|
Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.
| 11-09-15 10:07PM |
|
jamcan
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340 |
quote:
Originally posted by slider1
Its not a matter of naming brooms and having them banned but a matter of being specific about fabric and extras like plastic plates that should be banned as well as a change in the sweeping rule. There are homemade heads being used at various levels so unless each head/broom is inspected who knows what people are playing with. Its too simplistic to just ban a certain broom manufacturer or to have them turn the fabric inside out. More to it than that.
Homemade broom heads? Seriously? Look,I'm sure there's maybe a few geniuses with the time,money and equipment rigging up their own brooms. But the the WCF clearly stated that heads must be commercially available. I think that rules out most of the Emmett Browns out there.
So, once again, calling for the WCF to take responsibility for the countries, member associations and curlers that they represent; name the damn brooms. Do your job.
__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-11-15 04:05PM |
|
livem1
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 61 |
quote:
Originally posted by Itsjustagame
As stated by jamcam, you are wrong. Athletes can verify if each medication / supplement they are taking is specifically accepted in their respective sport. Here is the link : www.globaldro.com . Every participant to a National championship is given that link the day they qualify for it. If ever one medication or supplement is not on the list, someone at the CCA is mandated to communicate with WADA.
The same goes for brooms. The WCT will have to state SPECIFICALLY which brooms are not legal and why that is so. If they fail to do that (like they have for now with their politically correct statement), the witch-hunt, accusations and bullying by non Hardline sponsored teams will just keep going on.
for jamcam, John Benton told you in a post a month ago why you create a performance spec and why there is no point to naming products. They ARE naming the products by describing the material. Again, there are not 'model numbers/names' for every fabric a company uses. And if someone shows up with a Balance Plus broom and faceplate and made their own fabric head....what is the WCF going to specify? (as John mentioned to you before....enforcement is an issue)
As for the drugs, I did go to the link...but, all the drugs are listed by their generic name and then they give 'examples' of some trademarked names. I'm guessing they can't list every name out there....so, they list the generic which is a descriptive 'specification' essentially. This is just about spot on to what the WCF is trying to do initially. I looked up prednisone and they list 2 manufacturers only. I found at least 2 others...in a 2 sec google search. It doesn't mean the other 2 are okay right? Prednisone is the 'general' spec. Pressed fabrics are the generic here. How the heck is the WCF or any other governing body going to get more descriptive than that?
I'd love for somebody that really wants to beat this horse... to make up their own 'directive' on EXACTLY what they think the verbage on 'product specific' banned list would look like and post it. I think it might make it a lot more clear to people here why some have been really pounding this minute issue for awhile now.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-12-15 07:45PM |
|
farmcurl
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Oct 2015
Location:
Posts: 11 |
Glenn Howard was just on at the start with a quick interview with Kevin Martin. 1. Says he doesn't like lack of fabric regualtions (cough Hardline) 2. The hard piece of plastic under under the cover (cough Hardline) 3. The north/south sweeping.
I agree about the 3rd about sweeping motion. But not the first 2. As a rec curler I don't want to be buying new heads every month if I want to be decent at sweeping. And watching the game I see Scott doing the north south sweeping.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
| 11-12-15 08:19PM |
|
jamcan
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340 |
quote:
Originally posted by livem1
for jamcam, John Benton told you in a post a month ago why you create a performance spec and why there is no point to naming products. They ARE naming the products by describing the material. Again, there are not 'model numbers/names' for every fabric a company uses. And if someone shows up with a Balance Plus broom and faceplate and made their own fabric head....what is the WCF going to specify? (as John mentioned to you before....enforcement is an issue)
As for the drugs, I did go to the link...but, all the drugs are listed by their generic name and then they give 'examples' of some trademarked names. I'm guessing they can't list every name out there....so, they list the generic which is a descriptive 'specification' essentially. This is just about spot on to what the WCF is trying to do initially. I looked up prednisone and they list 2 manufacturers only. I found at least 2 others...in a 2 sec google search. It doesn't mean the other 2 are okay right? Prednisone is the 'general' spec. Pressed fabrics are the generic here. How the heck is the WCF or any other governing body going to get more descriptive than that?
I'd love for somebody that really wants to beat this horse... to make up their own 'directive' on EXACTLY what they think the verbage on 'product specific' banned list would look like and post it. I think it might make it a lot more clear to people here why some have been really pounding this minute issue for awhile now.
You are not much of a reader, are you. The WADA page is constantly updated with brand names and drug specs. It will always be a changing and likely incomplete document. Which is why they list both. It also takes updates submitted from different countries and associations. But that's already been spelled out by another poster.
And, had you read the WCF notice correctly you may only use equipment that is commercially available. Homemade brooms are effectively banned. Who knows why you continue to bring up a non issue.
And why are you so against the products being named? Arguing against something some simple and logical makes little sense indeed.
__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is . |
  |
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
CurlingZone > Chat Forums > General Curling Chat > Rock Talk > 20+ Top-Level Teams Sign Broom Agreement
In the run up to Christmas Day, 1893, the Aberdeen Peoples's Journal offered a prize of one guinea for the best letter about curling! That's the invitation... (read more)
A quick break for the Memorial Day holiday and we're back with our guest and new USA Curling Womenâs National Team & Juniors Director Jessica Schultz.... (read more)
I am in week 3 of isolation/quarantine/home schooling and getting a little squirrel-y. Personal hygiene has become optional. The kids have watched the entire... (read more)
On today's World Curling Report...we recap Day 1 of the 2019 Canada Cup. (read more)