E Michael White wrote:
Michael Flatt wrote: Thus far, there has been no explanation regarding the reversal of the decision of the floor Arbiter which was ratified by the Appeal committee.
Contrary to the opinions of many posters and what it says in the event rules an appeal committee's ruling is not always final. The committee may have convened at the wrong time in the process and thus rendered their own findings invalid.
I think it worth reproducing my response to another poster in a far off land:
It needn't have been the subject of 3 separate FIDE Commissions if the ECF had explained why shadowy figures in the background can intervene and overturn the ruling of an Arbiter supervising a game and whose ruling was subject to appeal and ratified.
The ECF claims to have rules yet make bizarre interventions and undermine the authority of the Arbiter who is in the front line ensuring that games are played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess. If some Higher Authority believes that the Arbiter was inexperienced or incorrectly trained then that situation should be remedied by extra training and statement by the Chief Arbiter to explain the circumstances and offer advice to other Arbiters so as to avoid the same problem in future.
So I call on the Chief Arbiter to explain who intervened, the reason for their intervention and what the floor Arbiter did wrong in following the FIDE Laws of Chess.
There has been a report that an individual was expecting to be disciplined by the Arbiters Commission but that by ruling that it was not a FIDE event that was not an option.
Awarding 1.5 points for a game, particularly at the British Championships, should ring alarm bells.
It reinforces my point elsewhere that there are insufficient Senior ECF Arbiters and that regulation of competitions are subject to the whims of individuals who are unaccountable.