What will Master's do about this?
PRESS RELEASE
N°58/2009
FINA BUREAU MEETING
Rome (ITA) - July 28, 2009
Rome (ITA), July 28, 2009 – On its first meeting held today in Rome (ITA), the 2009-2013 FINA Bureau fully complied with the decision of the FINA Congress, held on July 24, 2009 related with the procedure concerning swimwear approval. As it was also decided by the Congress, these rules are now By-Laws rules, which allow the Bureau to further control, update and correct any deviation to the process or to proceed with any necessary adjustment related to the development of the swimsuit technology.
The FINA Bureau decisions on swimsuits include:
MATERIAL – The material of the swimsuits will definitively be constituted only by textile fabric(s). The definition of “textile” will be made by a group of scientific experts chosen by FINA and led by Prof. Jan-Anders Manson, from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL) in Lausanne (SUI). This definition will be available to manufacturers by no later than September 30, 2009. The first definition of “textile” to be further confirmed by this group is: “Material consisting of, natural and/or synthetic, individual and non consolidated yarns used to constitute a fabric by weaving, knitting, and/or braiding.”
SHAPE – For men, the swimsuit shall not extend above the navel nor below the knee, and for women, shall not cover the neck, extend past the shoulder, nor extend below knee. Furthermore, no zippers or other fastening system is allowed.
USE – In the regulation approved by the Congress, the swimmer can only wear one swimsuit and no taping is allowed.
TESTS – Only measurable scientific tests will be performed within the frame of the swimwear approval procedure. For thickness, the 1mm limit will be adjusted to 0.8mm, for buoyancy the present value of 1 Newton will be reduced to 0.5 (FINA will even consider the limit of 0 Newton), and for permeability the material(s) used must have at any point a value of more than 80l/m2/second. Permeability values are measured on material with a standard multidirectional stretch of 25%. These parameters will be further considered by the above mentioned scientific group.
CONSISTENCY – Swimsuits effectively manufactured and used shall correspond to and be fully consistent with submitted samples. Any modification before use (including impregnation) is prohibited. Moreover, there shall be no variation/modification for individual swimmers.
APPLICATION – Considering the time needed for manufacturers to produce their swimsuits, the submission dates and the implementation of the rules are applicable from 2010 only in Swimming competitions.
In addition to these decisions, the FINA Bureau also approved the new FINA Committees and Commissions for the period 2009-2013.
Finally, it was also established that the Diving Qualification event for the 1st Youth Olympic Games (August 2010 in Singapore) will be held in Mexico City (MEX), in April 2010.
FINA Communications Department • Tel.: (41-21) 310 4710 • Fax: (41-21) 312 6610 • www.fina.org
Parents
Former Member
Lets just hope that whichever way USMS decides to go (And of course we wish suits to stay, permeable or non permeable, we can handle both) All i ask is that those with the power of vote take into account the stakeholders of this sport and community.
To date i have seen two statements, one from ASCA and one from FINA, and neither have shown any understanding or empathy for the position they wish to put their loyal Swimmers, Swim dealers and Swim companies in.
If there is to be change then everyone will have to handle it, but if that change is done in haste and does not allow for the natural retail and product supply chain cycle to run it's course then you will have many stakeholders of the sport losing millions of $'s.
Parents have bought suits, masters have bought suits, dealers have bought stock and manufacturers have products on the water and on order. Does a date of January 1st allow for this? Absolutely not, does this allow for all concerned to "Take the medicine in a non too painful way" no it does not, and any institution expecting this date or earlier to not harm the hands that feed them is widely off mark.
Swim dealers support local and national events, Brands support local, national and individuals as well as governing bodies, so why oh why would the powers of FINA and others wish to bite the hands that feeds them and then rub salt in to the wound by accelerating what would have been a semi-realistic phase out period from April to January?
When the power tool industry was asked to change it's batteries to be more environmentally friendly they did, but they asked for and were granted a several year window to do this, and knowing what lay ahead i do believe they actually reached a saturation with new sources of battery power ahead of time.
We can all handle change, it's just the manner and consideration with which it is done.
Sorry guys, harping on here, but i thank you for the freedom to be able to speak here.
Deano
(That was the week that was)
Lets just hope that whichever way USMS decides to go (And of course we wish suits to stay, permeable or non permeable, we can handle both) All i ask is that those with the power of vote take into account the stakeholders of this sport and community.
To date i have seen two statements, one from ASCA and one from FINA, and neither have shown any understanding or empathy for the position they wish to put their loyal Swimmers, Swim dealers and Swim companies in.
If there is to be change then everyone will have to handle it, but if that change is done in haste and does not allow for the natural retail and product supply chain cycle to run it's course then you will have many stakeholders of the sport losing millions of $'s.
Parents have bought suits, masters have bought suits, dealers have bought stock and manufacturers have products on the water and on order. Does a date of January 1st allow for this? Absolutely not, does this allow for all concerned to "Take the medicine in a non too painful way" no it does not, and any institution expecting this date or earlier to not harm the hands that feed them is widely off mark.
Swim dealers support local and national events, Brands support local, national and individuals as well as governing bodies, so why oh why would the powers of FINA and others wish to bite the hands that feeds them and then rub salt in to the wound by accelerating what would have been a semi-realistic phase out period from April to January?
When the power tool industry was asked to change it's batteries to be more environmentally friendly they did, but they asked for and were granted a several year window to do this, and knowing what lay ahead i do believe they actually reached a saturation with new sources of battery power ahead of time.
We can all handle change, it's just the manner and consideration with which it is done.
Sorry guys, harping on here, but i thank you for the freedom to be able to speak here.
Deano
(That was the week that was)
