Last week whilst talking to a Director of the SOP, he made me aware of moves afoot to split the Classic Class into two disciplines, Whole Work and Semi Digger. This was confirmed on Saturday last by another Director whilst I judged a ploughing match in Lincolnshire.
On Sunday last two Directors usually found lurking in the higher echelons of the unelected at the SOP (no names but suffice to say that one starts similar to Tom and ends in linson, t'other starts with Aitch and ends up ill) were trying to gauge feeling / curry favour for the very same manouvre. Both said and as yet unnamed directors just happen to plough in the Classic class using TCN's. Bearing in mind TCN's outnumber RWM's by roughly five or six to one, it is difficult to comprehend the need for a division of the class unless it is a calculated move to ban RWM's from the class. There seems little point in having sixteen or seventeen TCN's ploughing in one class whilst two or three RWM's plough together in another class. I see it as a move by a bad loser in a privileged position trying to remove opposition by imposing a ban on RWM's. The days where this division was nescessary are 30 odd years long gone. What's needed is for men to man up and plough.
What this does highlight is the significant distance between the few successful ploughmen who this affects and the largely unelected self propagating body in the echelons who make the rules. It is a joke, made in the very worst of taste.
Not hard to envisage the first problem. Who is the to be the classic representative for Europe or the 6 Nations, TCN or RWM ploughman?
Next problem if this goes ahead is how long RND's will last in the Vintage class if the proposed violation of the Classic class is allowed to take place.
The English Classic class is something to be proud of. It allows ploughs of a similar nature and era to compete on fairly level ground, the only addition nescessary being to legalise Duncan boards. We do not need to spoil it as the Europeans have done by legitimising world style kit. We do not need to follow their lead as the Scots have done. Let well alone. We started all this in the 1830's. We should be making the rules - not tagging along behind.
Forgive me for saying, but 300 members of the SOP who were coerced into supplying proxy votes at the last AGM, did nothing other than give a largely unelected body free rein to do as they please. Change in the SOP? I think not
On Sunday last two Directors usually found lurking in the higher echelons of the unelected at the SOP (no names but suffice to say that one starts similar to Tom and ends in linson, t'other starts with Aitch and ends up ill) were trying to gauge feeling / curry favour for the very same manouvre. Both said and as yet unnamed directors just happen to plough in the Classic class using TCN's. Bearing in mind TCN's outnumber RWM's by roughly five or six to one, it is difficult to comprehend the need for a division of the class unless it is a calculated move to ban RWM's from the class. There seems little point in having sixteen or seventeen TCN's ploughing in one class whilst two or three RWM's plough together in another class. I see it as a move by a bad loser in a privileged position trying to remove opposition by imposing a ban on RWM's. The days where this division was nescessary are 30 odd years long gone. What's needed is for men to man up and plough.
What this does highlight is the significant distance between the few successful ploughmen who this affects and the largely unelected self propagating body in the echelons who make the rules. It is a joke, made in the very worst of taste.
Not hard to envisage the first problem. Who is the to be the classic representative for Europe or the 6 Nations, TCN or RWM ploughman?
Next problem if this goes ahead is how long RND's will last in the Vintage class if the proposed violation of the Classic class is allowed to take place.
The English Classic class is something to be proud of. It allows ploughs of a similar nature and era to compete on fairly level ground, the only addition nescessary being to legalise Duncan boards. We do not need to spoil it as the Europeans have done by legitimising world style kit. We do not need to follow their lead as the Scots have done. Let well alone. We started all this in the 1830's. We should be making the rules - not tagging along behind.
Forgive me for saying, but 300 members of the SOP who were coerced into supplying proxy votes at the last AGM, did nothing other than give a largely unelected body free rein to do as they please. Change in the SOP? I think not
Last edited:
