Need some help of what to do?

[John Reyes]

you have become the Manchester Chess Federation open team Captain.

One of the originators on the Lancs side of this forty year old and counting dispute has died, There do however seem to be those in Lancashire who want to keep it going as a memorial.

County open teams were at the heart of the original dispute and it would appear that however takes on the job of being Greater Manchester captain is going to be treated as though he was Satan himself by some in the Lancs establishment.

i was asked and when you get rejected every year, who do you do?

[David Sedgwick]

This is one reason I support direct entry to the county championships with no link to the union stages.

Some people accept defeat swiftly and with good grace.

Others do so more slowly, but come round. On this matter, the members of the ECF Board fall into that category.

Then there are those who seemingly do not wish to allow the wounds to heal.

So be it.

[J T Melsom]

Specks and beams come to mind, given the somewhat triumphalist tone of the dinosaurs at the time. Andrew Zigmond has simply stated his personal view - is that not permitted?

[Nick Grey]

John you have my sympathy.
I doubt that ECF or Council want to address.
I think that the attitude is not furthering the cause of chess in the North nor the ECF.
Also seems basis of some is far ranging & not helpful historic (& possibly inaccurate geographic background),

I'm not sure why my old dispute is being raised again. Some posts think I'm stuck in the mud about finishing a game of chess, but in this case I was not allowed to complete the game. An incorrect claim on a clock (& seems that the clock was not presented as evidence). The appeal panel made a decision based on a shake of hands. I appreciated the support of a Lancashire player as well as our captain. This was in a National Semi-Final. Surrey made an adjustment & ever since then have insisted on arbiter presence at the National Stages.

Whilst I have got over it Kill Bill Volumes 1 and 2 are still in my top-10 films of all time. If I never play Bill again that stops issues with hand shakes or the five finger exploding heart trick. I cannot see where the latter is outlawed in the rules of chess or the County Championship or the thumb to the nose either.

[Andrew Zigmond]

This is one reason I support direct entry to the county championships with no link to the union stages.

Some people accept defeat swiftly and with good grace.

Others do so more slowly, but come round. On this matter, the members of the ECF Board fall into that category.

Then there are those who seemingly do not wish to allow the wounds to heal.

So be it.

Perhaps instead of `I support` it would have been better to have said `I think it would be better to have`. As I'm now slightly distant from the issue it doesn't really affect me so I don't see it as a question of admitting defeat.

Your view that direct entry would destroy the essence of the county championships is one I appreciate, even if I don't entirely agree with it. The SCCU has a vigorous internal program and appears to be at heart of chess activity in the South. It would have endured without the link to the county championships. The NCCU is an irrelevant bureaucratic backwater that would have been swept away taking the Manchester dispute with it. That was my point.

I'll also add that despite our differences on this matter I have always respected you as a man of integrity and do not include you in my criticisms of Surrey.

[Andrew Zigmond]

I'm not sure why my old dispute is being raised again. Some posts think I'm stuck in the mud about finishing a game of chess, but in this case I was not allowed to complete the game. An incorrect claim on a clock (& seems that the clock was not presented as evidence). The appeal panel made a decision based on a shake of hands. I appreciated the support of a Lancashire player as well as our captain. This was in a National Semi-Final. Surrey made an adjustment & ever since then have insisted on arbiter presence at the National Stages.

As the now ex controller I can be a little bit more outspoken in what I can say. The evidence WAS presented but the other party denied that it happened like that and I had to take both submissions on merit and deal with them as fairly as I could. I can understand why Surrey were dissatisfied with the eventual outcome but afterwards I felt like I was criticised for being impartial and not taking Surrey's side, as well as for choosing to rule on the information submitted and not playing detective. Subsequent proposals from Surrey also suggested that the controller should work to certain prescribed timescales (one of which Surrey were outside of themselves) and made no allowance for the fact that I work unsocial hours and shifts and can't always respond to things as quickly as I might like.

This was separate from the atrocious email I received a year later from a Surrey captain who was unhappy with the then results server (which could be cumbersome - I was always happy to sort out the imput myself if it was that much of a problem) and repeatedly referred to it as my system as if I'd designed it myself.

[David Sedgwick]

I'm not sure why my old dispute is being raised again.

I must accept the responsibility for that. It arose from my attempting to be supportive of John Reyes.

[David Sedgwick]

Perhaps instead of `I support` it would have been better to have said `I think it would be better to have`. As I'm now slightly distant from the issue it doesn't really affect me so I don't see it as a question of admitting defeat.

Your view that direct entry would destroy the essence of the county championships is one I appreciate, even if I don't entirely agree with it. The SCCU has a vigorous internal program and appears to be at heart of chess activity in the South. It would have endured without the link to the county championships. The NCCU is an irrelevant bureaucratic backwater that would have been swept away taking the Manchester dispute with it. That was my point.

I'll also add that despite our differences on this matter I have always respected you as a man of integrity and do not include you in my criticisms of Surrey.

Thank you for your post, which I appreciate.

I also value your efforts as Controller of the ECF Counties Championships. It is a notoriously diificult job and I thank you for sticking to the task for four years, which is somewhat longer than many others have managed.

It is the season of goodwill, so I'd like to propose a truce.

Jonathan M, I extend that offer to you also. Accordingly I shall refrain from responding to your post beyond this paragraph.

[Nick Grey]

It is the season of goodwill. And Andrew I also value your efforts as Controller. I was a bit worried by the Surrey references as that has to be our Board.
That I sat in the same room as Bill at last years finals was fine. Enough about that.

I think I posted something similar this time last year. Perhaps I'll post New Years Eve when I get home from work.

Is it too much to wish for a peaceful 2019 without moaning about the ECF, Council, Counties, Leagues, Clubs, Tournaments and Chess in the UK?