Sean Hewitt wrote:
Krishna Shiatis wrote:Yet we seem to have hundreds of thousands to pay for legal fees on a case which we have now been told we had an unlikely chance of ever winning.
I do understand that there is a private individual who has very kindly agreed to foot the bill, but the question remains, if there was somebody within the ECF who did manage to persuade the aforesaid individual to part with wads of cash, could they not have spent it on something more useful and actually beneficial to all rather than on a very risky bet which seems to involve a lot of sacrificing by this rich individual and has a detrimental effect on our standing now with FIDE in general?
I think it is the other way around. The ECF didn't persuade the individual to part with their cash - rather they asked the ECF to front the action they wanted to take but couldn't because they were not a national federation. That individual is Garry Kasparov.
So, in all fairness (and assuming that the guarantees hold good) this won't affect the ECF or it's finances. The money would never have been available for anything in England other than the litigation.
It is good to be told this kind of information - why is this not stated publicly on the ECF website?
I think the key part of what you just said is
"assuming the guarantees hold good...."
If they do not, then we are in big doggy doo-doos n'est pas?
Actually I would have still asked Garry to fund something in the UK in return for what we are doing on the premise that he has cash to spend on chess and it would have been a far better way to spend his money.
I am sure that somebody could have put the question to him. Who knows? He might have agreed. I am sure if you were to ask him now, whether he would choose to pay lawyers or help his friends in England with all this money, I think his answer would be to help us.