No news is bad news

[E Michael White]

The mirror gambit wont work in this photo as one of the boards would have to be wrong.



The mirror gambit doesn't really work in the other original photo either as its just about possible to read notices with capital letters at the end of words and shirts usually button on the right.

Hope this project works.

[Nick Thomas]

Come to think of it I think we deserve a full explanation and possibly apology from all those who made promises e.g. Charles, Fergus, Gerry and Peter Wilson are the 4 who come to mind. It was good of Fergus to come onto this forum with a partial explanation but I feel as though it is too little too late. I have no doubt he entered this mess with the best of intentions but he made promises and commitments and should shoulder some responsibility for the mess we are in. Charles is another who probably had the interest of chess at heart but he is probably most guilty of repeatedly making promises which he was in no position to honour. Not sure what to say about Gerry and Peter. They were more than keen to bask in the reflected glory a year or so ago but where are they now??

One more thing. It is time for the ECF to remove or amend the nonsense on the home page of their website and for the Chess For Schools website to be removed or amended.

I think it's all out of my system now...

[andrew martin]

Nick,

One of the very first things I asked for as ' Director' was that the Chess for Schools intro on the ECF front page should be taken down until clarification from Holloid about the production of the sets was sought.

Once a clear schedule was established, everything could be put back up again.

I also asked for all new applications from schools to be closed until guarantees about production of the sets could be given. The applications could always be reopened. I felt really bad and still do about getting these new applications coming into my mailbox when I couldn't give any promises in return.

I felt this was only right and fair to the schools and to the children and I still think so.

Not only was this directive blocked, but a certain member of the board called for my immediate resignation, branding this action ' suicidal'.

No comment.

I can tell you I am very, very angry about all the bad press the ECF is getting, because I am proud of a lot of the things the Federation does and I am very happy to be part of the team. Believe me, most of the ECF team do a fantastic job.

In this case though, all pride seems to be thrown out of the window and we are literally...grovelling.

Even now,if handled correctly,this project could still turn out to be the ECF's finest hour.

It is high time public statements were made by the instigators of the project detailing our ongoing plans. No spin.

The ECF owes it to the members.

Andrew

[Carl Hibbard]

The latest ECF posting does suggest "monthly" web site updates?

Here:-

http://www.bcf.org.uk/organisation/meet ... _jul08.htm

[Sean Hewitt]

I dont recall the regional meetings happening either.

[JustinHorton]

I don't think I follow the argument there. Or at least I follow the last part all right, but I don't see what positive purpose would be served by Andrew resigning.

[Mike Truran]

Well, I guess the point is that it's always good for boards to present a united front to the outside world. In business, directors who have a fundamental disagreement with the rest of the board (and this is I think a fundamental disagreement) do tend to put their bats under their arms and walk off the pitch.

[John Upham]

I don't think I follow the argument there. Or at least I follow the last part all right, but I don't see what positive purpose would be served by Andrew resigning.

I totally agree Justin. The only way to fight is from the inside. Otherwise, all else is "water off a ducks back".

I very much hope Andrew will stay in post : there is work to be done.

[JustinHorton]

Well, I guess the point is that it's always good for boards to present a united front to the outside world. In business, directors who have a fundamental disagreement with the rest of the board (and this is I think a fundamental disagreement) do tend to put their bats under their arms and walk off the pitch.

That's a fair point - although I'm fairly sure that sometimes they don't, if they think other board members may back them.

[andrew martin]

I would just like to say I have no intention of resigning whatsoever and that I have the utmost respect for the unselfish and excellent work most of the ECF officials do.

Andrew

[David Robertson]

Martin Regan & Mike Truran are quite right of course. In the normal conduct of a Board in the real world - that is, where the Board conducts its affairs in accordance with the protocols of the Combined Code of corporate governance - a Director standing in fundamental disagreement with his colleagues would consider his position and resign; or have the Chair take steps to achieve the same end. A Board is either unified, or it isn't properly a Board.

In that sense, the ECF Board has never been a Board. It doesn't think like a Board; it doesn't act as a Board; its members don't behave like responsible Directors.

It's really a Committee that pretends to be a Board; but not one that exists in the real world.

David
Atticus CC

[Nick Thomas]

Andrew.
Thanks, I appreciate your reply and agree with most if not all of it. I do think we deserve a fuller explanation from Fergus and some sort of explanation from the others I mentioned. I know this fiasco will cost me money because I feel partly responsible for the broken promises to my schools (I am the only “ECF” person they know after all) and will probably end up putting my hand in my pocket. I’m sure I won’t be the only one.

Whatever else happens Andrew please keep us informed of the TRUE situation. I know you are getting some criticism on this forum for your bluntness and honesty (a character trait of yours I noticed on the cricket pitch!) but the alternative is secrecy and underhandedness which is far worse.

[Mike Truran]

Nick, to be fair I don't think the comments made realte to Andrew's "bluntness and honesty", which I think we all agree are admirable, if only because in such short supply elsewhere in the ECF. The point being made (rightly or wrongly) is that a director having such fundamental differences with the rest of the board might want to "consider his position", as they say - leaving him free to be as blunt and honest as he likes outside the board. At least that is what would typically happen in the business world. Of course, it would be a fair point to make in response that if Andrew did resign from the board he would no longer have the inside knowledge he gets as a director, so would have limited information to be blunt and honest with!

[JustinHorton]

My strong preference would be for Andrew not to resign, though of course it's entirely his decision. Whatever parallels are being drawn from other situations, I don't see the advantage in this particular one.

[John Upham]

My strong preference would be for Andrew not to resign, though of course it's entirely his decision. Whatever parallels are being drawn from other situations, I don't see the advantage in this particular one.

Who would you like to see resign?