Compulsory Membership?

[David Pardoe]

Jack...looking at the size and shape of the West of England, and the travel issues/difficulties, I can well understand this from a purely practical standpoint.... I used to play for Glocestershire in the days when Mike Binks was captain, and enjoyed many good days out, travelling to away matches...some played on neutral territory.

[William Metcalfe]

The suggestion from Lancashire was MCF could be called Lancashire 2 that offer was obv rejected

[Alex Holowczak]

Lancashire are playing at home to Greater Manchester on 19th May in the County Championship. They're playing that in Greater Manchester, which seems a strange decision from a tactical point of view...

[William Metcalfe]

The reason i got involved with the NCCU in the first place was when the original NMS scheme was introduced us Cleveland players knew nothing about it Clevelands rep mr J Walsh told us nothing about it.
I got a bunch of imformation from friends in Durham so i deceided to stand as NCCU rep so i could pass on info and represent our players.
Even now all i want to do is get the best deal for Clevelands players unfortunatly this sometimes meens getting involved in all the political bs lol.
My personal view is to support the ECF but its a democracy and if our Cleveland AGM votes to go with the NCCU scheme that is what i will support.

[John McKenna]

Alex H >Lancs. are playing at home to Greater Manchester... in Greater Manchester, which seems a strange decision from a tactical point of view...<
But, brilliant from a strategic one as it implies that Greater Manchester is contained within an even greater Lancashire.

[Roger de Coverly]

I`m absolutely certain that with some good will and good sence, all of these matters can be resolved, and that long standing good neighbours and friends can stand united in friendly rivalry....

It's Tennant-Smith basically. I'm not aware of any forum or platform where he would be asked to justify his objection to the very existence of Greater Manchester and expose his views to critical cross-examination.

The NCCU honoured him as a long standing stalwart.

[William Metcalfe]

Also Jim Tennant Smith spent a lot of his own money in the original dispute.
I have cross exhamined him in the past and will do in the future.But he is not the only person in Lancashire to have problems accepting MCF.

[Mick Norris]

So helping a junior play in the acuall British championship was a bad thing was it David.Not everybody has money to pay for 2 weeks accomodation or transport that was why we helped[were we wrong to do that]
As to Manchester i started the ball rolling[alongside my other Cleveland delegate] only to run into Lancashires so called veto.As soon as i raise the issue again i can guarantee Jim Tennant Smith will come as Lancashire delegate lol.

I've just looked at the NCCU constitution - I have nothing better to do on a Friday night - and I see no constitutional mention of a veto for Lancashire. So their veto can be overturned by a simple majority. This is the same simple majority that you'd need to incorporate Greater Manchester within the NCCU. So the concept of a Lancashire veto is a complete fallacy.

You don't look very hard, do you? They use 3 below, and it has been looked at carefully on our side

"3) Membership of the NCCU is limited to recognised County Chess Associations within the territory of the NCCU (A recognised CCA is defined as any Association of Chess Clubs combined on a regional basis with the express consent of the NCCU Council). Each CCA that joins the NCCU undertakes to pay the annual subscription and/or fee as defined and determined by the NCCU at a previous Annual General Meeting. No new CCA will be admitted to the NCCU unless the following two conditions are met:

a) There is evidence that the new CCA has the support of a majority of both Clubs and Players in the area it purports to cover.
b) The existing CCA covering that area has been consulted and given twelve months notice in writing of the intention to admit a new CCA. Unless otherwise agreed any CCA newly admitted to the NCCU assumes the rights and obligations of all other constituent organizations."

[Mick Norris]

Alex H >Lancs. are playing at home to Greater Manchester... in Greater Manchester, which seems a strange decision from a tactical point of view...<
But, brilliant from a strategic one as it implies that Greater Manchester is contained within an even greater Lancashire.

John

They don't think Greater Manchester belongs to Lancs, only part of it - they think the rest belongs to Cheshire

It isn't a tactical decision, it is their captain (Bill) deciding to play where he lives

They play Yorks at Heywood too, but Cumbria at Lancaster contrary to what is posted above

We have played a home match at Atherton, but they wouldn't let us use the clubs equipment

[Alex Holowczak]

They don't think Greater Manchester belongs to Lancs, only part of it - they think the rest belongs to Cheshire

To be fair, this is what I think too...

Maybe you could stand for election to posts within the Lancashire CA; and get your MCF buddies to stand for other officer positions (like NCCU delegate). That way, you get rid of the Lancashire veto issue.

Might also cause a few arguments at the meeting - which would surely reflect worse on Lancashire than Greater Manchester.

[Roger de Coverly]

"3) Membership of the NCCU is limited to recognised County Chess Associations within the territory of the NCCU

When they talk of having a "Northern Membership Scheme", is that a misnomer? Unlike the ECF, individuals cannot become members of the NCCU.

Maybe you could stand for election to posts within the Lancashire CA

The Lancs website has or had minutes of the county association AGM. The attendance recorded is very small. Maybe individuals are not allowed to attend. If not so, then if the attitude of players in Lancs was that they wanted to end the dispute, they would have to attend the AGM and remove the feud mongers from office.

[William Metcalfe]

You are wrong Roger individuals that live or play for clubs or leagues in the NCCU area can become members.The grey area that i was never 100% certain of was if you played congresses in said area could you also become a member

[Mick Norris]

When they talk of having a "Northern Membership Scheme", is that a misnomer? Unlike the ECF, individuals cannot become members of the NCCU.

The NMS is their name for their MO, so it gives membership of the ECF not the NCCU

And like all other existing MOs, it finishes on 31 August

I am not sure if they are going to continue with a new one, and if so whether it will still be called the NMS

[William Metcalfe]

Also in the NCCU area Cleveland,Durham,Northumberland and Yorkshire ran there own MO schemes.These areas set up there own MOs after the original NMS was cancelled by the ECF

[Alex Holowczak]

You don't look very hard, do you? They use 3 below, and it has been looked at carefully on our side

"3) Membership of the NCCU is limited to recognised County Chess Associations within the territory of the NCCU (A recognised CCA is defined as any Association of Chess Clubs combined on a regional basis with the express consent of the NCCU Council). Each CCA that joins the NCCU undertakes to pay the annual subscription and/or fee as defined and determined by the NCCU at a previous Annual General Meeting. No new CCA will be admitted to the NCCU unless the following two conditions are met:

a) There is evidence that the new CCA has the support of a majority of both Clubs and Players in the area it purports to cover.
b) The existing CCA covering that area has been consulted and given twelve months notice in writing of the intention to admit a new CCA. Unless otherwise agreed any CCA newly admitted to the NCCU assumes the rights and obligations of all other constituent organizations."

Oh, I see. I hadn't realised this was considered to be a Lancashire veto. I would have thought that Manchester fulfils (a); it has an entire league, and could gather signatures at its AGM. (b) is just an odd rule; 12 months is about 11 months longer than necessary.

So, maybe you need a 2/3 majority to get this through, and suddenly it's not so easy.