http://bestxxxhere.com dontwatchporn.pro http://www.xxxone.net dicke deutsche bbw amateur titten von jungem kerl gefickt.

TRU Board Notes – 8/19/2019

  1. Roll Call
    1. Young
    2. Kurylas
    3. Dodge
    4. Tate
    5. James
    6. Tomsak
    7. O’Gara
    8. Hiller
      1. Guest
        1. Roche
  2. Follow Ups
    1. New Clubs
      1. Other Rugby Club – APPROVED
      2. OKC Tribe – APPROVED
      3. North Texas Barbarians – APPROVED
      4. Grand Prairie W – APPROVED
      5. Alliance W – APPROVED
      6. Denton W – APPROVED
      7. Fort Worth W – DENIED as paperwork wasn’t received. Recommending they play socially this year.
      8. Euless – DENIED as paperwork wasn’t received, viability fee refunded and recommending they play socially this year.
        1. Tate: This is really just a recap for our constituents, we handled most of these memberships via email. 
    2. Elections
      1. Tate: We did open voting and we’ve been receiving votes for MD1, Women’s and VP. We had a development this afternoon and Alan Sharpley has asked to withdraw his candidacy for MD1. So that means that David is re-elected.
      2. Young: I will let the MD1 clubs know tonight. 
      3. Dodge: I understand and appreciate the notification. 
      4. Tate: In any event, we’re still collecting votes for VP and Women’s. They have until Friday at 5pm to put in a ballot. Once those votes are validated we will post to the website and they will begin their positions Sep 1 with the new CIPP cycle.
  3. Extend new club requirement of a referee to current TRU clubs?
    1. Tate: We have required that new teams include a match official on their CIPP roster. The question is should we extend that requirement to all TRU clubs? I think that in the long term the answer is yes, but the real question is what sort of timelines and deadlines and such do we put around a requirement like that? It’s clear that we need to make participating in the recruitment and development a given in our club cultures and not an extra burden.
    2. Dodge: What I’ve been telling the teams in the North is that they need to have active referees on their roster. Meaning that they are members of TRRA and are accepting assignments. Everyone will start with Sunday matches and then if they can demonstrate that they have active TRRA referees, matches will be considered for movement from Sunday to Saturday.
    3. Tate: Yes, I think that is a necessity for the North but not as much in South and Central. Where I want to be mindful is when we start talking about folks that are outside major metro cities. 
    4. Dodge: At least from a competition side of this, try it as a pilot program in the North. At this point they’ve had two opportunities to take a referee course and there shouldn’t be a lot of excuses.
    5. Tate: I’m in favor of rolling out the concept and I like the idea of a pilot program. If we approve this for all clubs we need to be affording the clubs that aren’t in major metro areas some grace. This would include scheduling courses etc.
    6. Dodge: I completely agree with that, we need to give notice and the opportunity to fulfill the obligation.
    7. Tate: I would like to propose that we talk to the USAR instructors at the Summit this weekend and see if we can get some referee sessions scheduled in the next 10 months. We’d specifically be looking at targeting San Antonio, Corpus, McAllen, Shreveport, etc. When we have some course dates and locations that we can point folks to, then we can announce the policy and deadlines.
    8. Dodge: I’d like to see this policy as a larger discussion around our partnership with TRRA.
    9. Tate: Can you expand on that?
    10. Dodge: I have some concerns about losing higher level referees to the MLR, I also have concerns that TRRA is a member of our Board but we don’t have a place on their Board. Also if there is a dispute between TRRA and a TRU club, there should be a mechanism for an amicable resolution.
    11. Tate: I don’t think any of those things are of concern for me, at one time we were much closer with members on both Boards. I don’t expect that these will be controversial and I’m comfortable with addressing those questions.
    12. O’Gara: I think the TRRA fully understands that the TRU is our #1 customer and we get most of our funds from them. On the other hand, if a referee gets a call from an MLR team, who would expect them to turn that down?
    13. Tate: I do think that is an issue we need to address, but I do think that is an issue that the referee and TRRA should handle. I don’t think there is a lot we can do if a referee has reached that level and we should encourage them to do that. Where I have an issue is that up until now, we need some reciprocity coming back the other direction to help us with referee recruitment and development from the MLR side. I’ve seen some motion from the MLR but I would like to see something that is more formal and so forth. 
    14. O’Gara: We benefited from the MLR but maybe it just wasn’t that clear. We were able to have MLR ARs do Friday night or Saturday matches before their MLR game. We also found that when our referees were working with the MLR, they were instantly better for it. We also have been able to bring in other exchange referees to help cover when we did have referees doing MLR matches.
    15. Tate: Ok, but I can’t remember the last time Scott or Derek did a TRU match?
    16. Dodge: Is there any opportunity to get any MLR players as referees? It could be a good way to supplement their income and a good way to improve community relations. 
    17. O’Gara: Sure, I do see the Houston MLR coaches quite often and I can approach them about that. 
    18. Tate: I can do the same with the Elite.
    19. O’Gara: They may not even have to have a L1 course, they may be able to step out on the pitch and do a game.
    20. Young: There are some guidelines around referees have to be at least L1 certified to do matches that lead to a National Pathway (RRRC matches).
    21. Dodge: But they could do HS or any other non-USAR pathway match.
    22. Young: Totally, just wanted to put that out there!
    23. Tate: Yes, we’re in a bind but we’re fortunate that TRRA is generating the next generation of referees. That has come from the excellent work from Scott and the TRRA. 
    24. O’Gara: Also note that the first MLR season was almost all exchange referees, last year it was typically an exchange referee and possibly one TRRA referee. This year it may be that the entire referee crew is brought in, we just don’t know at this point.
    25. Tomsak: Is there a shadowing opportunity for younger referees at MLR matches?
    26. O’Gara: Yes, typically the entire Technical Zone crew is working with the MLR referees very closely. We’ve been able to expose lots of young referees to this and they are getting tremendous exposure.
    27. Dodge: Is there anyway to watch a MLR match and use it to train a referee?
    28. O’Gara: If they are radioe’d they can hear everything or the broadcast matches do have a center referee comm live. We are exploring an option that happens across the pond, you can pay a fee and have access to the referee comms through a device. Also at any match that has radios, referee spectators can text the TZ Manager and can have access to a radio if they’d like. 
    29. Tate: Oh, OK. That wasn’t something we were aware of. That is fantastic. I, and the TRU have an extreme amount of appreciation of everything TRRA is doing. We’re just trying to make sure that we’re doing the right thing by our constituent and that our members money is being spent wisely. 
      1. Tate: O’Gara, Dodge and I need to sit down to formalize the TRU and TRRA fee agreement soon. We’d like to start that after the Summit and once our new Board is seated. 
  4. AGM Recap
    1. Tate: First off, I wanted to thank everyone that was able to attend the AGM. We had more participation and engagement than ever before. I’d like to declare that going virtual seems to have been a very good success.
    2. Financials (posted to website)
      1. Tate: With the Boards approval, I’d like to delay publishing the financials to the website until after the Summit. We have some outstanding expenses that we need to settle. Any objection? None. APPROVED.
  5. Summit
    1. Young: 108 individuals are taking courses and 122 course registrations; course registrations close on Wednesday.
    2. Tate: This will be a great event and we’re looking forward to the weekend. This is the first year that we’re offering USA and TRU homegrown courses.  Also as you all know, we did place a small markup on the course registrations as we want to make this event revenue positive.
  6. HOF
    1. Young: 161  RSVPs, ticket sales are now closed.
    2. Tate: The HOF banquet has blown up and this will be our most attended event. We’ve also had several anonymous donations come in from the HOF members. We continue to work towards making this event revenue positive.
  7. USA Rugby Committee Chair Nomination Process
    1. Tate: We talked about this a little bit on the AGM call. Eric Gleason, USAR CFO emailed a group of people inviting “key stakeholders” to nominate persons for these committee Chair. The implication I took from that is that they weren’t likely to consider nominations from just anyone. They are looking for nominations from folks that have some degree, knowledge or qualifications. I do think it’s entirely appropriate to ask our community that if they’d like to suggest potential nominees to send those to us and then we can as a “key stakeholder” we can forward nominations that we feel are appropriate. The key is that they want these nominations in by August 30, so we won’t be able to have another Board call. I would like the input from the Board of anyone that might be a good fit for these positions.
      1. Tate: I’m proposing that we send Eric’s email to the TRU contact list and ask for nominations from our members. Then we can evaluate the nominations and move forward any names that are appropriate. Any objections? None. APPROVED.
      2. Dodge: I think that is a great idea.
  8. Women’s Forum
    1. Tate: I’ve had discussions with Isis of San Antonio Riveters and it was discussed on the AGM call. They have concerns around player eligibility and especially the Austin Valkyries with their player movements. I do want to emphasize that the Valkyries haven’t done anything wrong and do appear to be following the player movement guidelines alongside our men’s teams. This is unique and new to the women’s game so I understand the questions. I did indicate that the TRU doesn’t write the USAR eligibility guidelines in regards to player movement, nor do we craft the schedules as that is a function of the RRRC. I have offered that we can hold development camps for coaching, players etc to help bridge that gap. I do think we have lots of resources in our Union and we can handle this internally. I have extended that suggestion to hold a forum with those clubs but haven’t set a date yet. We’ll be looking for a weekend, probably on a Sunday, more than likely in September. 
      1. Tate: When we get that date and location set, I will publish that out to the Board to circulate to your constituents. We will see if we can’t do some good for these women’s teams.
      2. Dodge: One thing that came up on the RRRC July call was ways to make certain matches more competitive (lots of blowouts). We will more than likely put together an ad-hoc committee to explore this issue. Blowouts are going to happen but they don’t help competition.
      3. Tate: Yes and there is a balance of TRU vs RRRC and who controls what. The TRU role is to help with club and coach development. Scheduling and competition is handled by the RRRC. Eligibility would be handled by USA Rugby.
  9. USA Rugby National 15s Club Playoff Dates
    1. Tate: USA Rugby has given us the planned dates for future events. We know that we had the benefit of the
    2. Young: I did put in requests at the Round Rock Complex for 2020 and we were granted some dates. I’ll have to go back and look at my notes to confirm.
    3. Tate: We also potentially have the SabreCats facility that we could leverage.
    4. Dodge: Are we willing to have the discussion on subsidizing clubs that host?
    5. Tate: I’m happy to have the discussion but I don’t know where it will end up. There is clearly value in having these events in Texas. 
    6. Dodge: Hosting stretches the club as we all know and if we can help with that, I think it’s worth discussing.
    7. Tate: If we’re going to do this, we need to make sure that we are making the most of that financial opportunity.
  10. New Business
    1. None.
  11. Meeting Adjourned (9:10 PM)