The future - 2011 and beyond.

[Alex Holowczak]

A few comments on this evening's posts:

I suppose I should be amazed that a struggling organisation such as the ECF would reject the offer of someone who is quite clearly more than competent to take on both roles. If as you obviously do feel that you can commit the time then I and I am sure many others think you should have been given the opportunity.

The vote could have been 99 to 1 against and it would still have been the wrong decision. Loz is commited, dedicated, seeks out peoples' views and opinions, is willing to listen and take action where appropriate and most of all has a burning desire to promote chess in this country. If the ECF can't or won't recognise this and allow a change in the rule of holding more than one Directorship then in the words of Frazer in Dad's Army "we are all doomed"

The point is, Council weren't voting on whether Loz could do two jobs. They had to amend the ECF articles such that anyone could have the possibility of doing two jobs in future. So while Loz may be a perfectly good candidate in October, Council were perhaps worried that someone down the line - who may or may not be as well-acclaimed as Loz - might inherit such a position which wouldn't be beneficial for the ECF by default.

Of course it might be worth considering that "they" already have a candidate for JD lined up

In fairness, there isn't a long list of people queuing up for it. I haven't even heard any gossip or rumours of people who might be standing.

Why is the ECF not starting the ball rolling now, so that everybody can ask the prospective JDs the right questions now, rather than once the election has taken place?

I'm not sure which ball there is to start rolling. The JD standing down is well known in junior circles, but as yet no hats have been publicly thrown into the ring. There are no prospective JDs to ask questions, alas.

Parents have no vote, no say, can only lobby delegates who can choose or not choose to listen. Right now, our only say is through this forum which in my opinion is unfair and wrong.

You are perfectly entitled to vote through the delegates. I think this actually works pretty well in practice if they know who you are. Of course, things like the NCJS and NYCA have a vote at Council meetings; junior organisations which can reflect the feeling of parents if you want them to. Parents have as much say in chess as, say, the average club player. So it's not just the parents that this applies to.

We don't think that the fact that the current incumbent was elected unopposed three years running sends a message to the board that people were happy with his policies. I believe the board should have addressed the lack of candidates and the reasons for this rather than just take what was on offer, you don't have to talk to many people to know that they are not happy but there is none so blind as those who will not see

I don't think anyone inferred anything from the lack of candidates - other than the fact that no one else wanted to do the job. The reason for the lack of candidates - I reckon - is that it's a very big job, and often a very thankless task. If Council has to vote for someone with experience of junior chess - be it positive or otherwise - or no one, inevitably the someone is going to win.

Is it right that parents/players should seek out who represents them, surely the representatives should be seeking out the parents/players otherwise how do they know they are casting their vote appropriately?

Delegates should seek out opinions of the people they represent, but the reality is that the vast majority of people they'd ask don't care. Often, the delegates don't even care themselves. A sizeable chunk don't even return the letter. There are a lot of poor delegates; you're free to stand as a delegate, of course, for each association. I don't know what stuff Peter plays in. If he plays in a local league, you could stand to be ECF delegate for that league. (Of course, you'd then have to canvass everyone in the league for ALL issues on the agenda, not just the junior director one, and attend twice-yearly Council meetings.) Then again, your League could have a very good delegate, and it'd be rather pointless standing against him.

If the delegate doesn't have your contact information for you - he's not likely to - then I don't think it's unrealistic for him not to contact you. The delegate will usually contact the League Officers, who may e-mail the clubs, who may e-mail the players, with replies filtering back up the pyramid. I'm sure if you made contact with the delegates who can represent you, then they'd be more than happy to listen and contact you about this sort of issue in future.

[Sean Hewitt]

We don't think that the fact that the current incumbent was elected unopposed three years running sends a message to the board that people were happy with his policies. I believe the board should have addressed the lack of candidates and the reasons for this rather than just take what was on offer, you don't have to talk to many people to know that they are not happy but there is none so blind as those who will not see

I shall make an open offer. If you find a candidate for the post who is willing to stand, I will nominate him or her for the post. You need to find the candidate by the first week in September.

[Paul Sanders]

I shall make an open offer. If you find a candidate for the post who is willing to stand, I will nominate him or her for the post. You need to find the candidate by the first week in September.

The post could also be replaced with a non-directorial role, or junior responsibilities could be added to International and Home. The ECF already has a Manager of Coaching, whose primary focus seems naturally to be junior, and who is arguably already covering the 'Education' part of the JD's jd.

A junior mandate for the Director of Home Chess might encourage an upgrade of the British to a broader multi-stage national junior championships, while International could add some very important team and individual initiatives to the existing junior responsibilities (World Junior and FIDE tournament liaison).

What's left is of course the fund-raising, Government relations, and ambassadorial role, which is notably absent from the ECF's junior efforts. I wonder if a candidate would come forward for that if the more contentious responsibility for selection were devolved elsewhere in the ECF.

There are many ways to skin the cat.

[Ian Thompson]

The ECF already has a Manager of Coaching, whose primary focus seems naturally to be junior, ...

I'm sure you're right that juniors are concentrated on, but perhaps more attention should be given to adults. For example, someone in their 60s has recently retired from work and decided they'd like to learn to play chess. Where would they go? Of course, the answer should be their local chess club, but I doubt that many chess clubs provide coaching for adults, unless they are prepared to join in with the children. From what I've seen of junior chess clubs, I suspect few would.

[Paul Sanders]

The ECF already has a Manager of Coaching, whose primary focus seems naturally to be junior, ...

I'm sure you're right that juniors are concentrated on, but perhaps more attention should be given to adults. For example, someone in their 60s has recently retired from work and decided they'd like to learn to play chess. Where would they go? Of course, the answer should be their local chess club, but I doubt that many chess clubs provide coaching for adults, unless they are prepared to join in with the children. From what I've seen of junior chess clubs, I suspect few would.

Ian - I think more attention should be given to both juniors and adults. But why would an adult not look at the list of accredited coaches maintained by the Manager of Coaching just as a parent would?

http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=365

I suspect however that for most of the coaches on the list their main source of coaching money is directly or indirectly from parents of juniors. Statistically also, though it's a bit crass perhaps to put it so bluntly, juniors are more likely to be 'the future - 2011 and beyond' (per subject of thread) than the over 60s are.

[andrew martin]

Yet more focus on kids....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWFSoPiWw_Q

I am thinking of a way to stimulate chess among senior citizens, but that's outside the scope of this thread

Whoever takes on the job of JD will be a hero in my book.

[Jon D'Souza-Eva]

I can think of a few people who would probably do a very good job, but they are all heavily involved in other areas of junior chess which I'd hate to see them leave.

[Ian Thompson]

Ian - I think more attention should be given to both juniors and adults. But why would an adult not look at the list of accredited coaches maintained by the Manager of Coaching just as a parent would?

The first thing is that they would have to know that it existed. As it's categorised as "ECF Junior" on the website, even if they thought to look at the national federation's website they might well miss it.

That aside, if I was thinking of taking up a new activity, I wouldn't start by looking for coaches. I'd most likely look for a club either in the library or on the internet. I'd then go along to that club to see what they offered. If I wanting coaching as a beginner I think I'd be looking for group sessions, at least to start with. I'd assume that individual coaching was aimed at the experienced player.

[William Metcalfe]

Darlington chess clubs has a policy for when any new players walk through the door any player not playing a serious game will go over and offer to play the new player in a friendly game to judge his strenth then we try and work out how to help his game if he is a beginner if he is a experianced player he will play stronger players to roughly asatain his playing strenth.

[Carol Williams]

We don't think that the fact that the current incumbent was elected unopposed three years running sends a message to the board that people were happy with his policies. I believe the board should have addressed the lack of candidates and the reasons for this rather than just take what was on offer, you don't have to talk to many people to know that they are not happy but there is none so blind as those who will not see

I shall make an open offer. If you find a candidate for the post who is willing to stand, I will nominate him or her for the post. You need to find the candidate by the first week in September.

Loz Cooper

[Carol Williams]

A few comments on this evening's posts:

I suppose I should be amazed that a struggling organisation such as the ECF would reject the offer of someone who is quite clearly more than competent to take on both roles. If as you obviously do feel that you can commit the time then I and I am sure many others think you should have been given the opportunity.

The vote could have been 99 to 1 against and it would still have been the wrong decision. Loz is commited, dedicated, seeks out peoples' views and opinions, is willing to listen and take action where appropriate and most of all has a burning desire to promote chess in this country. If the ECF can't or won't recognise this and allow a change in the rule of holding more than one Directorship then in the words of Frazer in Dad's Army "we are all doomed"

The point is, Council weren't voting on whether Loz could do two jobs. They had to amend the ECF articles such that anyone could have the possibility of doing two jobs in future. So while Loz may be a perfectly good candidate in October, Council were perhaps worried that someone down the line - who may or may not be as well-acclaimed as Loz - might inherit such a position which wouldn't be beneficial for the ECF by default.

Can't the ECF articles be amended but with a caveat that ensures a review of the amendment each time the post comes up for re-election?

Of course it might be worth considering that "they" already have a candidate for JD lined up

In fairness, there isn't a long list of people queuing up for it. I haven't even heard any gossip or rumours of people who might be standing.

Why is the ECF not starting the ball rolling now, so that everybody can ask the prospective JDs the right questions now, rather than once the election has taken place?

I'm not sure which ball there is to start rolling. The JD standing down is well known in junior circles, but as yet no hats have been publicly thrown into the ring. There are no prospective JDs to ask questions, alas.

The ECF Board should be talking to people they feel have the skills to do this role.

Parents have no vote, no say, can only lobby delegates who can choose or not choose to listen. Right now, our only say is through this forum which in my opinion is unfair and wrong.

You are perfectly entitled to vote through the delegates. I think this actually works pretty well in practice if they know who you are. Of course, things like the NCJS and NYCA have a vote at Council meetings; junior organisations which can reflect the feeling of parents if you want them to. Parents have as much say in chess as, say, the average club player. So it's not just the parents that this applies to.

We don't think that the fact that the current incumbent was elected unopposed three years running sends a message to the board that people were happy with his policies. I believe the board should have addressed the lack of candidates and the reasons for this rather than just take what was on offer, you don't have to talk to many people to know that they are not happy but there is none so blind as those who will not see

I don't think anyone inferred anything from the lack of candidates - other than the fact that no one else wanted to do the job. The reason for the lack of candidates - I reckon - is that it's a very big job, and often a very thankless task. If Council has to vote for someone with experience of junior chess - be it positive or otherwise - or no one, inevitably the someone is going to win.

Is it right that parents/players should seek out who represents them, surely the representatives should be seeking out the parents/players otherwise how do they know they are casting their vote appropriately?

Delegates should seek out opinions of the people they represent, but the reality is that the vast majority of people they'd ask don't care. Often, the delegates don't even care themselves. A sizeable chunk don't even return the letter. There are a lot of poor delegates; you're free to stand as a delegate, of course, for each association. I don't know what stuff Peter plays in. If he plays in a local league, you could stand to be ECF delegate for that league. (Of course, you'd then have to canvass everyone in the league for ALL issues on the agenda, not just the junior director one, and attend twice-yearly Council meetings.) Then again, your League could have a very good delegate, and it'd be rather pointless standing against him.


If the delegate doesn't have your contact information for you - he's not likely to - then I don't think it's unrealistic for him not to contact you. The delegate will usually contact the League Officers, who may e-mail the clubs, who may e-mail the players, with replies filtering back up the pyramid. I'm sure if you made contact with the delegates who can represent you, then they'd be more than happy to listen and contact you about this sort of issue in future.

This is very interesting and perhaps one of the key issues that needs addressing, if as you say often the delegates don't care then how can any of us hope to change the ECF? Is it a good idea for the delegate contact details to be on the ECF website? At least that way players could contact their delegate easily

[Sabrina Chevannes]

Yes it is a shame that Lawrence cannot take on the role fully as everyone is clearly behind him and he will obviously be a good choice. Unfortunately the current ECF policies do not allow him to take on both directorships.

However, if Lawrence was to find someone that he could work with and trust, I am sure that the new Junior Director could hand over the International responsibility over to Lawrence to overlap with his current directorship. This would take a big weight off the new director's hands. They would of course work together and plan the selections. I am sure the new director will want to consider various selection processes and not just one selection tournament and it might be a nice idea for the new director to hear the voices of the current active parents, as they are the ones who will be truly affected by the change and not the director.

Then the junior director can focus on introducing more junior tournaments. The chance to achieve more national titles would be a nice thing. Jovanka and I have started to run the National Girls' Chess Championships which consists of four qualifiers and a final and there could be another general junior tournament like this, and not just for girls.

I really hear what people are saying about no official England team. This is something I have been wondering about for ages - it is rather crazy that there isn't one! We are trying to resurrect the England Girls team at the moment and it would be nice if International events could be organised for the England team and England Girls' team. This is something that Loz could also help with.

I LOVE Krishna's ideas regarding teaching as it is well structured and motivated. It is also a social thing. Jovanka and I will be running similar events over the summer so watch this space
This is something the new Junior Director can work with Andrew Martin with as he is in charge of coaching. If the new Junior Director works closely with all his fellow colleagues and the workload is shared out, then it will be less of a burden and I think more successful.

I am confident we can find someone who can work with Loz and Andrew in order to get the best for our children. We have a lot of people working hard already to get more children playing chess, so if we all work together, I think English chess can be a success.

[Carol Williams]

Apologies Alex

I have tried to respond to some points you raised on the posting and inadvertently made it appear that you had written comments which were actually my responses to your original comments!

To avoid any confusion I list below my comments to Alex's post

Once again sorry

Can't the ECF articles be amended but with a caveat that ensures a review of the amendment each time the post comes up for re-election?

The ECF Board should be talking to people they feel have the skills to do this role.

This is very interesting and perhaps one of the key issues that needs addressing, if as you say often the delegates don't care then how can any of us hope to change the ECF? Is it a good idea for the delegate contact details to be on the ECF website? At least that way players could contact their delegate easily

[Alex Holowczak]

This is very interesting and perhaps one of the key issues that needs addressing, if as you say often the delegates don't care then how can any of us hope to change the ECF? Is it a good idea for the delegate contact details to be on the ECF website? At least that way players could contact their delegate easily

Well, I only infer that some delegates "don't care" because they don't return the letter, or nominate a proxy. They might never have received it, because of a change of address. The organisation might just not have chased it up. If they were that interested, they'd chase it up...

If you click here, you can download the information you require. Not all of the contact information there, but that'll be because either:
(a) They opted out of providing it
(b) They don't have computers, so didn't provide an e-mail address
(c) They never returned the letter asking for this information (it was in the same mail that had the letter to return to say whether or not you were attending Council).

Also, FYI: as a Director already, I think Loz can nominate himself. It's always good to have lots of extra nominations for a candidate though.

[Alex Holowczak]

No harm done, Jack'll tidy it up later!

Can't the ECF articles be amended but with a caveat that ensures a review of the amendment each time the post comes up for re-election?

I'm not the person to be asking legal questions, but instinctively that sounds like dodgy ground to tread on.

The ECF Board should be talking to people they feel have the skills to do this role.

Not sure it should be up to the Board. I think it should be up to the outgoing Director to seek a replacement if there aren't any obvious candidates who have expressed an interest.

This is very interesting and perhaps one of the key issues that needs addressing, if as you say often the delegates don't care then how can any of us hope to change the ECF? Is it a good idea for the delegate contact details to be on the ECF website? At least that way players could contact their delegate easily

Already replied above!