Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

General discussions about grading.
Sean Hewitt
Posts: 2190
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:27 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote:Before the howls of outrage start this is the critical point. The Yorkshire league has to be part of the membership and game fee structure because Yorkshire would be forced to disaffiliate if the league went ungraded. Andrew Farthing made this quite explicit and it was a big factor in the ultimate decision. Obviously Yorkshire couldn't and shouldn't be treated any differently; so how many leagues would be able to jump at this chance and how many would be kept in line by the disaffiliation threat? My point is that Yorkshire's size may be the reason there are so many satellite leagues and in that respect Yorkshire IS a special case.
I don't think that would work. The reason is that it would be totally unfair (in my opinion) to treat independent leagues in Yorkshire differently from independent leagues elsewhere in the country such as Stockport, Coventry, London etc. Why should those leagues be forced to pay £2 per game per non-member in order to have members games graded whilst Yorkshire leagues get away without making the same payment?

I really don't see that Yorkshire is a special case. It just thinks that it is.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19011
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:46 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote:The Yorkshire league has to be part of the membership and game fee structure because Yorkshire would be forced to disaffiliate if the league went ungraded. Andrew Farthing made this quite explicit and it was a big factor in the ultimate decision.
I don't actually think that's the case that non grading forces disaffiliation. Yorkshire can remain a member of the ECF by virtue of paying the membership fee or deemed membership fee demanded by the ECF. Lancashire, for example, is a member of the ECF but doesn't run a county league. The competitions run by the YCA and whether it wants such competitions to be nationally graded is a separate issue.

The logic is the other way round. If the YCA wants the Woodhouse and other events to be graded, then it has to join the ECF to permit this. The local leagues wouldn't have to join the ECF to be graded, since they could ask the YCA to submit games on their behalf, but the YCA would pass on costs and conditions imposed on it by the ECF.

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1816
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Sat Nov 17, 2012 2:16 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Andrew Zigmond wrote:The Yorkshire league has to be part of the membership and game fee structure because Yorkshire would be forced to disaffiliate if the league went ungraded. Andrew Farthing made this quite explicit and it was a big factor in the ultimate decision.
I don't actually think that's the case that non grading forces disaffiliation. Yorkshire can remain a member of the ECF by virtue of paying the membership fee or deemed membership fee demanded by the ECF. Lancashire, for example, is a member of the ECF but doesn't run a county league. The competitions run by the YCA and whether it wants such competitions to be nationally graded is a separate issue.

The logic is the other way round. If the YCA wants the Woodhouse and other events to be graded, then it has to join the ECF to permit this. The local leagues wouldn't have to join the ECF to be graded, since they could ask the YCA to submit games on their behalf, but the YCA would pass on costs and conditions imposed on it by the ECF.
I can assure you this is the case. Andrew Farthing made this very explicit at the YCA AGM; otherwise I think the preferred YCA option would have been for the Yorkshire league to have gone non ECF graded but for the YCA to remain affiliated. I think I can safely say that the only reason the AGM voted for the new structure was due to the threat of complete disaffiliation.

Sixteen pages into this thread we're not really an awful lot further on. I will keep saying this - there is now a strong pro ECF wing within the YCA that wants to bury the petty schisms of the past for once and for all. However this will not be an overnight process and at present it's the pro ECF players who feel like they're being kicked in the teeth.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19011
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Nov 17, 2012 2:47 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote: I can assure you this is the case. Andrew Farthing made this very explicit at the YCA AGM; otherwise I think the preferred YCA option would have been for the Yorkshire league to have gone non ECF graded but for the YCA to remain affiliated. I think I can safely say that the only reason the AGM voted for the new structure was due to the threat of complete disaffiliation.
I think the meeting should have challenged him on this. The ECF can put no compulsion on the YCA or any county association to even run a league, let alone dictate that it has to be graded. If you don't send the ECF any results, you don't get the league graded. Cumberland, we presume, are remaining members of the ECF, but won't get their county competitions graded unless they agree to the ECF's conditions.

Actually I suppose the ECF Board could vote to expel a voting member, or can they? Would such an expulsion be subject to approval of the voting membership, ie ECF Council meetings?

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1816
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Sat Nov 17, 2012 5:01 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Andrew Zigmond wrote: I can assure you this is the case. Andrew Farthing made this very explicit at the YCA AGM; otherwise I think the preferred YCA option would have been for the Yorkshire league to have gone non ECF graded but for the YCA to remain affiliated. I think I can safely say that the only reason the AGM voted for the new structure was due to the threat of complete disaffiliation.
I think the meeting should have challenged him on this. The ECF can put no compulsion on the YCA or any county association to even run a league, let alone dictate that it has to be graded. If you don't send the ECF any results, you don't get the league graded. Cumberland, we presume, are remaining members of the ECF, but won't get their county competitions graded unless they agree to the ECF's conditions.

Actually I suppose the ECF Board could vote to expel a voting member, or can they? Would such an expulsion be subject to approval of the voting membership, ie ECF Council meetings?
Could I ask for some clarity on this point, possibly from Sean Hewitt or Alex H. Feel free to message me privately if you feel this forum is not the most appropriate place for it.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Sean Hewitt
Posts: 2190
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sat Nov 17, 2012 5:49 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote:Could I ask for some clarity on this point, possibly from Sean Hewitt or Alex H. Feel free to message me privately if you feel this forum is not the most appropriate place for it.
Andrew - can you leave it with me to check into this for you? I don't want to give the wrong answer, and it's not something I know off the top of my head.

Dan O'Dowd
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:14 am
Location: Carlisle, Cumbria

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Dan O'Dowd » Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:52 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Andrew Zigmond wrote: I can assure you this is the case. Andrew Farthing made this very explicit at the YCA AGM; otherwise I think the preferred YCA option would have been for the Yorkshire league to have gone non ECF graded but for the YCA to remain affiliated. I think I can safely say that the only reason the AGM voted for the new structure was due to the threat of complete disaffiliation.
I think the meeting should have challenged him on this. The ECF can put no compulsion on the YCA or any county association to even run a league, let alone dictate that it has to be graded. If you don't send the ECF any results, you don't get the league graded. Cumberland, we presume, are remaining members of the ECF, but won't get their county competitions graded unless they agree to the ECF's conditions.

Actually I suppose the ECF Board could vote to expel a voting member, or can they? Would such an expulsion be subject to approval of the voting membership, ie ECF Council meetings?
Cumbria* (as distinct from the old Cumberland, Westmorland and Furness part of Lancashire) is indeed currently an ECF member. What with the South Lakes being individually registered as a tournament I don't know what will happen though since I will be playing in a match with our rep I can find out in a week. I also know that our grader has said he will internally grade games, though what relevance this assumes I have no idea, since I cannot presume he will end up with full access to all relevant results. If I get any further news on the childish wrangling above me, I will let you know, but our members are having their say at any rate.

Michele Clack
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:38 pm
Location: Worcestershire

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Michele Clack » Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:39 pm

I would like to say that is enjoyable meeting new people at congresses and in County games and I would like to think that all these sort of problems could be ovecome and we could be one big Chess Family. So come on folks lets all get behind the ECF and try and give chess a head of steam. After all what is the ECF but the sum of it's members?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19011
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:04 pm

michele clack wrote: After all what is the ECF but the sum of it's members?
A body seeking to dictate the terms on which competitive chess takes place perhaps.

It's the problem in Yorkshire that the local evening leagues are not members of the ECF and do not wish to become members even indirectly.

Michele Clack
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:38 pm
Location: Worcestershire

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Michele Clack » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:36 pm

Have you consulted the rank and file in Yorkshire Roger? It does sound from postings on here that some people in Yorkshire would very much like to be part of the ECF with one grading system. Any competitive activity needs rules and procedures, so why use language like
A body seeking to dictate the terms on which competitive chess takes place perhaps.
It's this sort of attitude that causes problems in the first place.

Matthew Turner
Posts: 2987
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Matthew Turner » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:59 pm

Michele,
Having a policy of spending $1m with the primary purpose of restricting funds for chess in developing nations might not be the best way of encouraging one 'big chess family'.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4079
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:06 pm

Matthew Turner wrote:Having a policy of spending $1m with the primary purpose of restricting funds for chess in developing nations might not be the best way of encouraging one 'big chess family'.
This wasn't the purpose of the legal action, and you know it wasn't the purpose of the legal action.

Matthew Turner
Posts: 2987
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Matthew Turner » Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:16 pm

Yes it was

Sean Hewitt
Posts: 2190
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:29 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote:
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Andrew Zigmond wrote: I can assure you this is the case. Andrew Farthing made this very explicit at the YCA AGM; otherwise I think the preferred YCA option would have been for the Yorkshire league to have gone non ECF graded but for the YCA to remain affiliated. I think I can safely say that the only reason the AGM voted for the new structure was due to the threat of complete disaffiliation.
I think the meeting should have challenged him on this. The ECF can put no compulsion on the YCA or any county association to even run a league, let alone dictate that it has to be graded. If you don't send the ECF any results, you don't get the league graded. Cumberland, we presume, are remaining members of the ECF, but won't get their county competitions graded unless they agree to the ECF's conditions.

Actually I suppose the ECF Board could vote to expel a voting member, or can they? Would such an expulsion be subject to approval of the voting membership, ie ECF Council meetings?
Could I ask for some clarity on this point, possibly from Sean Hewitt or Alex H. Feel free to message me privately if you feel this forum is not the most appropriate place for it.
Andrew - I can confirm that the YCA would not be disaffiliated if it chose not to grade the Yorkshire League as long as it continued to pay it's ECF membership fee.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19011
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:35 pm

michele clack wrote: It does sound from postings on here that some people in Yorkshire would very much like to be part of the ECF with one grading system.
Some of the people no doubt would, but the local league officials have shown next to no sign over the past twenty years of being interested in bringing their leagues in line with the rest of the country in joining and financing the ECF.

At a cost of immense local fighting, the YCA could have decreed that access to the local YCA grading system was also conditional on paying some form of league or individual fee, enough to finance the YCA being able to include local league games in the national system.

Post Reply