OPTION I

Considerations for the future EA Board

Proposing party: Aengus Wright

PROVIDE FEEDBACK

Your constructive and considered feedback is encouraged. Note that feedback that is offensive, abusive, or anonymously posted will not be tolerated. You may not agree with the views or opinions of others, but they must be respected.

To add your feedback, you will need to create an account.

8 Comments

  1. This is one of the best submissions actually for the members. The membership proposal change is a big step in the right direction.

    • I agree with Shahron.

  2. Points 1-4 on page 1 yes, yes, yes and yes. Point 4 in particular, I would love to see EA/PC/ARC/IS to be one.

    For example:
    You can attend let’s say Friend of Werribee HT. There is a an ARC EA80, PC EA80, IS EA80, Amateur EA80, Professional EA80. Includes clubs, schools, professionals and amateurs.

    • This could also help save Pony Club as I have not heard good things of its survival in Victoria at least lately.

  3. Key points 1-6 YES! especially 6, as a coach this sort of cutting corners on basic knowledge has always deeply disturbed me, even myself in hindsight of my early years.
    I wish I could shake my 14 year old ambitious self who was jumping 1.15m rounds and tell her she needs to understand how her horse works in order to train him better before she felt upset and angry that the horse stopped or bucked. Learnt the hard way he had ulcers and a poor diet! In that process my horse had to endure poor welfare in order for my mother and I to learn. We attended pony club and were on SJ Development Squad. I also received regular coaching. However, those management skills, the Equine Theory, was never taught.

  4. I like the simplicity of this structure – sports committees currently run the sports anyway so it would be more about how these committees will be supported by National.

    Certainly I agree that HP needs to be controlled more by National as there seems to be different things happening in different states and that the states have too much power over it – not benefiting the riders.

    I like the structure of the Board as I think that there needs to be a say from those that actually need to implement things as then the ideas like “Ready, Set, Trot” wouldn’t have made it through and money wouldn’t have been wasted.

  5. Thank you for preparing your proposal. I do support the idea that all riding/driving/vaulting members need to pass a “horsemanship” competency test- this will definitely help with safety, horse and rider welfare and should also provide an opportunity for potential members to understand the structure of the organisation, protocols and rules. Currently, we sign an agreement to abide by the rules but there is no surety that people have even opened the link to the rules let alone understand their obligations as members or what is required to participate in EA activities.
    EA has (or did have) an MOU with Pony Club but there has not been any progress with aligning or utilising the Pony Club structure as a feeder to EA which is very disappointing since Pony Club has the structure that includes education opportunities for all members and would be a very useful system for youth development. The High Performance program is in many ways designed to comply with Sport Australia generic sport structures as a first priority so that Equestrian athletes can benefit from funding for athlete development & support at major international events like the Olympics & FEI championships. There is a requirement from Sport Australia to include community sport as well as elite programs and to show how young athletes are developed; for EA this needs careful consideration in the restructure so we can still access SA funds while supporting members at all levels. Im not sure yet from your proposal how your structure is different from the current system where the national discipline committees drive the requirements of their athletes. great to have more information to be considered in the new structure.

  6. Just a clarification – there is currently no horsemanship requirement in hrcav. In order to compete a rider needs to be level assessed but that is based solely on their riding ability and being able to safely compete, not on any horsemanship skills.

Submit a Comment

User Guidelines for the Site

Purpose

The intention of the Site is to provide an avenue for stakeholders of EA to have open, constructive, and respectful discussions on the EA restructuring options and process. The behaviour of users must always align with this intention.

Terms

The following terms and conditions govern your use of the EA Engage website, and by accessing EA Engage, you agree to accept and be bound by the terms in full.

While we take all reasonable care in preparing, maintaining, and updating the information on EA Engage, we do not represent or warrant (either express or implied) the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the content. You acknowledge and accept the website content may contain errors.

Users of EA Engage must abide by EA’s social media and code of conduct policies, and must have read these prior to participating in any forum on EA Engage:

Any activity concerning your access to and use of the https://engage.equestrian.org.au/ website as well as any other media form, media channel, mobile website or mobile application related, linked, or otherwise connected thereto (collectively, ‘the Site’) may be considered by EA and disciplinary measures may be taken.

We advise that all content posted on the Site is moderated after the fact and EA reserves its rights to remove content that does not abide by EA’s policies at its entire discretion.

Any content posted on the Site should not be constituted as expressing the views or opinions of EA, the Administrators of EA or KordaMentha. Any content that does not abide by EA’s policies, such as harassment, defamation or bullying should immediately be reported to the Administrators by email: [email protected].

To the maximum extent permitted by law, we disclaim all liability (direct, indirect or consequential loss) for loss directly or indirectly arising from your use of, or reliance on, the website or its content.