USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Angus French
Posts: 2151
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by Angus French » Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:13 pm

Malcolm did provide a report to the AGM - in printed form; I don't think an electronic version was published. See below for scanned pages.
Attachments
FIDEDelegateReportPage1of2.jpg
FIDEDelegateReportPage1of2.jpg (643.3 KiB) Viewed 1840 times
FIDEDelegateReportPage2of2.jpg
FIDEDelegateReportPage2of2.jpg (407.54 KiB) Viewed 1840 times

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by JustinHorton » Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:25 pm

Thanks for that. (It would be nice to see it on the ECF website if such is convenient and possible.) Malcolm says he was "the most vocal delegate", which is an odd combination with not being there the whole session.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:34 pm

JustinHorton wrote:(It would be nice to see it on the ECF website if such is convenient and possible.)
The editorial in Chess reads as an abridged version of the report presented at the ECF AGM.

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 2073
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:10 am

I am assuming the accusations made in this thread about the FIDE delegate can be backed up with evidence. Are the roll calls where the ENG delegate was allegedly absent in the public domain (and given FIDE's track record can we rely on these to be accurate)? Has any senior figure from another Western delegation publicly criticised the ECF? In his report Malcolm refers to tapes of the meeting? Are these available? What do they show?

The FIDE delegate does not contribute to this forum but can be contacted (albeit in another capacity) through the Ask The Directors facility on the ECF website. If I had concerns about allegations made on an unofficial forum I know that's where I might start.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:16 pm

Give it a pop then Andrew, let us know how you get on
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

NickFaulks
Posts: 8453
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by NickFaulks » Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:57 pm

To me, the question is not whether the England team captain was taking breakfast with his team at the time of the roll calls - that is just an acknowledged fact - but whether the ECF accepted the free room for ten nights, plus travel subsidies, offered to delegates. If the ECF Board decided to do that ( how would we know? ), but then allowed ENG to be unrepresented at the roll calls, than I think they acted improperly. In my opinion FIDE shows far too forbearance towards federations which abuse their finances in this way.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 5249
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon
Contact:

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by David Sedgwick » Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:49 pm

NickFaulks wrote:To me, the question is not whether the England team captain was taking breakfast with his team at the time of the roll calls - that is just an acknowledged fact - but whether the ECF accepted the free room for ten nights, plus travel subsidies, offered to delegates. If the ECF Board decided to do that ( how would we know? ), but then allowed ENG to be unrepresented at the roll calls, than I think they acted improperly. In my opinion FIDE shows far too forbearance towards federations which abuse their finances in this way.
You reported previously that on at least two days the General Assembly was only narrowly quorate. That would suggest that dozens of delegates were absent from the roll calls.

Do you consider that the Boards (or equivalent bodies) of all those Federations acted improperly?

NickFaulks
Posts: 8453
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by NickFaulks » Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:55 pm

David Sedgwick wrote: Do you consider that the Boards (or equivalent bodies) of all those Federations acted improperly?
Absolutely, I thought I made that clear. I would be furious if Bermuda did it. However, this is the English Chess Forum.

edit : Does the ECF Board really want its organisation to be just one of the list of known freeloaders?
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 5249
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon
Contact:

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by David Sedgwick » Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:04 pm

NickFaulks wrote:
David Sedgwick wrote: Do you consider that the Boards (or equivalent bodies) of all those Federations acted improperly?
Absolutely, I thought I made that clear. I would be furious if Bermuda did it. However, this is the English Chess Forum.

edit : Does the ECF Board really want its organisation to be just one of the list of known freeloaders?
So, if a delegate turns up for the roll call but then disappears for the rest of the day, then that is fine.

But if a delegate misses the start of proceedings but then represents his Federation vigorously for the rest of the day, he and his Federation are freeloaders.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:33 pm

Well, up to a point David.

I think I'd like my delegate to be there for the whole session if that's possible, regardless of what (say) the delegate from the Duchy of Grand Fenwick might or might not do. And if my delegate can't be there for the whole session, or for some reasons chooses not to be, I think I'd like to be informedthat this was the case, and the reasons why. Not particularly to make a fuss about it, but just because I think that would be normal practice for a delegate.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

NickFaulks
Posts: 8453
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: USCF (and ECF) v FIDE

Post by NickFaulks » Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:40 pm

David Sedgwick wrote: So, if a delegate turns up for the roll call but then disappears for the rest of the day, then that is fine.
Judging by the general occupancy of the hall, I'd say that delegates who make the 9am start do mostly stay for the full proceedings. They may not contribute much but, as proved in Tromso, their involvement, such as it is, is vital.
But if a delegate misses the start of proceedings but then represents his Federation vigorously for the rest of the day, he and his Federation are freeloaders.
I don't think I've ever come across one of them.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

Post Reply