The NRAA - who do they serve?

[Woody_rod]

There has been a lot of chat lately, both on here and elsewhere, based on the action or inaction of the NRAA leadership. How long are NRAA members going to put up with this?

I for one, and sick of the self serving, arrogant people that run our sport. It is time for new blood: new people to drive our sport into the future.

Right now we are stuck with people that do what they want, for their own purposes. They choose teams made up of their mates, and meanwhile, the actual duties they are supposed to be doing fall to the side, such as reviewing and improving the rules we shoot under, or identifying new areas to go into, such as FTR.

There are always plenty of excuses for poor performance - none of which interest me. If they can't do the job, go and do something else.

These create issues for everyone in our sport, and leaves plenty of opportunity for other associations to take members of ours, while the NRAA wonder why their membership in some areas is dwindling.

When they eventually see an issue, such as the F Class discipline that has been around for years; the NRAA then chooses a person that has no clue about new areas in the sport, and calls his own opinion that of the membership without one question being polled about the subject. Seems to me the person chosen was going to toe the party line and make everyone shoot F Standard, even though it has no international relevance. This person should have been voted in by the NRAA membership, not just chosen by them so suit their own ends.

So, when have people had enough? I think after the WLRC is time. The whole NRAA leadership should be replaced by younger, broad minded people that care about the membership, not just themselves.

If these issues come about partly by the consittution of the NRAA, then that needs to be changed as well to include some things that modern associations use, such as:

1. Time limited executive positions. So the people cannot be in the position more than a certain amount of time and then get stagnant as is the case now.
2. All positions must be voted in by the NRAA membership. There can be no choosing of individuals by the NRAA leadership for their own purpose.
3. People not performing in their role can be removed by membership vote at any time.
4. Performance in any role can only be judged by the membership, NOT by the NRAA leadership.
5. Poor team performance means the team selectors must be replaced along with the team not performing. Team selectors should NEVER be NRAA senior leadership, they should be team selectors only, and have no role in the NRAA other than team selection. There is far too much conflict of interest in the current process.

I am sure there are plenty of other areas needing attention.

NRAA members need to always remember that THEY are the force of the association, NOT the NRAA leadership.

[dhv]

Pardon my ignorance ( I am a member of many shooting and hunting organisations but NRAA is not one of them) but are these voluntary positions?

If so, then you are no different to SSAA or any other organisation in that people complain of inaction but come the AGM no one else is prepared to put their hands up and have a go.

On the other hand, as an elected official, you get on with the job as best you see fit, with limited resources and very little practical support, in the hope that you leve the job (eventually) better than you found it.

What more can you ask for if you cant or wont have a crack yourself?

[johnk]

Funny how we all have different opinions about who is self serving.

[Matt P]

Until such time as teams are fully funded by the NRAA or sponsorship there will always be selections that are "interesting". At the end of the day the NRAA generally selects the "best team that can afford it" not the best team. There used to be a small fee charged to every member ($5.00 from memory) to help fund teams but was dropped due to complaining about the majority funding the minority.


Matt P

[John E]

I think you've gone a bit over the top there, Rod.

John

[Woody_rod]

Based on what I have seen, these questions need to be asked.

Saying people are volunteering etc does no mean they can do whatever they feel like etc.

This needs debate by the NRAA membership, with the outcome to better the movement. Right now, there is too much secrecy, poor membership confidence that I have seen, poor performance generally.

I can only speak about the outcomes. The NRAA needs to be open about what it is doing, what they are doing for members. No answer is usually the reply.

It is my right as a member to raise issues I find. If the NRAA or other members don't agree, welcome to democracy.

[Lynn Otto]

Rod a little while back there was an excellent post that set out the structure of the NRAA and our relationship to it. Before you get too fired up it may be a good idea to check that out. Don't get me wrong, I have been known to be critical of the NRAA as well but it is not quite as simple as you seem to think.

In a nutshell, the NRAA is an incorporated body, it's only 'shareholders' being the state associations...we have no direct connection to it at all. Our connection is as members of the state associations, the customers if you like. Now, should we expect better customer service, damn right we should but it still comes down to 'if you don't like what is being done' then pull on a hard hat and get in there and do better.

I've forgotten the exact details but when a position on the 'board of directors' is filled there is a process for nominations and the voting is done by the 'Members' ie the representatives of each state association. So your state association will be your first port of call if you wish to nominate to fill any future vacancies.

[RDavies]

Maybe I,m reading from a different hyme book, but the last person I heard who went on the board was probably the most knowledgable person about all 3 disciplines and is pro F Open. I,m just glad someone takes the job and lets us shoot.

As far as team selection, my thoughts were until more F class shooters show more interest in shooting over seas, the only practical selection criterea is, if you can afford it, your on the team. I cant comment on how it is in TR though, but they seem to get the same financial backing we do.

I certainly wouldnt mind some financial backing for overseas shoots, but if it is like has been mentioned, the majority complaining about supporting the minority, then, they have listened to the majority. Same with F/TR. I would prefer F/TR, but it seems 90% of F/std shooters dont.

[AlanF]

Well I have no problems with the NRAA at all. I'm just grateful that we have people who are prepared to put in the time and effort at that level. Despite the fact that the NRAA has no direct relationship with the shooters as such, it is nevertheless made up of shooters from our ranks, and it is wrong to have a them and us attitude. We elect our State Councillors and they elect the NRAA Board members. Anyone who is unhappy with the performance of the NRAA has the opportunity to make themselves available for a position or nominate someone they think can do a better job.

Regarding assistance with team travel, I don't think the general membership can be expected to help finance the few who travel. And I also think any levy amount which might be acceptable to members wouldn't make much difference anyway. Assuming we have 4000 shooter members nationally (this is a guesstimate), then if we levy each member $10 per annum, that's $40,000. I'm guessing again that we might have 50 shooters per year going overseas, so each one would get $800. That certainly wouldn't be the decider for me - I'm expecting the FCWC to cost about $10,000.

Clearly some will find it easier to afford the costs than others, but at risk of being shot down in flames, I think that in a country like Australia, almost anyone can, if they have sufficient notice (e.g. several years), and determination, raise the required amount for overseas team travel. Its a matter of priorities in one's own life. I have a lot more sympathy for those who are handicapped by ill health (themselves or family) and can't commit to team participation because of that.

Just give me time to get the thermal blanket out, then you can respond .

Alan

[John E]

Alan, I'm with you 100%
John

[Deano 29]

I for one couldn't be happier in the selection of the latest memeber of the NRAA directors. We wanted F Class to be represented in the NRAA and now that is the case there seems to be a FEW who arn't happy. Rod and Linda good luck to you both on your ventures overseas but please dont be mistaken and assume that F/TR is the be all and end all for the future of our sport. We have to many outsiders trying to close us down all together so from where i sit we need to get the numbers up to a point where our voice can be heard. The NRAA is our voice in that respect and i have no interest cutting thier legs from under them.

United we stand devided we fall!!

[bartman007]

I find it disappointing that we don't seem to get the funding for our National Teams let alone the State Teams.

If it was Swimming / Cricket / etc then the money would be readily available through special grants.

It would be nice to see our NRAA officials actively chasing funding for these teams, as I'm sure we have the skills locally to kick some US and UK butt

If the NRAA officials are not appropriately funded by us the members, then should we be looking to fund an individual, to actively raise the profile of our sport with the Government, and Sport grants department?

After all, on a voluntary basis we all give as much time as we can spare. If we are paid to do a job, then spare time is no longer the issue! And hopefully the desired outcome is realised.

[SRyan]

I find it important to know all the facts but sometimes it seems shooting one's mouth off is a much better option???!!!

You are a member of your state and your state is a member of the NRAA. So to start - we need to raise our "issues" appropiately at state level.

As a new councilor for my state association i have a new found respect for people who give up their personal time to assist with trying to make our sport continually improve. I doubt anyonr has the intention other than the growth and improvement of both TR and FClass!

I do however often find it interesting that the loudest people are the ones that throw stones and provide ineffective or non constructive feedback and are not willing to stand up to the plate and put in the hard yards!

Its easy to critise but lack balls to bat up!

But then again, apparently this is a democracy so we all have our opinion!

[TOM]

I find the loudest people load their "mates" pockets with shit and get them to throw it, while they watch safely from a distance!

[John E]

I find it important to know all the facts but sometimes it seems shooting one's mouth off is a much better option???!!!

You are a member of your state and your state is a member of the NRAA. So to start - we need to raise our "issues" appropiately at state level.

As a new councilor for my state association i have a new found respect for people who give up their personal time to assist with trying to make our sport continually improve. I doubt anyonr has the intention other than the growth and improvement of both TR and FClass!

I do however often find it interesting that the loudest people are the ones that throw stones and provide ineffective or non constructive feedback and are not willing to stand up to the plate and put in the hard yards!

Its easy to critise but lack balls to bat up!

But then again, apparently this is a democracy so we all have our opinion!

I'll drink to that, Susie