Arbiters (jobs for) proposal.

[Sean Hewitt]

Kent are not the only county missing from the list of level2/3 arbiters. Middlesex' omission may be down to it being regarded as part of London, and we must note that one of the arbiters seems to be of no known abode. However the list given earlier also shows no such arbiter in Buckinghamshire, Cheshire, Cleveland, Cornwall, Cumbria, Dorset, Durham, Herefordshire, Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Shropshire, Suffolk, Wiltshire, or Worcestershire, some of which are home to more than one league.

Not sure why Cheshire is on that list as I'm certainly affiliated there. I play for a Cheshire club until last month lived in Cheshire. I've also made decisions in the past for the Northamptonshire League (on the back of my Leicestershire roots).

Without casting aspersions, Alex Holowczak may have something to say about the claim that Worcestershire has no qualified arbiters amongst its ranks.

I also note that Shropshire is on the list, yet successfully ran a FIDE rated congress this year with suitably qualified arbiters present.

In short - I'm not convinced that this list is accurate, nor representative.

[Michael Flatt]

Kent are not the only county missing from the list of level2/3 arbiters. Middlesex' omission may be down to it being regarded as part of London, and we must note that one of the arbiters seems to be of no known abode. However the list given earlier also shows no such arbiter in Buckinghamshire, Cheshire, Cleveland, Cornwall, Cumbria, Dorset, Durham, Herefordshire, Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Shropshire, Suffolk, Wiltshire, or Worcestershire, some of which are home to more than one league.

Not sure why Cheshire is on that list as I'm certainly affiliated there. I play for a Cheshire club until last month lived in Cheshire. I've also made decisions in the past for the Northamptonshire League (on the back of my Leicestershire roots).

Without casting aspersions, Alex Holowczak may have something to say about the claim that Worcestershire has no qualified arbiters amongst its ranks.

I also note that Shropshire is on the list, yet successfully ran a FIDE rated congress this year with suitably qualified arbiters present.

In short - I'm not convinced that this list is accurate, nor representative.

The table was constructed by combining data available on the ECF website as a rudimentary survey of how well the country is covered by Arbiters.

There were certain assumptions regarding where Arbiters are based by reference to their recent grading record. Each Arbiter was counted once, and once only, which requires making a choice as to where he was most active. West Midlands or Worcestershire is a mere detail in terms of the overall results.

I am not privy to exact information without conducting a detailed survey of all Leagues, Congresses and Arbiters. This exercise has served its purpose by promoting discussion.

If you you have more accurate data you of course free to share it with those taking an interest in this topic.

Incidentally, I am pleased that the anomaly regarding the withholding the appropriate ECF Arbiter status from a leading tournament organiser is finally to be resolved. It is something that I had previously flagged up to the Home Director along with the absence of qualified BCF Arbiters from the ECF list. At the time he said nothing could be done - apparently that was not correct.

[Roger de Coverly]

I also note that Shropshire is on the list, yet successfully ran a FIDE rated congress this year with suitably qualified arbiters present.

Chief Arbiter was ECF Director Dave Thomas, whom one would associate with Warwickshire. The Deputy Arbiter wasn't someone I'd heard of before, but his grading record is Brewood and Staffordshire. From memory they've asked Alex H to be an arbiter in previous years.

[Mike Truran]

Were the 'competition rules' emailed to all competition organisers to make sure they saw them?

I think it would be a good idea to consult the leagues directly.

Sounds sensible. It may take a few days, but we'll see what we can do (for both leagues and congresses, and for both arbiter regulations and competition rules). The database may not be perfect to start off with, but will no doubt improve with time.

[Sean Hewitt]

I also note that Shropshire is on the list, yet successfully ran a FIDE rated congress this year with suitably qualified arbiters present.

Chief Arbiter was ECF Director Dave Thomas, whom one would associate with Warwickshire. The Deputy Arbiter wasn't someone I'd heard of before, but his grading record is Brewood and Staffordshire. From memory they've asked Alex H to be an arbiter in previous years.

Which is exactly my point. County boundaries are not impenetrable.

[Ian Thompson]

If it's an intent that from 1st September 2016, all Congresses require the presence of an arbiter approved by the ECF in order to be graded, that's a strategic issue for those Congresses. But perhaps you have an email from the Home Director saying that's not the case.

I don't think there is any basis for saying this applies from 1 September. The ECF's statement that it is already the case appears to be incorrect and there is no date specified in the proposed new arbiter regulations, or elsewhere, of when it will apply from. Therefore, it will not take effect until the ECF specifies a date.

[John Swain]

You might have thought that the ECF would be more concerned with maximising its revenue stream and thinking of ways of persuading large areas like Yorkshire to become members, rather than putting obstacles in the path of getting games graded at a local (club/league/congress) level. But no...

There are many competent arbiters around, some with decades of experience, who have no formal qualifications at all. There are others in the same category who passed the BCF Arbiters' course, a qualification which was awarded, rightly or wrongly, for life. Yet in the Brave New World of ECF Arbiter Land, experience or a BCF Arbiter title count for nothing.

One could be cynical and suggest that some are more interested in their personal (rather than the ECF's) revenue stream, creating opportunities for themselves as trainers (and possibly paid arbiters).

I withdraw my last comment and apologise (I will also amend the original post). Having read the proposal more carefully, it is clear that only travel and accommodation expenses are proposed, rather than a fee, which hardly constitutes a "personal ... revenue stream".

Clearly, there is an urgent need to inform congresses about the personnel needed for their control teams and I would hope that the ECF will show considerable latitude to congresses which may struggle in the short term to meet the requirement of having a L1 ECF Arbiter present.

[Mike Truran]

Handsome words, and appreciated. Thank you.

As per my earlier post, we will endeavour to do better on communication to leagues and congresses as soon as we can.

[Carl Hibbard]

Handsome words, and appreciated. Thank you.

As per my earlier post, we will endeavour to do better on communication to leagues and congresses as soon as we can.

I have to ask if more traffic comes through here that the official site?

[Angus French]

Were the 'competition rules' emailed to all competition organisers to make sure they saw them?

I think it would be a good idea to consult the leagues directly.

Sounds sensible. It may take a few days, but we'll see what we can do (for both leagues and congresses, and for both arbiter regulations and competition rules). The database may not be perfect to start off with, but will no doubt improve with time.

Thanks Mike - and Alex.

[Michael Flatt]

In terms of planning training courses it would seem to me essential for the ECF to conduct a survey of all organisers that submit games for grading to establish:
1. Their current arrangements with regard to use of qualified Arbiters in their Rules and Appeals committees and in supervision of competitions,
2. Their estimate of how many places they expect to fill in Arbiter training seminars in the next three years,
3. Whether their preference is for an ECF or FIDE syllabus.

Having established the level of demand the ECF/Chess Arbiters Association could then plan how many courses to run and identify potential locations for them.

Will there be sufficient lecturers available to run all the necessary courses?

It seems rather a lot of work for Alex McF and Lara B, whom I assume would be most attendees preferred choice of lecturer.

[NickFaulks]

Is there any reason to think that leagues and their constituent clubs think that all of this is necessary, or has the ECF pulled it out of the air?

[Michael Flatt]

Is there any reason to think that leagues and their constituent clubs think that all of this is necessary, or has the ECF pulled it out of the air?

The first I knew of it was when RdC created this discussion thread. Nobody can know the leagues collective opinion until they are asked.

I thought that was one of the roles of Council to agree policy, but so far they have not been involved - as a member of Council I am not impressed.

There really ought to be a technical panel to oversee Rules and Appeals.

[Roger de Coverly]

The first I knew of it was when RdC created this discussion thread. Nobody can know the leagues collective opinion until they are asked.

Which even if it annoys ECF Directors and other insiders is the reason I do it. The premise probably dates back to 1979/80 or so and the Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

[Mike Truran]

Michael

Per my earlier post(s), my own view is that these are not policy issues for Council, but rather operational issues for the Board. I fully accept that views on this may differ.

In any event, given that I have already said in an earlier post that we will endeavour to engage with leagues and congresses (something we could maybe have done earlier, but nobody's perfect) I'm not really sure why you're unimpressed, given that direct contact with leagues and congresses is surely going to provide much more useful input that the (at best) once removed views of many Council members.