English Chess Forum

Breaking News

Gerry Walsh has announced that he will not seek re-election as ECF President in October.

More to follow

I've just received the Papers for the ECF Council Meeting on 18th April.

I quote the following from the President's Report, verbatim and without comment:

"When we reach October Council I will have completed 10 years as lead officer for the federation and I can advise you that I have informed the Board that I shall not seek re relection as President and I have asked the Board to consider the manner of finding a new candidate to contest the Presidential election at October Council. I do not wish to leave the ECF completely and I would like to continue as your FIDE delegate."

In the introduction to the topic dealing with USCF matters on her Forum, Susan Polgar makes the following request: "Please be respectful to everyone".

May I make the same plea in respect of any contributions to this thread.

David Sedgwick wrote:May I make the same plea in respect of any contributions to this thread.

I won't accept anything but constructive comments on this particular thread

Ernie Lazenby wrote:Ben why do you feel the need to make the last post. The decision by Gerry warrants a little more respect I think

As I pointed out, I was looking for constructive comments on this one

Loving the two faced new look Ernie. Ill remember Gerry for making alister Hung cry at ampleforth 2, thatll be it really, its how most of my side remember him. Whilst he did do good in his time, this was a belated resignation.

Ben

PS: Who is taking up the role is not disrespectful, its the question you ask when someone resigns. If someone dies then of course its distasteful in the short term. But eventually you need to know whos stepping in to the role. after all ernie you have been eyeing up the role, so go on son.

Ben Purton wrote:Loving the two faced new look Ernie. Ill remember Gerry for making alister Hung cry at ampleforth 2, thatll be it really, its how most of my side remember him. Whilst he did do good in his time, this was a belated resignation.

Ben

I think Ernie's position has always been quite clear.

Ernie has respected Gerry "the man" but not in, as you say quite rightly, belated "holding on of" position as ECF President. I remember the post regarding the "slating" of Gerry from Nigel Short previously - right intent from Nigel to try and get some changes in the ECF but a rather idiotic statement regarding Gerry "the man" and his Mother, which took away any constructive arguments he had. Ernie at that time opposed the statement rightly due to the personal nature of the attack.

Constructive criticism should always be welcome but criticism for criticism's sake shouldn't be accepted.

I struggle to respect anyone whos suppose to promote chess and can make a 15 year old from a struggling background cry. So I really don't mind if what i say needs to be taken with salt.

Official report is now here:-

http://www.bcf.org.uk/organisation/meet ... _mar09.htm

Ernie Lazenby wrote:
I mentioned that this was discussed at a recent meeting of the Northern Counties Chess Union. It is to be pursued.

This is from the published minutes
‘Making the ECF Presidents position a figure head position only.’
Questions were raised as to the job description of the ECF President and who wanted it? The question of being a figurehead with no power also raised the issue of having more than one position within the ECF as the President of the ECF was also the FIDE representative. The meeting concurred with the proposal.
ACTION – Dave Cole to look into the ECF President’s job description and formulate a proposal for the April ECF Council meeting.

Ernie, these proposals don't seem to have materialised. Do you know why not?

In the circumstances a constructive debate at the April Council Meeting about the future role of the President would have been extremely well-timed. We seem to have lost the opportunity.

Ben Purton wrote:Who is taking up the role is not disrespectful, its the question you ask when someone resigns

Ben, I didn't see the post of yours which Carl removed. Perhaps that's just as well.

I'll endeavour to give a constructive reply to a reasonable underlying question.

In my opinion, and it is only my opinion, one of two things can now happen:

1. The Board can take no action and await one or more candidates offering themselves for election as President in October. Council can then decide between these candidates on their merits.

2. The Board can initiate a consultation process, in particular within the Unions, with a view to identifying a candidate who can command general support and thus potentially avoiding the need for a contested election.

It seems to me that there are pros and cons to both approaches

David Sedgwick wrote:2. The Board can initiate a consultation process, in particular within the Unions, with a view to identifying a candidate who can command general support and thus potentially avoiding the need for a contested election.

The CFS fiasco has to be resolved first in my opinion, like the Finance Director position there is a danger that no candidates will even come forward for the role

Thanks for the reply, Ernie.

Ernie Lazenby wrote:.
Notwithstanding Gerry's decision I feel the NCCU proposal should be put forward and followed through.

The problem now is that, short of a Special Council Meeting, there won't be any way for Council to make a formal decision as to the future role of the President before potential candidates for the position have to decide whether or not to submit nomination papers.

I vote Ernie for president!!!

Should I stand for the role? I'm open to argument either way.

You might find yourself playing a lot less chess if you did.