IFS magazine have picked up on a very interesting proposal that hasn't been mentioned in this thread yet:
Source: https://www.facebook.com/figureskatingmag/posts/10154773034562538
See pages 50-52 of the PDF
This particular proposal has been brought forward by the ISU Council. It is followed by a number of proposals on the same topic that have been brought forward by Germany.
I wonder why that country is taking an interst in this... :think:
About time somebody dealt with the shenanigans that have been going on at the FFSG. But, I'm not sure whether these particular proposals are the right way to go about it.
I like the idea of only one member of a couple having to have citizenship of the country they are representing. That would prevent a Mervin Tran situation arising again.
Having the requirement that only one partner needs citizenship would also prevent skaters having to make changes that affect their lives outside of skating. I used to be in favour of switching nationalities, until I realised the impact that it had on other aspects of their lives.
It is the requirement that the non-citizen partner has to be resident in the country they want to represent for a year that I am not sure about. I can see where they are coming from. Trying to prevent skaters from representing countries that they know nothing about or have not even stepped foot in. And I agree with that sentiment.
BUT, the thing is, a lot of skaters nowadays do not train in the country they are representing. They have foreign coaches and so train in their coach's country. So, how is the "resident for a year" requirement going to work for the non-citizen if they are training overseas?
See what I mean?
Most importantly, if passed, would these rules apply to the Olympics?
Incidentally, it is interesting that the embargo period (18 months for ISU competitions, 12 months for other internationals) remains in the proposals. I would have thought that would have gone! (As you have probably have picked up over the years, I am really against the embargo).
The big disappointment, though, is that the ISU rejected Germany's proposal (proposal 90) to ban the practice of having to pay a federation to get them to release a skater. So, the FFSG will be able to continue this carry on!
But, at least proposal 86 is a step in the right direction. I hope it gets passed.
CaroLiza_fan
I was reading through the proposals that will be put forward at the ISU Congress in June. This one particularly interested me because, if it passed, it would put an end to the "hostage-taking" situations of skaters who decide to represent another country. A release would no longer be required:
(a) A Skater may compete only as a member of the Member of a country of which he/she is a citizen or in which he/she has resided for at least one year.

(b) In Pair Skating and Ice Dance only one partner needs to fulfil the requirements stated in paragraph 2.a). The other partner, however, must be a citizen or resident of the country of a Member.
(c) A Skater who has competed in any ISU Championship, ISU Event and/or International Competition for any Member and who intends to compete in the future for another Member may compete for the respective Member only after the following waiting periods have elapsed:
i) For participation in International Competitions and ISU Events other than ISU Championships: twelve (12) months since he/she competed in any ISU Championships, ISU Event and/or International Competition for another Member;
ii) For participation in ISU Championships: eighteen (18) months since he/she competed in any ISU Championships, ISU Event and/or International Competition for another member.
Source: https://www.facebook.com/figureskatingmag/posts/10154773034562538
See pages 50-52 of the PDF
This particular proposal has been brought forward by the ISU Council. It is followed by a number of proposals on the same topic that have been brought forward by Germany.
I wonder why that country is taking an interst in this... :think:
About time somebody dealt with the shenanigans that have been going on at the FFSG. But, I'm not sure whether these particular proposals are the right way to go about it.
I like the idea of only one member of a couple having to have citizenship of the country they are representing. That would prevent a Mervin Tran situation arising again.
Having the requirement that only one partner needs citizenship would also prevent skaters having to make changes that affect their lives outside of skating. I used to be in favour of switching nationalities, until I realised the impact that it had on other aspects of their lives.
It is the requirement that the non-citizen partner has to be resident in the country they want to represent for a year that I am not sure about. I can see where they are coming from. Trying to prevent skaters from representing countries that they know nothing about or have not even stepped foot in. And I agree with that sentiment.
BUT, the thing is, a lot of skaters nowadays do not train in the country they are representing. They have foreign coaches and so train in their coach's country. So, how is the "resident for a year" requirement going to work for the non-citizen if they are training overseas?
See what I mean?
Most importantly, if passed, would these rules apply to the Olympics?
Incidentally, it is interesting that the embargo period (18 months for ISU competitions, 12 months for other internationals) remains in the proposals. I would have thought that would have gone! (As you have probably have picked up over the years, I am really against the embargo).
The big disappointment, though, is that the ISU rejected Germany's proposal (proposal 90) to ban the practice of having to pay a federation to get them to release a skater. So, the FFSG will be able to continue this carry on!
But, at least proposal 86 is a step in the right direction. I hope it gets passed.
CaroLiza_fan
Last edited: