ECF Elections 2015

[Jonathan Rogers]

....
David Openshaw's statement includes

Seniors Chess: Further outside help (of approximately £12000) have allowed us to field strong teams and support individuals in World and European Individual and Team Championships with good results (World Seniors Team Championship 2015 bronze medal, Keith Arkell European Seniors Champion 2014).

Am I missing something here? Wasn't the ECF support in both cases nil, Keith raised funds from this very Forum, and Terry Chapman paid the Team money?

I think that's right, but it seems consistent enough with David's reference to "outside help".

Various points occur to me

1) Home Director (HD) and International Director (ID) are both opposed by other people who already attend Board meetings. This happens rarely if ever, and now it happens twice! Would one be right in inferring that the CEO asked both challengers to contest the post? However much they may have already "thought about it", did they approach the CEO to sound him out about the idea, or did he approach them?

2) After all, to judge from his own election statement, there seems little doubt that the CEO welcomes their challenges. He is not allowed to comment on the other elections now, but to my mind there is a wink and a nod in his statement which seems to say "we're doing quite well overall, not in running the British or funding the International teams, that's all been a bit disappointing, but we hope to be back on track soon".

3) Exactly how is JF going to deliver his platform? And if Malcolm can find funding for the international teams, shouldn't be asked whether he has already offered his help to the incumbent?

4) No doubt Malcolm and JF really do have a lot to offer, though, and I have commented more adversely than most on the current ID's obsession with funding only the Open team. But the way in which the posts have been seen to be contested is a less happy point, and I think that this point alone will decide the HD election in favour of Alex.

Do things have to be this way?

[raycollett]

According to one post elsewhere: "Chess24 asked us about broadcasting on 17th July, 10 days before the start of the event". Such short notice for such an ITC intensive request seems odd. I received the impression that the issue of international coverage of the Brit Championships was tied up with a planned proposed sponsor. Did the sponsor only come forward within a few weeks of the congress? Anyone care to comment?

[Simon Ansell]

Well, like Simon said, Yorkshire is almost independent

I mentioned Yorkshire because we've just moved to York!

In general I'd think its surely sanest to try and ignore whatever nonsense the time localised incarnation of the ECF is getting up to and view membership as supporting the overall idea of a country wide chess entity?

You're probably right and maybe I was a bit strong, but reading those threads at the other place depressed me. Noone should have to work in such an environment, least of all volunteers.

[LawrenceCooper]

4) No doubt Malcolm and JF really do have a lot to offer, though, and I have commented more adversely than most on the current ID's obsession with funding only the Open team. But the way in which the posts have been seen to be contested is a less happy point, and I think that this point alone will decide the HD election in favour of Alex.

Do things have to be this way?

Hostile electioneering isn't unknown, the 2011 Junior election was unpleasant at times, I can vouch for that as I was supportive of Sabrina once I had made the decision not to stand and continue in International. I also found the lead up to my election as Junior Director to be very uncomfortable, intimidating phone calls, unpleasant comments made to those associated with my coaching and teams and attempts to get some of my closest friends to stand against me are things I won't forget in a hurry. I fear Alex is in for a similar fate, although there was already unpleasantness towards him and myself towards the end of the 2013-14 election year and that is almost 12 months ago.

Whilst I have my preferred candidates at the elections my real hope is that whatever board we end up with will show respect towards each other and not air their dirty linen in public. That said, recent events do allow Council more idea of what goes on behind the scenes and allows them to vote not only on election address but also on public conduct.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

I was about to read some of the threads on the other place, but someone seems to have made the place unreadable by creating numerous threads for Q&A sessions. (Yes, I know it was deliberate, to try and encourage calm moderated debate. Let's see if that actually happens. You can't force debates to be calm and civilised.)

Oh, and I agree absolutely with Lawrence above, hoping that: "whatever board we end up with will show respect towards each other".

[IM Jack Rudd]

It's not that unreadable. All those threads are sitting neatly in Ask The Director.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

True. Though I click on "active topics". Still, the Q&A sessions that no-one replies to will drift down that listing anyway. Though as there are really only 2-3 active threads over there, it won't make much difference.

[Carl Hibbard]

Should we have a bet how many will get a question let alone an answer?

[Michael Flatt]

There doesn't seem to be much happening in the way of debate on the the other channel.

The live-in caretaker has knocked up some virtually identically named threads that have killed the conversation stone dead.

If I were the moderator I would delete them all and let posters name their own threads. Its all rather too nannyish for my liking.

[raycollett]

Carl Hibbard wrote:

Should we have a bet how many will get a question let alone an answer?

Sorry. Will I be blackballed

[Carl Hibbard]

Carl Hibbard wrote:

Should we have a bet how many will get a question let alone an answer?

Sorry. Will I be blackballed

As always Paul Cooksey has a plan I can actually respect to see how far the other place has come and it should really be a good reflection on the point of the other forum.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Seniors Chess: Further outside help (of approximately £12000) have allowed us to field strong teams and support individuals in World and European Individual and Team Championships with good results (World Seniors Team Championship 2015 bronze medal, Keith Arkell European Seniors Champion 2014).

Am I missing something here? Wasn't the ECF support in both cases nil, Keith raised funds from this very Forum, and Terry Chapman paid the Team money?

I think that's right, but it seems consistent enough with David's reference to "outside help"."

It is a bit misleading though - he seems to be implying that he was responsible for the money coming in, and I am not sure that was the case...

[Ian Thompson]

David Openshaw's statement includes

Seniors Chess: Further outside help (of approximately £12000) have allowed us to field strong teams and support individuals in World and European Individual and Team Championships with good results (World Seniors Team Championship 2015 bronze medal, Keith Arkell European Seniors Champion 2014).

Am I missing something here? Wasn't the ECF support in both cases nil, Keith raised funds from this very Forum, and Terry Chapman paid the Team money?

In respect of the World Seniors Team Championship it would be interesting to know how the team was selected. Was it an England team freely selected by the ECF or did the money come with conditions attached to either who was going to select the team or who had to be in it for the money to be available?

[Mike Truran]

C'mon Ian! Why don't you take a wild guess?

[Jonathan Bryant]

In respect of the World Seniors Team Championship it would be interesting to know how the team was selected. Was it an England team freely selected by the ECF or did the money come with conditions attached to either who was going to select the team or who had to be in it for the money to be available?

http://gardinerchess.com.au/gm-rogers-h ... rld-title/


A very good piece by Ian Rogers that, I think. Complete absence of anything similar in the British chess press (of course).