting with all the clubs on the 19th of October (12 days ago!!) and the subject has been deliberately avoided by our mates of Khandallah, probably to escape a collective talk and a dangerous vote for them. Easier to go straight to an ukase from the "politburo". Process purely crypto-stalinist.

I'll ask my club Windy Hills to pull out of this Joke Cochonnet challenge. Doesn't mean anything anymore.

seb.


At 9:50 PM, Tom van Bodegraven said...

I have informed my club (MPC) that I am no longer participating in the JC. It is hard to believe that the Khandallah people have been so childish about this. If they had simply let the JC go, they could have looked sporting, mature and maintained the moral high ground. I think Fay Doyle's role in all of this is simply one of the proverbial puppet - rather disappointing, and probably as a result of misplaced loyalty.

 

NOTE: I did play for our Masterton club in the December 2006 challenge. I did this because many of our members could not play on the date, and we were in real danger of not being able to front a team - this would have been the ultimate irony. It was, I felt, something to be avoided at all cost. -Tom.


I have emailed this on 01/11/06 to Fay Doyle:

 

"Hi Fay,

 

As a member of the MPC I request from you (WPA President) the following:

 

1) Who were the executive members present when the ruling was made about the Jacques Cochonnet Petanque Cup:

 

"Therefore the executive has decided to put all matches on hold until a meeting can be held to review the current rules which have become 'fudged' over time. It is likely the meeting will be held early next year."

 

2) On what date took this meeting place.

 

3) Under which section of the WPA constitution can the WPA executive make this ruling.

 

4) Do you think as WPA President that not consulting with the clubs involved (Masterton and Khandallah) was proper conduct.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Kind regards,

Tom van Bodegraven.

Update 02/11/06: No reply. Have resend the email.

Update 03/11/06: No reply. Have resend the email.


Email recieved from Fay Doyle on 01/11/06:

Tom

I see that the e-mail I sent to the clubs in the Wellington Petanque Assn region has been put on your blog site WITHOUT MY PERMISSION. What right did you have to put it on? Please tell me what right you have to put an e-mail that wasn't addressed to the blog site to be put on.

 

I REQUEST THAT IT BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY AND PLEASE DO NOT PUT ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT I WRITE UNLESS YOU HAVE PERMISSION

 

Fay Doyle

 

My reply:

Hi Fay,

 

Please note that this is an issue that concerns us, the MPC. This is our MPC Blog. Your email is all over the Wellington region. I have every right to publish material that people email to me. I have every right to inform our members and the wider Petanque community about what is happening to their club and their game. Already one of our members has resigned as a result of the actions taken by WPA over this issue. I would appreciate it if you could answer the questions I emailed you earlier. Regards, Tom.

27/11/06: It is hard to believe that Fay and the Khandallah/WPA people object to me publishing a general (not private) email which was sent out to all clubs in the Wellington region. WPA, Khandallah and Fay are now conveniently using this as a feeble excuse for not answering the questions I and Graeme B have asked in numerous emails to them. Going underground when things get difficult is a sign of guilt and only serves to make matters worse. Just to put things into perspective: here we have Nicky Hager stealing emails from the leader of the opposition and publishing these in a book without any problems! Can we all see the absurdity of the logic employed (objecting to me publishing Fay's email which was meant for general publication) by the Khandallah/WPA people. -Tom.

"All e-mail received by NZPW is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer" "....Please be aware that I do however reserve the right to paraphrase, and use (or not use) your name in connection." text taken from this PAGE.


At 7:55 AM, Liz Rocks said...

As far as I am aware the Khandallah Club has not approached the WPA about the Jacques Cochonnet challenge.

 

When Graeme Morris emailed Michael about the challenge he copied his email to Faye Doyle.

 

If the Masterton Club did not want the WPA to take action, why did Graeme cc to Faye?

 

The Khandallah Club may well have been in the process of deciding on a course of action, probably to Masterton Club’s liking, only to be stymied in mid stream!

 

This is not to say that Khandallah will remain in that position. Contrary to the views of some, we are able to see beyond our own umbilical.

 

Acting CEO position.

As the information highway continues to be full of potholes, I would like to let those of you who might be interested, know, that Michael informed the PNZ executive and Council that as from the 31st October 2006, he would be stepping aside from that role. -Liz.


At 9:13 AM, Tom van Bodegraven said...

Does this mean that Fay Doyle decided to assemble the WPA executive and make a ruling as a result of Graeme Morris's CC (carbon copy). Graeme Morris knows the CC convention well and uses it whenever appropriate. Just to refresh our memories, here is an explanation of the convention of CC:

"There really isn't a practical difference between using the To or CC field. Everyone gets the same message. At work, though, the CC field is sometimes useful to merely inform colleagues of information they might be interested in, but shouldn't have to take action on."
Text taken from this site

 

Does this mean that Khandallah was about to give it to us, until Graeme Morris "stymied" it with his CC (carbon copy)?. I do not understand any of this logic. It sounds more like blame transferral to me.

 

If however I am wrong, and it was indeed Fay Doyle who acted on her own, prematurely and without instruction, I owe the Khandallah club a big apology. Update 28/12/06: I have not made an apology to the Khandallah club, as Fay and the WPA's involvement is still shrouded in a thick fog brought about by what seems like a severe closing of ranks weather event.


At 10:42 AM, Liz Rocks said...

All I meant by that cc thing was that if Faye had not been alerted by Graeme copying his email to her, the WPA would not have been involved.

 

The Khandallah Club committee were in the process of deciding, as I said, on a course of action which would have made that involvement completely unnecessary.

 

I can assure you that to the best of my knowledge Faye acted without any involvement of the Khandallah Club. I just think things have moved a bit too fast - I don't know who Faye talked to/with or whether she took instruction from anybody or not, but I certainly was not trying to shift blame. -Liz


At 11:07 AM, Tom van Bodegraven said...

No one has a problem with the WPA being involved. We are just trying to find out if what happened was ethical and constitutional. WPA clearly states: ".... Therefore the executive has decided....". This indicates to me that more than one person was involved. Now that WPA is involved, it is a shame we are not able to get these simple questions (I emailed to WPA) answered.


At 4:27 PM, Anonymous said...

I have emailed Michael and asked him if all the players who defended the JC cup in October were in fact paid up members of Khandallah. I have not had a reply.

I have it on very good authority that at least one person who played is not even a member of Khandallah, has not paid any subs and in fact probably should not have been playing in any WPA tournament. If this is the case I would assume that Khandallah would have to forfeit the defence for knowingly fielding players not eligible to play. This would mean that Hataitai are probably the legitimate holders of the JC cup. I would be very interested in Khandallahs reply to this.

Graeme Burnard


For background reading click HERE

See also Discussion Document about Jacques Cochonnet Cup

See also Email from Fay Doyle

See also Summer Interclub (Wellington region)

See also Minutes of Special Meeting

 

With regards to the Minutes of Special Meeting The folowing is interesting:

 

"Fay said she took full responsibility for putting the challenges on hold as she felt it would give clubs "time out" but this had not happened – hence the special meeting. Fay also apologised if she made a wrong decision but she had had the best interests of the WPA at heart."

 

"Fay also apologised if she made a wrong decision" (should this read: "Fay also apologised for making the wrong decision").

 

No one doubts that Fay meant well, but what does she mean by:

 

"she felt it would give clubs time out".

 

Time out from what? Clubs were still negotiating. What is in question here is whether Fay acted by herself, with others or under instruction from others. If she acted by herself, she clearly misused her position. My feeling is that Fay was under instruction, and now feels that she should take the blame out of misplaced loyalty. All very sad. -Tom.

 

Update 05/01/07: Fay, Khandallah and the WPA's involvement is still shrouded in a thick fog brought about by what seems like a severe closing of ranks weather event. Still waiting for answers to these questions -Tom.

 

The closest we got to an apology from Khandallah for misconduct was with this line: "He apologized for any disharmony and would like the matter to be resolved." (taken from Minutes of Special Meeting).

 

Top

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.