Gaixo escribió:I just find it disheartening that you ("you" meaning Spanish Blood Bowl, but also you two in particular) have given up on the NAF.
- I don't know if you've seen the numbers that Sann just posted on the NAF forum, but Spain is the second-largest nation in terms of membership.
- Manuel had a seat on the committee and I wanted him to keep it.
- I would have legitimately loved to have Pako as my vice president, and would have made up a different title for him if he had preferred to help out in some other way.
My point is that you all have the power to change the organization if you want to. Just run someone for every office, every time, until you have enough of your own people on the committee to create real change. Viyullas called me a coward, but I'm the one that's been doing my best to reform this organization for the past 6 years, and without much advice or assistance from the revolutionaries of the world.
I feel like I was always forthright with Spain, even when you made my life difficult, and that's because I really do love your corner of the community. Once I'm gone and the committee looks much like it did in 2013, I think you'll notice the difference.
Hi Nate!
I'm glad reading you here. I appreciate your words and am thankful for your job these years. As you know, I would have prefered a more autonomous stance in terms of rules (the NAF keeping the CRP as the main rulebook, or editing a LRB with its own experienced players) than what we have had, but I don't blame you. I get it that you have to deal with different sensibilities, and that there are people in the committee more keen to yes-saying to all GW produces. All things considered, I think it is good that rules are annually reviewed ... even if the document provided is not one that can be used a rulebook.
That being said, there are some thoughts that I have about the current spanish BB scene, that may be (or not) extrapolable to other nations. I will try to be as succint and precise as my English allows me. No harsh feelings against anyone behind these words:
1) Age. We have seen our demography go older and older. I was one of the youngest players when I started, and I am now almost 32 and still among that category. People get married, have children, lose their jobs or simply die. Many real life problems grab our attention and we reach a point when we "don't want to spend any more intellectual effort in this questions, if in the end the NAF will simply look for GW's approval". It's a mixture of helplessness and irrelevance and when you have more urgent things to think about, you just don't want to complicate your life any more.
2) Economics. This is related to the previous point. As age increases, so does our solvency. We organize some tournaments with nice menus included in the price, and I am the first one that enjoys them. However, this is not the norm in Spain, and I am glad that most of our tournaments try to keep their prices as low as possible. More than 20 € is usually considered "expensive". I know that is not the case outside of our borders. We have to think that it is very difficult for teenagers or students to afford a travel to another city, eat something, and of course staying overnight. I have always said that we should look for people between 14 or 20 years as our main source of new blood.
In addition to this, most of our citizens remember very well the last economic crisis, and some still suffer its effects. Our income is way lower than that of our neighbours from the north, or those overseas.
With that in mind, when the NAF decides to organize a World Cup in one of the more expensive countries in Europe, in a venue that costs... ufff... better not thinking about that... The same goes for the NAf Championship, in Nottingham. I have enjoyed it very much 3 times, but I remember very well that people were surprised by the low amount of spaniards there,
given our total numbers. I talked about that in the committee, and I remember saying that putting a 50 pounds ticket for just 1 mini and some sandwiches was too much, when added to the other expenses. I suggested looking for cheaper venues (following Bilibali's or Reva's examples, which manage similar number of players)... and the answer that "that tournament had a caché that had to be manteined", or something similar. So we have to play BB in a place where medical congresses are arranged, right. (You didn't say that Nate, I remember that aswell).
And after that, when people read that both the World Cup
and many NAFC's have been economically "saved" by the NAF because they weren't able to manage the finances properly (while insisting in keeping said
caché), it is very comprehensible that they feel that distance increased. To me it feels like ANOTHER rescue to the banks, and the least one can feel is some anger. No Bilbali nor Reva have ever asked for 1 single cent to the NAF, as far as I know. And the size of the event is not a valid argument, as I already have stated that many NAFC faced similar issues.
With that type of mentality not only does the NAF deterr teenagers from attending, but also whole nations ¬¬. And the first step in getting people involved is having them playing together. If the main tournaments are not able to gather someone's attention, it is difficult that person will keep his interest in taking part in that community.
3) Lack of faith in the system. I think that our particular national identity is very mistrustful about any distant autority. That may explain some of our past (and recent) political history, but also explains part of our distance to the NAF as an organization. We do not have the impulse (nor the need, this is a game after all) to start a revolution, but we simply turn our backs and say "do not disturb me" and try to keep our lives as if the external autority didn't exist. In the case of real life, this leads to tax evasion in almost all services, weakness of the national identity and probably lots of corruption, but also to stronger bonds with those that we perceive as closer to us and a "carpe diem" attitude that is hard to explain to foreign people. In the case of BB, where no crime is made if we do not obey GW's dictates... It's hard to accept the NAF's will to NOT create and mantain its own rules and independence. So I guess the NAF is perceived as a relatively irrelevant collaborator with GW's authority.
4) The NAF still feels ultra UK based. Paul has hold the Treasurer position for too long. More than anyone else any other position. He has probably done a good job, but it is not healthy for an organization that kind of perpetuation, which basically feels like the power in the shadows. The know-how has to be passed on and the responsibility has to be over the shoulders of a team, not a man. His good relationship with GW headquarters almost nullifies any independence aspiration for the NAF suggested in the committee. I like him very much, by the way. He is very nice and a polite person. I have a good relationship with him, but for the sake of NAF's administrative health, someone else should take that role. Some kind of limit in one's re-elections could be a healthy measure.
Uf, and I said I wanted to keep it succint. Anyway, I have nothing but good feelings for you Nate, and I really appreciate the common sense you put in the committee. These paragraphs are only my personal view of the things as I perceive them, obviously. I do not speak for the rest of spaniards.
Take care, and see you at the Patatonia ; )