English Chess Forum

With a large amount of news appearing on the ECF website today, the invitation to submit nominations for the PLAYER of the YEAR Award has disappeared from the front page of the website.

If you have not yet made your nominations DON'T PANIC. You can find the invitation by typing 'PLAYER OF THE YEAR' into the search box near the top right hand corner.

PLEASE DO SO! I am grateful to the 50 or so members who have responded so far. But with only 50 or so of our 8000-10000? members troubling to vote so far it makes the turnout at the FINANCE COUNCIL MEETING look positively massive.

Paul Bielby, Chairman ECF Awards Committee

oh dear

Evidence has emerged of widespread attempts in certain quarters to manipulate the voting for the Player of the Year award. The ECF Awards Committee has therefore concluded, with great reluctance, that it has no choice but to abandon this year’s exercise. The Committee will be considering how the process can be improved next year to ensure that the Player of the Year award is made on genuine merit rather than as the result of unacceptable behaviour.

Why is it that for the last ten years or so, this process is seemingly frequently beset with serious problems?

Jonathan Rogers wrote:Why is it that for the last ten years or so, this process is seemingly frequently beset with serious problems?

The voting process is the ECF's only OMOV, but doing it without imposing security measures leaves it vulnerable to being hijacked.

The nomination process has been controversial as well, this sometimes attacked by those with agendas or issues to raise

We entrust Council with elections for everything else where allowed by the directors, why not give them (Council) the task of determining player of the year?

Suitable considerations invited. First come first served!

I assume a bit of lobbying for votes takes place each year. I wonder how it was different/ worse this year?

Chris Rice wrote: the result of unacceptable behaviour.

Presumably there were attempts from individuals to vote on behalf of other individuals using membership data in the public arena.

I would have thought that one email address together with a unique membership ID was sufficient.

I'm trying to imagine what is meant by "unacceptable behaviour".

Perhaps Putin was involved or would that be fake news?

John Upham wrote:

Chris Rice wrote: the result of unacceptable behaviour.

Presumably there were attempts from individuals to vote on behalf of other individuals using membership data in the public arena.

I would have thought that one email address together with a unique membership ID was sufficient.

I'm trying to imagine what is meant by "unacceptable behaviour".

Perhaps Putin was involved or would that be fake news?

I would imagine that "unacceptable behaviour" could be, let's say, to be kind, over exuberant campaigning.

So, we need a poll on here then

Someone please tell me I'm wrong but I've always thought that, if for example a moderately-sized club or other organisation could persuade say 60 of its members to vote for one candidate, that should be enough to swing it. I surely can't be the only person to have had that thought and, in all likelihood, some people (past and/or present) have very likely not simply had the thought but acted on it.

Rather curiously I was chatting to Paul Bielby at South Lakes last Saturday about the awards and everything seemed perfectly on course and hunky-dory. Either he was excellent at dissumulating (which didn't strike me as likely - though I had never met him previously) or things have blown up only this week.

Roger Lancaster wrote:Someone please tell me I'm wrong but I've always thought that, if for example a moderately-sized club or other organisation could persuade say 60 of its members to vote for one candidate, that should be enough to swing it. I surely can't be the only person to have had that thought and, in all likelihood, some people (past and/or present) have very likely not simply had the thought but acted on it.

Ben Purton once launched a campaign to get Liam Varnam the award. He didn't come anywhere near winning, but I think he finished fifth or thereabouts.

Roger de Coverly wrote:why not give Council the task of determining player of the year?

Because then Sean Hewitt would win it every year

I wonder if the ECF will take an IAG type stance in revealing the specifics of the problem encountered ?

David Robertson wrote:

Roger de Coverly wrote:why not give Council the task of determining player of the year?

Because then Sean Hewitt would win it every year

I think that's now a little out of date, prof. (though the principle remains).