Legacy time – the BBF AGM approaches
While in 2012, everything in British sport was geared towards the Olympics and Paralympics, Team GB had successes elsewhere, with their, not amazing, but nonetheless impressive, performances in various international baseball tournaments.
With that in mind, and as the BBF season approaches, the AGM takes place this Saturday, 26th January, in Birmingham; a number of hot topics set to be discussed.
Bear in mind that the following report has hints of opinion among the facts.
The AGM itself was pushed back by about two months, having initially been scheduled in November to make sure that the season had a proper send-off and that debates would take place while events were still fresh in the minds of members. However, it would appear that with the weather and the GB teams playing in competitions across Europe, the inevitable happened and the AGM, as always it seems, will take place in late January, just ten weeks before the first pitch of the league season.
From the various strands of debates raised from the related Facebook group which has seen many prominent voices throughout baseball in the UK add their thoughts to the mixer, it is sure to be a lively event. How often could you say that about an AGM?!
Last year, the main point was around the BBF Board de-recognising the ABUA-GB (umpires association) on behalf of the membership during the 2011 season. That was half-revoked, granting the umpires a vote at the event, but little has changed since and the situation around officiating remains as divided as ever.
Like all sports, the lower level clubs argue they’re not getting enough support, but over the past few years (and at least all of the seven I’ve been involved in British baseball), that hasn’t changed and can’t justify changing unless there’s a huge surge in membership that would make the sport a more enticing prospect for sponsors or marketing (i.e. money generation!)
With the resignation of Mark Salter as the BBF President at the end of the 2012 season, the Board was left with significant vacancies throughout. No President, no Secretary and no Youth League Commissioner for the North among the most high-profile absences, but still the organisation perseveres thanks to its members and wealth of dedicated volunteers.
The topic that is likely to cause the biggest stir is around whether there can be any significant restructures to the BBF or BBF Board to help it operate more effectively and efficiently given the limited duties it currently is able to carry out. With only 46 member clubs, comprising 83 teams, it’s a wonder why there is such a huge level of animosity between some of the more vocal opponents of the organisation with its members, but similarly with so few teams to organise, it’s arguable that more should be done now to make sure that the infrastructure is better able to support those clubs.
One motion brought forward has been to rip out the constitution and start again, and in the meantime appoint an independent board to carry on the duties. The problem here being that few who care about baseball in Britain can be seen to be independent of a club, let alone a philosophy that could determine the direction in which the organisation moves, and to hire a consultancy to take care of the BBF in the meantime would cost significantly more than is at the disposal of the members and the federation combined.
Another major point that could cause controversy is removal of extra votes for clubs with more than one team. Previously, and in my opinion correctly, each team entered into a BBF league is entitled to one vote, meaning a club like the London Mets would receive six votes compared to Hull Scorpion’s solitary card. Arguably it is more representative that each club should get a vote on behalf of its members, rather than each team, but those with more teams are likely to have more members that make up a larger share of the BBF’s membership, and therefore would be impacted more for any changes. Surely, as in all voting systems, the one with the most votes should win, and the one with the most people should have the most votes (MEP votes for the European Parliament, or the US elections, for example.)
I certainly see the flip side – that, as has happened in the past, if two or three of the larger clubs vote one way then it means up to 12 other clubs need to vote against them to counter the vote. This rarely happens because the smaller clubs comprising the BBF membership don’t tend to attend in great numbers, therefore reducing the value of a single vote, but surely this should instead galvanise those who are from smaller clubs to come together and communicate better beforehand. Or introduce phone/postal votes.
We live in a world of 24-hour communication, so if there’s a way to write in to the constitution that a phone call from a member club representative to the voting secretary/chair of the AGM during a vote can be counted then that would surely be sufficient. If it turns out that they didn’t want to vote anyway, or just didn’t care about the AGM, then this possibly says as much about baseball in Britain as it does about that club.
One alternative that has been suggested following the motion being proposed is a different voting allocation – for example, one vote for one senior team, one vote for a junior team and one more vote for a club with two or more senior teams. For example, take Richmond – currently with three senior teams in BBF competition, three votes becomes two. Herts Baseball (four senior, two junior) sees six votes become three. It reduces the chance of the big clubs having too much influence, while rewards them still for having put in the hard yards to get more people playing baseball. However, this could only be voted on in the 2014 AGM, as the amendment to the original proposal was discussed informally rather than formally submitted. I love politics…
From my view, work around improving communications, and within that broad brush improving media activity, is vital, as an organisation that talks more and is more open can leapfrog some of the requirements of having a top quality product, while developing junior baseball is vital for the growth and future growth of the sport; it amazes me how few teams that have been around for more than three years – probably the required time to establish the senior section – have junior programmes.
The BBF AGM pack can be downloaded here.
It details the positions that people have applied to fill, mostly with only one person running, which somewhat belies the discussion that has been taking place but highlights the apathy that is a cultural phenomenon throughout the BBF when push comes to shove.
I don’t mean to sound negative, as I am well aware that the many people running for the Board positions are often senior or leading volunteers within their own clubs, but that does somewhat reduce the amount of impartiality and the amount of time and effort that the person can dedicate to any one role. Especially if they have a job (pretty important, unless you’re a multi-millionaire, in which case SHOW US THE MONEY!) and a family that will ‘selfishly’ eat in to what time can be offered to the position.
So in short – this is the time that people can make a difference in the way an organisation and a sport is run here in the UK, but a lot still needs to be done. Any possible outreach to Scotland and giving the teams in the South West a reason to affiliate as well should be explored. Only a few years ago were Scottish teams taking part in the BBF leagues, and while my efforts to find out what happened there have proven unsuccessful so far, let’s not forget that the past is history, the future is a mystery, but it’s the here and now that can change the course of things.
I’ll leave you with this short maxim by which I’ve come to live by over the past few years. Make of it what you will…
If you want to see the change, be the change.