English Chess Forum

andrew martin wrote:Are you at the 4NCL this weekend Sabrina? We can discuss this face to face.

Sounds like a telling off more than an answer to some of the excellent questions Sabrina was raising?

Carl, I would be grateful if you would disable my account on this forum. I understand you will retain the posts I've made.

Thanks.

Carl Hibbard wrote:

andrew martin wrote:Are you at the 4NCL this weekend Sabrina? We can discuss this face to face.

Sounds like a telling off more than an answer to some of the excellent questions Sabrina was raising?

But who would be telling off whom ?

A good question

However we clearly now won't be getting an answer to the point Sabrina raised which is a shame

I never get any answers when I raise questions of something that doesn't sound quite right! These things just continue. However, if I was to do the same....Oh boy!

Sabrina Chevannes wrote:I never get any answers when I raise questions of something that doesn't sound quite right! These things just continue. However, if I was to do the same....Oh boy!

I agree with you Sabrina, it appears impossible to get answers over issues.

Is this forum incapable of conducting debates without someone closing their account?

Sebastian Stone wrote:Is this forum incapable of conducting debates without someone closing their account?

I suppose he took umbrage at Carl's supposed support for Sabrina. In general, Carl intervenes very little. I believe he prefers it if names are not mentioned directly when they're being accused of something and that posts mostly consisting of sarcasm and derision would be unwelcome. I think a well known blogger might find his posts censored, where he to register, not for content, but for tone. It's not likely to happen as if he were to register and post here that would allow his words of wisdom to be directly commented upon.

Roger de Coverly wrote:I suppose he took umbrage at Carl's supposed support for Sabrina. In general, Carl intervenes very little.

I did feel in this instance the comment of Sabrina had merit and deserved an answer

Roger de Coverly wrote:I think a well known blogger might find his posts censored, where he to register, not for content, but for tone. It's not likely to happen as if he were to register and post here that would allow his words of wisdom to be directly commented upon.

Quite happen for him to register as we do allow and prefer comments

andrew martin wrote:Carl, I would be grateful if you would disable my account on this forum. I understand you will retain the posts I've made.

Thanks.

Why has Andrew disabled his account here?

Whether Carl has questioned him or not, whether Sabrina has questioned him or not, he should just answer at the very least.

Sabrina has raised a fair question and she deserves an answer (as do we all, who are wondering the same thing).

Knowing Andrew, I imagine he took offence at the telling off post. He raised a concern about Sabrina's comments, given her potential conflict of interest, then when his concern was misunderstood, he tried to take it offline. Seems perfectly reasonable.

As it happens, I agree with him. But speaking as an unaccredited person who does some coaching, and a non-member of the ECF, I am rather less concerned than he seems to be.

Which bit do you agree with Simon?

I was asking about the fact that the official ECF coaching site was just a picture of him and a link to his academy's website.

You mention again about my personal conflict of interest - but which is this? All I have ever said is that I want the best for the juniors. I haven't suggested any of them get coaching from me or direct a link off an ECF coaching page to my website.

So why is that I have a supposed conflict of interest here, but yet Andrew does not? I just want to know why it is some rules for some people and different ones for others.

Would just love a valid explanation

Without commenting on the specific disagreement I will say something about 'conflict of interest'. A conflict of interest in my opinion exists in both cases. This is not the same as saying that you would use it to your benefit. As you have stated (and I'm not disagreeing) you want the best for the juniors.
The point is that if you could suggest to them that they should get coaching from you instead of another coach. It is a potential conflict of interest - the fact that you won't take advantage of the situation doesn't mean that a problem (in theory at least) doesn't exist.

Hi Sabrina

You make some fairly scathing remarks about the efficacy of the ECF's Accredited Coach scheme, yet you are an ECF official. I imagine Andrew was concerned that an ECF official was being very critical of an ECF scheme, and was questioning whether the ECF was aware of and happy with your comments. I imagine he decided not to have a discussion online, but to discuss with you face to face.

I know you made the comments on your blog so they are not made in your ECF capacity. I accept completely that you are not touting for business, as you have said. What you are offering is an important service and clearly the ECF can't offer it, so I welcome your offer, and so should everyone. If there are people out there doing what you suggest, then they shouldn't be.

I know nothing of Andrew's relationship - or yours, for that matter - with the ECF coaching site, but I wasn't referring to that.

So I see your conflict as being between the negative comments on your blog and your ECF role. You are a great coach - as my daughter will attest - and I wish you nothing but the best.

Simon