WPA ?

[Badpenguin]

A major issue for recognition is that the USOC required 30% of the board members of the organization to be current or past athletes. I think the BCA Board has never had more than a single player representative.

The Board had a change of direction, I believe due to new officers. They sold the BCA leagues to Mark Griffin, so they no longer had any player members. The ended the effort for recognition. They moved from Colorado Springs to Denver.

As far as carom and snooker, I think all the BCA would have needed to do was take on as affiliated members the USBA and the USSA.

Then why is the BCA allowed to represent the US within the WPA? They aren't even recognized by the US as representing anything from an Olympics perspective.

Knowing that creating a representative body that would need to consist of 30% current or past athletes, pool does not stand a chance in hell in the US. Our pool players are mostly just too selfish to do anything about our sport overall unless there is an angle in for them, and god forbid they appear "woke", whatever that means.

 

[MattPoland]

Then why is the BCA allowed to represent the US within the WPA? They aren't even recognized by the US as representing anything from an Olympics perspective.

Knowing that creating a representative body that would need to consist of 30% current or past athletes, pool does not stand a chance in hell in the US. Our pool players are mostly just too selfish to do anything about our sport overall unless there is an angle in for them, and god forbid they appear "woke", whatever that means.

It’s extra tricky given the BCA is the continental member of the WPA. So in theory they are meant to represent all of North America (Canada and Mexico too). In theory we don’t even have a national federation specifically for the US. But if we did the BCA would likely be a candidate. And in practice the BCA only seems to have focus on the US but I’m sure they do still act continentally in some WPA regards. Which begs the question whether the BCA would be willing to allow a national federation to charter up for the US under it (kind of like a paper federation) that solely existed to meet USOPC requirements and solicit USOPC funding.

 

[Badpenguin]

It’s extra tricky given the BCA is the continental member of the WPA. So in theory they are meant to represent all of North America (Canada and Mexico too). In theory we don’t even have a national federation specifically for the US. But if we did the BCA would likely be a candidate. And in practice the BCA only seems to have focus on the US but I’m sure they do still act continentally in some WPA regards. Which begs the question whether the BCA would be willing to allow a national federation to charter up for the US under it (kind of like a paper federation) that solely existed to meet USOPC requirements and solicit USOPC funding.

It doesn't sound to me like the BCA does any more for North American players than the WPA does. They are an industry group and should not be representing players at all.

 

[sjm]

It doesn't sound to me like the BCA does any more for North American players than the WPA does. They are an industry group and should not be representing players at all.

Yes, that's true to a point, but don't forget that the BCA does quite a bit for American junior players through the Billiards Education Foundation.