VoyForums

Mon, Nov 23 2009, 6:07:19 [ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Tue, Jan 09 2007, 14:22:46
Author: Curious
Subject: I heard that Sharon Taylor's dance school closing. Is it true and if so does anyone know why?


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> True .... -- Taylor Parent, Tue, Jan 09 2007, 14:41:29 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> Why is the school closing? -- Curious, Tue, Jan 09 2007, 17:03:00 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> wot are the 23 qualifyers going to do now - ave they joined other schools and will they still be able to dance at the Worlds? -- interested ! ! !, Tue, Jan 09 2007, 15:04:05 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> Qualifers World - Taylor Academy -- Scottish Qualifying Observer, Tue, Jan 09 2007, 17:32:14 [1]

Taylor Academy had 26 world qualifiers not 23

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> world enties to be in by 15th jan so must be in new school and entered by then -- difficult to find someone to take them at such short notice., Tue, Jan 09 2007, 15:22:29 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> Would they not make an exemption for them under the circumstances? -- Bridie, Tue, Jan 09 2007, 16:29:04 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> It was my understanding that you have to dance at the worlds with the teacher you qualified with! -- would seem a little unfair to penalise these children!, Tue, Jan 09 2007, 16:29:06 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> The Worlds rules clearly state that you can only compete for the school that you qualified with. Its Rule 5 on Page 16 ofthe worlds syllabus (see www.irish-dancer.co.uk for a copy) -- wonder if CLRG will budge?, Tue, Jan 09 2007, 20:28:24 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> Surely there HAS to be an exception in these kind of cases? I thought the rule was for those who are medal holders, move schools and then try to take up their place at the next Worlds when dancing for the new school NOT for cases like this. -- Mum, Tue, Jan 09 2007, 23:58:07 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> These two sites also mention this and seems to have a little info with regards rules for the dancers involved, dont know how correct info is though. http://www.voy.com/206521/ and http://www.voy.com/60473/ -- Bridie, Wed, Jan 10 2007, 0:12:45 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> good luck 2 dhannon and jodie i love ur dancin -- hope 2 hear who all the dancers go 2 how sad 4 them, Wed, Jan 10 2007, 15:31:47 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> 3 months before worlds -- no way!!!!!!, Wed, Jan 10 2007, 19:03:10 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> such a shame for these dancers, love jodie!! -- x, Wed, Jan 10 2007, 21:37:27 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> have heard that some Taylor dancers are moving to Comdhail -- Shocked, Wed, Jan 10 2007, 21:59:44 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> Taylor to Comdhail -- old_dancemum, Fri, Jan 12 2007, 23:50:33 [1]

My dd used to dance for An Comdhail 7 years ago and although her dancing grades improved when she moved to Commission, she's finds it all a bit more cut throat and catty here. In more ways than one, Comdhail had its own unique charm. My dd is in a large school but part of me feels that the domination by these "superschools" is taking away some of the variety and social fun.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> Taylor to Comdhail -- old_dancemum, Fri, Jan 12 2007, 23:56:17 [1]

Sorry - hit the return button before I'd finished. Wasn't classing Taylor as one of these "superschools". If some of the dancers want to try the "other side", good luck to them - at least they're not giving up adn I think they might enjoy it.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> only the Campbell girls have moved which will be a great loss! -- others now at McCutcheons new school or Caroline Greene, Thu, Jan 25 2007, 13:22:37 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> which school did they go to on an comhdhail? -- believe some went to the boyle school as well, Wed, Jan 31 2007, 15:31:14 [1]

which school did they go to on an comhdhail?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> Yeh - I heard a few went to Boyle school too. -- mum, Wed, Jan 31 2007, 19:41:57 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> a few went to peter thomson school -- tkat, Thu, Feb 01 2007, 7:49:08 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> brilliant school -- interested, Sat, Feb 03 2007, 13:09:39 [1]

brilliant school to go to! wish them the best of luck!!

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> second that -- .., Wed, Jul 01 2009, 15:17:12 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> some of those that went to Boyle have now moved again to McCutcheon, which means a 6 month ban. However it seems that the rules might be bent forthem as TC is a senior member of AC -- is that fair?, Thu, Feb 08 2007, 12:19:10 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> meant to say they are medal holders and looking to dance at the Worlds, which is against the rules after a transfer. I'm sure Boyle school might argue against this! -- could be fallout, Thu, Feb 08 2007, 12:21:12 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> For goodness sake, stop all this nonsence -- 1 with sence, Fri, Feb 16 2007, 19:11:20 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> why is it nonsense. It is a simple discussion about the application of the CLRG rules, which ppenalise dancers who have no control over their situation. It is nor an attack on the dancers involved, who I think we all support and hope they get to the Worlds. -- and it is senSe by the way, Fri, Feb 16 2007, 19:45:08 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Some dancers who are now dancing for James McCutcheon did attend (and dance in) at least one Boyle class and were asked not to come back by the Boyle T.C. If the ban is waived this may be of interest to Irish Daz having been told that the ban stood even when the decision to leave the class was made for them. The validity of the six month ban rule in question again? -- An interesting situation, Fri, Feb 16 2007, 19:52:45 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I'm following this with interest! ;o) -- Irishdaz, Sat, Feb 17 2007, 11:23:45 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I know a family who moved to Ireland from US and attended a dance school for a few weeks under the idea that it was a trial. Then they went to another school and there was no mention of a 6 month transfer period. How did the teacher that they left not report this. Don't know if the teacher that they joined knew that they had been to other school. They danced at their regionals! -- All should have to play by the rules, Thu, Feb 22 2007, 16:10:50 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> It shouldn't be up to the Boyle school to argue this. Rules are rules and they are there to be applied equally to all people. CLRG should be upholding the rules that they make. IF these dancers were asked not to come back to the Boyle school, it must have been for a very good reason as TC is very fair and this school has a great reputation. Boyle TC wouldn't do this on a whim! -- mum, Sun, Feb 18 2007, 22:38:17 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> I agree. This decision would not have been taken lightly and I'm sure it was totally justified. It will be intersting to see how CLRG deal with this though as the dancers are now being taught by a member of the regional council and are presumably preparing for the worlds. If they are allowed to dance this will surely have implications for other dancers who were asked to leave by a teacher and whose ban was upheld. -- Are CLRG only applying the rules when it suits them?, Sun, Feb 18 2007, 22:57:26 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Boyle School are not arguing anything!! They are more concerned with promoting Irish Dancing and preparing ther dancers for the All Irelands and Worlds -- .., Mon, Feb 19 2007, 11:39:32 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> Agree with post from Personal Friend on this. The only relevent issue here is how the rules are now applied in another case of TC requesting a pupil leave. In this situation it is of no use or business to anyone else the reasons behind the request, but whether the rules will still be followed so strictly as they appeared to be in Miss Amos's case. It would be appreciated that no-one further speculates on reasons behind this, as I do not want to read personal attacks on the girls involved (who have been through enough already) nor on theTC, as from reading various and previous postings over time, TC appears to be a decent and fair person. -- MOD, Mon, Feb 19 2007, 13:12:54 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> as i see it these dancers were not part of the boyle class the teacher simply did not want them as pupils and so did not transfer them into her class so they were still free agents -- not a member of that class, Tue, Feb 20 2007, 1:53:10 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> Please note, It has been requested that some posts be removed, purely because focus of discussion was becoming personalised as names were being mentioned. As above post states my view, I won't repeat it and bore you all. Please remember it's the rules we are looking to now and not dancers or teachers. Thanks for being here, -- MOD, Mon, Feb 19 2007, 15:23:53 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> Well said MOD. The ONLY issue for discussion should be how CLRG choose to enforce their rules. I did not see the posts that were on this thread that you had to delete but I presume the discussion had started to focus on the individuals rather than the situation. It would be great if this issue could be discussed without people being personally criticised. This issue could affect any of us in the future even if we think that all is well with our own T.C's. Other peoples experiences show us that you never know what's round the corner. -- CLRG's interpretation of the rules should be the focus IMO., Mon, Feb 19 2007, 17:24:43 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> ATTENSION MOD PLEASE GET THIS OFF RIGHT AWAY -- POST REGARDING TAYLOR DANCERS SHOCKING, Tue, Feb 20 2007, 13:03:20 [1]

MOD THIS IS SHOCKING GET IT ALL OFF STRAIGHT AWAY WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH ITD PURELY GOSSIP IF ITS NOT ALL OFF WE WILL BE TAKING LEGAL ACTION THIS POST SHOULD NEVER HAVE GOT THIS FAR. THE OTHER BOARDS HAVE REMOVED THIS STRAIGHT AWAY.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> I am sorry you find this thread shocking, but as of yet nothing detrimental has been said regarding the dancers from Taylor’s school. In fact all posters here and on other boards have wished them all well, and hope to see them all compete at the worlds. Every one of these dancers can be proud of themselves, 1) for qualifing, and 2) for finding a way to continue to represent themselves, their past (Taylor) and present school at the worlds. As my other posts recently said the issue people are discussing is to do with rule application. It would appear from someone signed as ‘not a member of that class’ that the rule concerned may not be applicable as the dancers were not committed to the school they viewed and therefore there is no problem regarding their competing. (more inside) -- MOD, Tue, Feb 20 2007, 16:34:43 [1]

Personally I would rather see open discussions of rules and such instead of nasty behind the back gossiping, when issues of this nature arise. Quite gossip still gets passed on and, as a Chinese whisper either gets blown out of proportion or much worse reputations are ruined and no-one gets to the truth. Please appreciate that removal of this thread will not suddenly stop anyone debating the topic, but it will stop people being able to correct any wrong information getting passed around. Please read my other post to see what is acceptable to post in this discussion. Anyone abusing that will be banned.As I am lucky enough not to be hard of hearing, there is no need to shout, I would also appreciate not being threatened with legal action as I know that neither speculation nor gossip are illegal, unless insulting, inflammatory and/or offensive.I agree that this makes life difficult as what one person may consider offensive another may not, and in the end it may come down to the personal view of a judge on the day, but ID could really do without the type of publicity that court cases and such would bring and unless we can bug everyone going to every feis we can’t control gossip, but by open discussion we can stop damage being done by it. And more importantly insure more people get the truth.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> I think the fact this debate has been removed from 2 other forums yet still continues here, confirms there is a genuine debate to be had about the rules and how they are applied. There is no ill-feeling towards any dancers or TC - I just believe the ID public at large are curious to see how CLRG will apply the rules, given the recent Amos case.The above threat of legal action seems somewhat excessive from what I've read above. -- observer, Tue, Feb 20 2007, 19:17:42 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> I'm seriously shocked at your shouting and the blatant diregard of the posting rules i.e no shouting. I find threats/ bullying and intimidation disgusting in children but even more abhoorent in adults(I'm presuming you're an adult). I only read the other threads of this post to see exactly what you were shouting at and threatinng mod about. If you are serious about legal action. Why not be brave enough to put your real name and school you're associated with on the board instead of being a coward. People should be allowed freedom of speech, without threats Do you usually go about threatining others or are you making an exception because you can't have you own way?. -- imho, Tue, Feb 20 2007, 21:11:54 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> Hummmmm, who are, or what is 'WE' ? -- only shocked by 'WE', Wed, Feb 21 2007, 15:23:04 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> "we" - Did you pick up on this small word too? Looking at it logically, it can really only be one of 2 parties, either the new school or the dancer(s) in question. Nothing personal should be taken from these posts. People just looking for honesty in the ID world. I'm sure this debate will be raised at Regional Council and/or CLRG levels. Good that less in ID is done behind "closed doors" and that the ID community is now more informed of rules and decisions. Will be interesting to see the outcome, one way or the other. -- observer, Wed, Feb 21 2007, 22:33:21 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> I dont actually think this post came from either a teacher from any school or anyone directly involved with the dancers. It may have been a well meaning associate thinking they were doing them a favour, sadly their manner and approach was unpleasent and obviously not acceptable. There is room for everyone's views, with the expectation that the views will be expressed politely and without bullying overtones. -- MOD, Thu, Feb 22 2007, 13:50:32 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> Actually it wasn't taken off the other boards straight away at all. It was left until things started getting personal. It'd help if you could spell ATTENTION then you couldn't be accused of being infantile. Can't say it's a typo...too many keys between S and T How odd that it took you so long to comment on a post that started a few weeks ago! :oS -- Meself ;o), Thu, Feb 22 2007, 23:01:01 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> Did anyone ever hear the outcome of these dancers who attended 2 schools in Scotland? Was a ban enforced by CLRG or are the dancers competing at the Worlds? Curious to know how CLRG acted, given how CLRG have applied this rule in the past with others. -- curious, Mon, Mar 19 2007, 18:59:48 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> I haven't seen any of these dancers competing at any feis recently so I'm not sure that it has all been resolved yet. You would think they would be competing as part of thier preparations for the worlds if they were able to. -- haven't heard any more though., Tue, Mar 20 2007, 0:10:21 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> No Ban They are dancing at the world rules for some and rules for others!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -- dancer, Tue, Mar 20 2007, 0:10:43 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> I am glad for the children involved. It is a great achievement to qualify and it would have been very upsetting for them if they had not been allowed to dance. However this really does highlight the absurdity of the 6 month ban rule and how it is applied by CLRG. It really is about who you know. Would these dancers have been treated the same way if their new teacher was not a member of the Scottish regional council? Perhaps that's a question Siobhan Amos would like CLRG to answer. And we're supposed to have faith in them and their teachers and adjudicators. Makes you think -- CLRG suiting themselves and those who work for them., Tue, Mar 20 2007, 0:24:56 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> It's not what you do, but who you know -- never been any different, Tue, Mar 20 2007, 0:48:56 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> Many thanks for the info.Was just curious as nothing had been heard of since. I must say in one way I'm pleased for the children involved who will be allowed to dance, after qualifying in November. I am however disappointed with CLRG as they are looking more and more foolish as each year progesses - it must be a very bitter pill for those dancers who have been refused a free transfer in the past (not just S. Amos but others I know of). CLRG will NEVER change! Good luck to all UK dancers for the Worlds. -- curious, Tue, Mar 20 2007, 19:07:15 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]
[> [> Meant to add in a big THANKS to the mod for allowing this discussion to continue when other Boards removed it. -- curious, Tue, Mar 20 2007, 19:09:29 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> It was removed because it got VERY personal, no other reason! Every time a personal comment was taken off, another was put on, so it was thought best to delete it altogether! -- Know the Mod and their reasons, Tue, Mar 20 2007, 21:47:28 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> [> Didn't realise that - I must have missed all the personal stuff. Just saw snippets then it disappeared. I know all the mods are usually very fair. Thanks. -- curious, Tue, Mar 20 2007, 22:31:26 [1]


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[ VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
 * Notice: Posting problems? [ Click here ]
 * HTML allowed in marked fields.
* Message subject (required):

* Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:

Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+1
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2008 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.