UK Press Release

[Bedlam]

all culture bashing aside, The U.S does it and if you ask me paintball is a hell of a lot stronger over there than here

Edit: all you have to do is make sure someone ensures all barrel socks are on outside of the net. and of course there will be reffs to help run the site. but players need to have the freedom to go on the field (when available) play a game against anyone they want and walk off it.

But we are trying to get away from unorganised games. This is the equivalent of football in the park, using jumpers for goalposts (Couldn't resist it ). And the US is a different kettle of fish, not the anarchic country you would have us believe it to be. I recognise the freedom that you would feel but what is trying to be achieved is the foundation of a unified rulebook, unified regulations for sites and organisers and some semblance of being able to take this sport seriously, outside of paintball.

So, a little like sex with an ugly woman, the immediate thrill might be good but sooner or later you are going to realise that it was a mistake to let your standards drop.

 

[O.G reborn]

From a site owners perspective (SupAir), I have to admit that I shudder at the prospect of players running their own games. Now, I am not shuddering at the prospect of loosing revenue but more from the knowledge of all that is required in order to run safe games let alone the infrastructure to support it.

Although not a sanctioned event, I do fully support all that the UK Federation is trying to achieve. I also believe that the board is driven to improve the standard of UK Paintball, not only in the interests of the trade but also for the promoters and players.
The biggest challenge that keeps nagging at me out of all this is the number of activities that need to be undertaken and the lack of available time to do them. Getting UK paintball back on track is a mammoth task, especially if we are going to address all formats of the game at all levels.

Given the challenges that exist and those that will develop as we move forward with this initiative, maybe the most important thing is to ask how we, the non board members, be we players, promoters or site owners, can support the Federation.
In order to support the UK Federation, and I assume that our support will be wanted/needed at various stages in the coming months/years; we will need a clear understanding of what the objectives are for moving UK Paintball forward.

In order to get to that point, we will need to be sure of what needs to be done. It is at this stage that I see where Bedlam is coming from – how does the UK Federation capture all that needs to be done? I would suggest that there are a number of people across all formats that would have a strong view on this; how do we capture all this useful ‘stuff’ whilst minimizing the time spent reviewing, assessing and agreeing a way forward?

A question without answers is not the most helpful approach, so here is an idea. How about commissioning some working groups to take on specific areas of focus and working with the relevant board member to present their findings, recommendations and plan for implementation? These working groups would give the board a wider access to the paintball community, add much needed bandwidth and maybe enable the board to utilize some expertise that doubtless resides within this forum.

 

[Bedlam]

A question without answers is not the most helpful approach, so here is an idea. How about commissioning some working groups to take on specific areas of focus and working with the relevant board member to present their findings, recommendations and plan for implementation? These working groups would give the board a wider access to the paintball community, add much needed bandwidth and maybe enable the board to utilize some expertise that doubtless resides within this forum.

O.G Reborn, my question was good but your answer was better. Setting given timelines for these working groups would enable the board to set realistic goals and milestones. This has to be the foundation that is needed to drive the changes forward with any pace.

 

[TomMcTaf]

From a site owners perspective (SupAir), I have to admit that I shudder at the prospect of players running their own games. Now, I am not shuddering at the prospect of loosing revenue but more from the knowledge of all that is required in order to run safe games let alone the infrastructure to support it.

Although not a sanctioned event, I do fully support all that the UK Federation is trying to achieve. I also believe that the board is driven to improve the standard of UK Paintball, not only in the interests of the trade but also for the promoters and players.
The biggest challenge that keeps nagging at me out of all this is the number of activities that need to be undertaken and the lack of available time to do them. Getting UK paintball back on track is a mammoth task, especially if we are going to address all formats of the game at all levels.

Given the challenges that exist and those that will develop as we move forward with this initiative, maybe the most important thing is to ask how we, the non board members, be we players, promoters or site owners, can support the Federation.
In order to support the UK Federation, and I assume that our support will be wanted/needed at various stages in the coming months/years; we will need a clear understanding of what the objectives are for moving UK Paintball forward.

In order to get to that point, we will need to be sure of what needs to be done. It is at this stage that I see where Bedlam is coming from – how does the UK Federation capture all that needs to be done? I would suggest that there are a number of people across all formats that would have a strong view on this; how do we capture all this useful ‘stuff’ whilst minimizing the time spent reviewing, assessing and agreeing a way forward?

A question without answers is not the most helpful approach, so here is an idea. How about commissioning some working groups to take on specific areas of focus and working with the relevant board member to present their findings, recommendations and plan for implementation? These working groups would give the board a wider access to the paintball community, add much needed bandwidth and maybe enable the board to utilize some expertise that doubtless resides within this forum.

Don’t flame me for this. . .


Reading you post, I think straight away of a projects "needs and benefits" and "scope realisation". In essence this is what the board is trying to set up right? A project to bring paintball back on its feet within the UK? Now I am probably preaching to the converted, but all of this can be and should be very structured. Proven methods of managing something with success, straight out of a text book. But there are several key things to keep people engaged, like working groups which have been suggested, which will bring value to what is being done. I would also suggest, writing things down! This is fundamental, Ie documentation, project plan, stakeholder plans, programme, requirements statement etc etc, all of which should be signed off by the board. This will set the target for what you are trying to achieve. Remember though, there have to be realistic goals within given times.

Now that was a bit of a quick rant, and maybe 101 in management, but I honestly thinking setting up a structure like this would bring benefits to what you are trying to do.

Tom

 

[O.G reborn]

Don’t flame me for this. . .


Reading you post, I think straight away of a projects "needs and benefits" and "scope realisation". In essence this is what the board is trying to set up right? A project to bring paintball back on its feet within the UK? Now I am probably preaching to the converted, but all of this can be and should be very structured. Proven methods of managing something with success, straight out of a text book. But there are several key things to keep people engaged, like working groups which have been suggested, which will bring value to what is being done. I would also suggest, writing things down! This is fundamental, Ie documentation, project plan, stakeholder plans, programme, requirements statement etc etc, all of which should be signed off by the board. This will set the target for what you are trying to achieve. Remember though, there have to be realistic goals within given times.

Now that was a bit of a quick rant, and maybe 101 in management, but I honestly thinking setting up a structure like this would bring benefits to what you are trying to do.

Tom

Yep agreed - that said, I feel reasonably certain that the current board members are adopting many of these principles. My point was more around approach than process i.e. distributing the workload and using any available expertise,whether on the board or not, to deliver the most value (or if reading from the consulting book of cliches "the biggest bang for your buck")

 

[Robbo]

So, the points you make are ones that I agree with, but as you have said" that was a given". I think what I was after was more about ensuring what others have mentioned (consideration for all aspects of paintball) and ensuring that the board is steered by the chairman with a view to the big picture whilst ensuring the future of our sport at all levels.

I do not doubt the qualification or capability of anyone on the board to make those decisions. My statement "Whether we question those decisions or not, fair representation to our players, traders, site owners and organisers on the basis of the majority is necessary, even demanded" was intended to strike at the heart of "making decisions because we can" over "making decisions because we need to". I do believe that it is easy to slip from "need to" to "can" and that doesn't help the community at large..

I am beginning to sound a little preachy for my own tastes and for that I apologise. We sit on the outside of this process and hope that our vision of a unified paintball community is in-line with that of the board. We can take your word that it is but until those changes come tumbling down, we just can't know for sure.

We may metaphorically be sitting at that table with you but that also means that actually, we must ensure that the board does the right thing. Only time will tell with that.

You seem to be implying I am gonna fall victim to some heady brew of powerade which is kinda premature to say the least; the 'can' and 'need' point you make is somewhat negative and basically unnecessary.

Of course you can now rebut and suggest 'it's not unnecessary', and in essence, you may be right, but I am certainly not gonna get bogged down in 'what ifs'? ...there are far too many of them for me to worry about.

And as for you suggesting 'we must ensure that the board does the right thing' , I'm afraid not mate, it is we, the board who will make sure we do the right thing.
We just cannot get to any sort of point whereby we are nothing more than a puppet board amid the clamour of every person who cares to express a need.


The only way we are gonna get anywhere is by creating an organised body that has the necessary experience and clout within the sport, which is exactly what we have just done.
And then the most important part ........we have to have the trust of everybody else out there who we represent ......it would seem you don't trust me or the rest of the board to fully represent anybody without running the risk of getting too big for our boots.
Well if and when it happens, I'm sure you'll let me know

 

[Bedlam]

You seem to be implying I am gonna fall victim to some heady brew of powerade which is kinda premature to say the least; the 'can' and 'need' point you make is somewhat negative and basically unnecessary.

Of course you can now rebut and suggest 'it's not unnecessary', and in essence, you may be right, but I am certainly not gonna get bogged down in 'what ifs'? ...there are far too many of them for me to worry about.

And as for you suggesting 'we must ensure that the board does the right thing' , I'm afraid not mate, it is we, the board who will make sure we do the right thing.
We just cannot get to any sort of point whereby we are nothing more than a puppet board amid the clamour of every person who cares to express a need.


The only way we are gonna get anywhere is by creating an organised body that has the necessary experience and clout within the sport, which is exactly what we have just done.
And then the most important part ........we have to have the trust of everybody else out there who we represent ......it would seem you don't trust me or the rest of the board to fully represent anybody without running the risk of getting too big for our boots.
Well if and when it happens, I'm sure you'll let me know

The baseline is I agree with the idea of the board. That I have maintained all along. As for you or them on a power trip, never mentioned it and thats not in question here. But you do say "The board will make sure the board does the right thing" and then strangely enough, you then go and make the point I am trying to drive at

we have to have the trust of everybody else out there who we represent

Sort of some mixed messages there. But, you are right. They do have to have the trust of those who you represent and at this moment, I want to trust you but we have no basis to trust the UKPBF....yet. Only time will tell.

And lets be honest, if you did get too big for your boots, would you listen to anyone?

 

[Ainsley]

I'm coming back in here again as I’m finding this thread very interesting.

Further to what I've already said, as far as a board is concerned, I feel that it is absolutely necessary. Too many cooks (no pun intended cook$) spoil the broth. Final decisions have to be made and those decisions should be made by people who have been at the frontier of the sport from the beginning.

However, to say that this group of people alone will felicitate enough change in a relevant period of time is unlikely to say the least.

The easiest way of dividing up the responsibility is through Counties, each with their own small board who then report to the Gods. In turn, the main board has a channel which it can pass rules and regulations through. When you break the Country down like this, how many sites on average is a board responsible for? 10 at the most? This is far more realistic in my opinion. This board can than work with the sites, making sure things are put into place. There is also then a clear chain of authority.

The U.S does it and if you ask me paintball is a hell of a lot stronger over there than here

I disagree. There are 306,000,000 people in the USA compared to only 61,500,000 in the UK. It appears stronger, but only due to the sheer size of market. What you are talking about here would kill the sport and strip it of any credibility. We don't need to force it underground, we need 'clubs' if you like, places to promote and guide new players.....Under 18s teams to bring through the next generation of players etc.

No one likes red tape, but it is fundamental to our goal.

 

[O.G reborn]

Sort of some mixed messages there. But, you are right. They do have to have the trust of those who you represent and at this moment, I want to trust you but we have no basis to trust the UKPBF....yet. Only time will tell.

Surely we start this process with the presumption of trust? After all, as far as I am aware, none of the board members have anything other than a trustworthy name in paintball.

 

[Robbo]

The baseline is I agree with the idea of the board. That I have maintained all along. As for you or them on a power trip, never mentioned it and thats not in question here. But you do say "The board will make sure the board does the right thing" and then strangely enough, you then go and make the point I am trying to drive at

we have to have the trust of everybody else out there who we represent

Sort of some mixed messages there. But, you are right. They do have to have the trust of those who you represent and at this moment, I want to trust you but we have no basis to trust the UKPBF....yet. Only time will tell.

And lets be honest, if you did get too big for your boots, would you listen to anyone?

If you believe I have indulged myself in mixed messages, then you have misunderstood me.
The power-trip point was made because of the 'need' to 'can' statement and this transition can only be made when the people making those decisions become lax in terms of responsibility ...i think that might constitute some sort of power-trip, leastwise in my book it does.

And as for what you believe is the metaphorical thrust thru my heart where you suggest I am giving out mixed messages?
I have just read, and re read what I said you think is 'strange' ... just because the board sets out to do the right thing, is no way, contradictory or anomalous to us having the trust of the players ... they are not mutually exclusive, in fact, they are complimentary.
Now, I'm not gonna bogged down in some meaningless semantics debate with you because I have better things to do but I will continue this rebuttal with your last point, and one that seems to be more personal.

If I get too big for my boots???

You gotta be kiddin me man, you're waaaaayyyy too late for that, my middle name is Sasquatch