An appeal to enrich the pool of Senior ECF Arbiters

[Michael Flatt]

Originally posted elsewhere but I think that it might generate more debate here.

In terms of the close knit group it is perhaps worth noting that in the first instance the main qualification to join the team is to be a qualified ECF arbiter which limits the pool of candidates straight away (and the qualification is not easy to obtain, nor should it be).

Therein lies the crux of the matter.

There are many functions that can be carried out quite satisfactorily without the need to be a registered ECF or FIDE Arbiter. There are very few occasions that the Arbiter is required to become involved and make a ruling, especially now that Fischer Time Controls have superseded the need for Quick Play Finishes.

Preparing the draw for each round is only a minor part of the Arbiter's duty. It requires a straightforward application of a set of rules that somehow has taken on a mystique akin to the casting of runes or reading of tea leaves (as alluded to elsewhere in the incomplete title of the Blitz competition that Alex controlled).

In the the last round draw of the Championship application of either the FIDE or British Swiss Pairing Rules would have produced identical opponents for players in contention for the title. Can the extra fiddling around and desire to create a draw satisfactory to the aesthetic taste of an individual Arbiter be justified if it exerts no influence on the emergence of the eventual winner? Given the time saving and absence in heartache in adopting the computerised FIDE system, wouldn't the pragmatic approach be to accept it?

With regard to the ECF Arbiter qualification, it is not only the taking of the test but the need to gain the endorsement of a Senior Arbiter that that conspires to limit the supply of new Arbiters. Firstly, the opportunities of taking the test are few and far between and poorly publicised. Secondly, the pool of Senior Arbiters is very limited both in number and geographically. Should the first step in removing the perceived blockage be simply to promote some of the more active registered Arbiters to the Senior rank and to ensure a good geographic spread?

[Daniel Young]

With regard to the ECF Arbiter qualification, it is not only the taking of the test but the need to gain the endorsement of a Senior Arbiter that that conspires to limit the supply of new Arbiters. Firstly, the opportunities of taking the test are few and far between and poorly publicised.

It's worse than that! I took the ECF Arbiter exam last August, and was told that it should be marked and returned within three weeks. I was eventually told of my result in April. As it stands I'm still waiting to be listed as a trainee on the ECF list.

Under the circumstances I have to wonder how serious the ECF really is about producing more Arbiters.

[Brian Towers]

What would be particularly interesting would be an explanation of the ECF position and thinking of the roles of ECF and FIDE arbiters within the ECF and the interplay between them. Do they merge seamlessly into one coherent strategy? Or are FIDE arbiters stained by the NIH syndrome?

[Roger de Coverly]

Do they merge seamlessly into one coherent strategy?

There's a statement of the ECF's position at
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/arbiters/ecf-arbiters/

Whilst the FIDE rules say that every rated event or tournament needs a licensed arbiter, the ECF rules say that the arbiter has to have ECF approval as well.

From 1st September, 2014, tournaments yet to be registered without a Level 1 Arbiter or above will not be registered with FIDE, even if these titleholders are Licensed with FIDE.

[Brian Towers]

Thank you, Roger, that was fascinating.

I did wonder how this -

Whilst the FIDE rules say that every rated event or tournament needs a licensed arbiter, the ECF rules say that the arbiter has to have ECF approval as well.

From 1st September, 2014, tournaments yet to be registered without a Level 1 Arbiter or above will not be registered with FIDE, even if these titleholders are Licensed with FIDE.

would match up with England's EU free-trade obligations, to say nothing of any equivalent obligations to fellow FIDE federations, but then I read the qualification requirements for an ECF level 1 (trainee) arbiter. Anyone who has passed the FIDE arbiters' seminar exam qualifies, so that should solve any problems with foreign qualified arbiters.

Note the hint of ambiguity in the phrase "pass mark" for the FIDE arbiters' test. In other countries, which are perhaps more FIDE friendly, this can mean a number of things. When I did the course in December 2011 the ICF had, I think, 2 additional pass marks at something like 60 and 70 as well as the FIDE pass mark of 80. 60+ was required along with 3 suitable arbiter norms for the ICF arbiter qualification, 70+ plus 3 suitable arbiter norms for FIDE NA arbiter qualification before getting to the FIDE FA qualification.

There are no additional levels of ICF arbiter because the FIDE qualifications are integrated into the system. One wonders what the ECF rationale is for their parallel system.

[Roger de Coverly]

One wonders what the ECF rationale is for their parallel system.

That FIDE allow anyone to become an arbiter for the payment of a fee, regardless of their skills in shuffling pairing cards.

(edit)
Also that UK arbiters are for the most part giving their time and expertise for nothing, treating it as a leisure activity. Charging them for the sake of it is not a nice response.(/edit)

[David Sedgwick]

With regard to the ECF Arbiter qualification, it is not only the taking of the test but the need to gain the endorsement of a Senior Arbiter that that conspires to limit the supply of new Arbiters. Firstly, the opportunities of taking the test are few and far between and poorly publicised.

It's worse than that! I took the ECF Arbiter exam last August, and was told that it should be marked and returned within three weeks. I was eventually told of my result in April. As it stands I'm still waiting to be listed as a trainee on the ECF list.

Under the circumstances I have to wonder how serious the ECF really is about producing more Arbiters.

I plead guilty to that. It's no one else's fault. It's probably my second worst failing in thirty or so years.

I've already made more than one private apology and I now make a public apology.

Somehow, I don't think that I'm likely to be asked to conduct an ECF Arbiter Training Course again any time soon.

[Michael Flatt]

It's worse than that! I took the ECF Arbiter exam last August, and was told that it should be marked and returned within three weeks. I was eventually told of my result in April. As it stands I'm still waiting to be listed as a trainee on the ECF list.

Under the circumstances I have to wonder how serious the ECF really is about producing more Arbiters.

I sympathise having experienced that, as have many others.

It is not specific to the training and appointment of new Arbiter but seems to be a general malaise that pervades many areas of the Organisation. The lament is always that we are all volunteers and none of have time to do everything demanded of us. It was ever thus and likely to remain so.

There are, however, a number of things that could improve the situation. Making use of available technology is the key but somehow there never seems to be the right person available to understand, plan and co-ordinate its implementation.

Individuals in key roles might consider sharing the work load with another.

As a management guru might say, "these are opportunities, not problems".

Having identified that many new Arbiters will need the endorsement of a Senior Arbiter it seems an appropriate time to upgrade some of the more active experienced Arbiters. As well as increasing the opportunity for individuals to work with a choice of Senior Arbiter, more importantly the ECF does need to become less reliant on the one or two stalwarts who seem to do everything.

[Brian Towers]

One wonders what the ECF rationale is for their parallel system.

That FIDE allow anyone to become an arbiter for the payment of a fee, regardless of their skills in shuffling pairing cards.

That's a sad and twisted version of the truth.

FIDE does not allow anyone to become an arbiter. What they have done is appoint themselves gatekeepers of the two higher qualifications, FA and IA, and pass on gatekeeper responsibilities for the bottom level qualification, NA, to the individual federations. It is, after all, in the individual federations where the lowest level will be working and it is up to the federations to control and police this as suits their needs.

As I pointed out in my previous post, the ICF sets a lower threshold on the exam and requires arbitering norms before forking out 20 euros and submitting someone for an NA qualification. As an aside, I don't know of anybody who scored lower than 80 in the exam who has gone on and done any arbitering here (which doesn't mean, of course, that there aren't cases I don't know about).

From a reading of the ECF site it would appear that the ECF in their role as NA gatekeepers for England require 80+ in the FIDE exam or a pass in the ECF exam.

So, again, one wonders what the ECF rationale is for their parallel system. Your glib response is not the answer.

[Roger de Coverly]

FIDE does not allow anyone to become an arbiter. What they have done is appoint themselves gatekeepers of the two higher qualifications, FA and IA, and pass on gatekeeper responsibilities for the bottom level qualification, NA, to the individual federations. It is, after all, in the individual federations where the lowest level will be working and it is up to the federations to control and police this as suits their needs.

That's exactly the point. If you are running a FIDE rated competition, you are required to be at least a National Arbiter and pay money to FIDE for the privilege. If ECF rules don't or didn't require an arbiter to be present, say for a League match played under conditions of "no arbiter present", then it's just a money grab. The ECF reimposed rules that NA's didn't count as arbiters for British events unless they also satisfied ECF rules.

[NickFaulks]

FIDE does not allow anyone to become an arbiter. What they have done is appoint themselves gatekeepers of the two higher qualifications, FA and IA, and pass on gatekeeper responsibilities for the bottom level qualification, NA, to the individual federations. It is, after all, in the individual federations where the lowest level will be working and it is up to the federations to control and police this as suits their needs.

That's exactly the point.

I agree with Roger.

Had I registered a local Bermuda tournament with myself as arbiter, my FA title would have required a payment of €80 to make me a Licensed Arbiter. I speculated that I could have instead have paid only €20 to obtain a licence in the name of one of our elderly cats. We had never seen any need for an arbiter to officiate at our fifteen player Swisses, and the cat would certainly have abided by the arbiters' prime directive ( my own view ) of doing no harm.

[JustinHorton]

Unusual cat in that respect.

[David Robertson]

Unusual arbiter too

[Michael Flatt]

Out of curiosity, I have looked at the age profile of the Senior Arbiters currently listed on the ECF website.
There are 14 listed and their ages fall into the following age ranges:

Code: Select all

Age in      Number of
years       ECF Senior Arbiters
below 40    none
40 to 49     2
50 to 59     1
60 to 69     4
70 to 79     5
80 to 89     1
unknown      1
Total        14

Sorry, to use the code window. It was the only way I could format the table.

Of course, the Senior Arbiter title is for life, so it is conceivable that one or two may have retired from Arbiting.

[Brian Towers]

So, how come 3 of the so called "senior" arbiters are under 60? Did they fool the folk at the ECF by dying their hair and / or wearing a false white beard?