CJ Banned?

[IM Jack Rudd]

Furthermore, I did turn up to one of my games wearing a t-shirt advertising a charity (the National Autistic Society, as it happens). Nobody commented at all.

[Andrew Camp]

On the entry form, there is a comment about players needing to be dressed in smart casual.

No mention of officials or presidents.

[matt_ward]

I can not imagine discussing it on the forum would have much impact to be honest Christopher.

I am not aware really of anyone complaining about the conditions they seemed adequate to me. My only concern was they did not seem to have Air conditioning in the playing hall, which was a pity.

Other than that I think the location was well planned and extremely good I mean right in the city centre of Sheffield can't complain really.

Matt.

[Simon Ansell]

I agree with Liam it is ashame that a T- shirt overshadowed such a fantastic British Chess Championships. I think the critical point is that it was probably the wording on the T- shirt which people found offensive rather than what it said as it were.

I think people are entitled to wear what they want. It did not consist of expletives and therefore how can it really offend people, in actual fact the person that should of been banned is the arbiter which banned CJ I think it is ludicrous that they banned the President of the ECF and who has put more than £16,000 of his own personal savings, if it was not for him there probably would not of been an event this year of the standard we saw.

I think people should respect CJ and appreciate what his role is within the ECF.

MAtt.

Suppose for one minute CJ had stood up with a T shirt saying I support Brian Eley or one saying people who are not gay are not normal or any other controversial slogan would you then argue that spending his own money to support chess should be a forgive all get out? Surely you are not arguing that anyone who gives us money can stand on whatever platform they wish? If so perhaps I should sponsor the British if I can wear a T shirt saying all commies and loony lefties should be shot at dawn.

I say what I say as a supporter of CJ and he knows that. On this occasion however he made an error of judgement something we all can do very often.

I think you must have missed my posts where I twice said "so long as it as not offensive", Ernie. "Some people are gay. Get over it." is not offensive.

[IM Jack Rudd]

My only concern was they did not seem to have Air conditioning in the playing hall, which was a pity.

Ding! Matt has it. There was insufficient air-conditioning in the playing hall; there was no air-conditioning in the office. It was a very hot fortnight.

[Nick Thomas]

I agree with Liam it is ashame that a T- shirt overshadowed such a fantastic British Chess Championships. I think the critical point is that it was probably the wording on the T- shirt which people found offensive rather than what it said as it were.

I think people are entitled to wear what they want. It did not consist of expletives and therefore how can it really offend people, in actual fact the person that should of been banned is the arbiter which banned CJ I think it is ludicrous that they banned the President of the ECF and who has put more than £16,000 of his own personal savings, if it was not for him there probably would not of been an event this year of the standard we saw.

I think people should respect CJ and appreciate what his role is within the ECF.

MAtt.

Suppose for one minute CJ had stood up with a T shirt saying I support Brian Eley or one saying people who are not gay are not normal or any other controversial slogan would you then argue that spending his own money to support chess should be a forgive all get out? Surely you are not arguing that anyone who gives us money can stand on whatever platform they wish? If so perhaps I should sponsor the British if I can wear a T shirt saying all commies and loony lefties should be shot at dawn.

I say what I say as a supporter of CJ and he knows that. On this occasion however he made an error of judgement something we all can do very often.

Since nobody else seems to know the answer to my question could you speculate as to what was offensive about the t-shirt CJ actually wore?

[Andrew Camp]

I agree with Liam it is ashame that a T- shirt overshadowed such a fantastic British Chess Championships. I think the critical point is that it was probably the wording on the T- shirt which people found offensive rather than what it said as it were.

I think people are entitled to wear what they want. It did not consist of expletives and therefore how can it really offend people, in actual fact the person that should of been banned is the arbiter which banned CJ I think it is ludicrous that they banned the President of the ECF and who has put more than £16,000 of his own personal savings, if it was not for him there probably would not of been an event this year of the standard we saw.

I think people should respect CJ and appreciate what his role is within the ECF.

MAtt.

Suppose for one minute CJ had stood up with a T shirt saying I support Brian Eley or one saying people who are not gay are not normal or any other controversial slogan would you then argue that spending his own money to support chess should be a forgive all get out? Surely you are not arguing that anyone who gives us money can stand on whatever platform they wish? If so perhaps I should sponsor the British if I can wear a T shirt saying all commies and loony lefties should be shot at dawn.

I say what I say as a supporter of CJ and he knows that. On this occasion however he made an error of judgement something we all can do very often.

Since nobody else seems to know the answer to my question could you speculate as to what was offensive about the t-shirt CJ actually wore?

Less offensive and more provocative (to some). This morning should have been about the winners and nothing more.

[Simon Ansell]

Furthermore, I did turn up to one of my games wearing a t-shirt advertising a charity (the National Autistic Society, as it happens). Nobody commented at all.

Jack theres a big difference, you were not about to stand in front of a great many people as head of our national organisation knowing full well photographs would be taken.

Maybe, but I was on board 3 in front of many spectators and lost the "game of the day". There are photos on the tournament website. So would I have been asked to change?

[Christopher Kreuzer]

er no.What there is an attempt to equate two issues that are disproportionate. CJ's decision to wear the t-shirt was in my view selfish. The arbitor should have told him so.

The decision to ban it was of far greater import. It was a statement that says the ECF regards gay slogans as so offensive that it will ban its own President from presenting prizes rather than have a gay slogan view by younger chess players.

If you can not see that one is far more serious than the other then nothing more can be said.

Agree 100% with the above.

This is essentially my view as well. But I repeat, there is no dress-code and the t-shirt was not offensive. Maybe there should be a dress-code. Had I turned up on board 3 in round 9 to play David Howell wearing the same t-shirt, would I have been asked to change? I very much doubt it.

Good point. I should however, say that, on re-reading, I'm not sure Martin is quite right to say that there was a "decision to ban it". It seems more nuanced than that. It seems that a short discussion was had, and some poor decisions were made to change who was presenting the prizes, but that is not the same as a "decision to ban". The impression I get is that there was a standoff, and CJ went and sat down, and someone else stepped forward (or was asked) to present the prizes. Of course, "disagreement over t-shirt slogan leads to impasse and confusion but prizegiving goes ahead anyway with someone else presenting the prizes" is much less conducive to headlines than "ECF President banned from prizegiving".

[Sebastian Stone]

I agree with Liam it is ashame that a T- shirt overshadowed such a fantastic British Chess Championships. I think the critical point is that it was probably the wording on the T- shirt which people found offensive rather than what it said as it were.

I think people are entitled to wear what they want. It did not consist of expletives and therefore how can it really offend people, in actual fact the person that should of been banned is the arbiter which banned CJ I think it is ludicrous that they banned the President of the ECF and who has put more than £16,000 of his own personal savings, if it was not for him there probably would not of been an event this year of the standard we saw.

I think people should respect CJ and appreciate what his role is within the ECF.

MAtt.

Suppose for one minute CJ had stood up with a T shirt saying I support Brian Eley or one saying people who are not gay are not normal or any other controversial slogan would you then argue that spending his own money to support chess should be a forgive all get out? Surely you are not arguing that anyone who gives us money can stand on whatever platform they wish? If so perhaps I should sponsor the British if I can wear a T shirt saying all commies and loony lefties should be shot at dawn.

I say what I say as a supporter of CJ and he knows that. On this occasion however he made an error of judgement something we all can do very often.

Since nobody else seems to know the answer to my question could you speculate as to what was offensive about the t-shirt CJ actually wore?

Well I imagine being told they need to "get over" someone being gay could be seen as offensive to those who don't really care at all. Until they realise the message isn't aimed at them.

[Nick Thomas]

Less offensive and more provocative (to some). This morning should have been about the winners and nothing more.

What was provocative about it exactly?

[Andrew Camp]

Less offensive and more provocative (to some). This morning should have been about the winners and nothing more.

What was provocative about it exactly?

You would have to ask those who were 'provoked' by it.

[matt_ward]

Yes but Ernie your anology is some what dubious, I don't think they are comparable in the sense CJ's t- shirt did not say anything offensive, and what your saying " If I can wear a t- shirt saying all commies and lonney lefties should be shot at dawn". Apart from that being totally prejudice and that comment looming in the direction of right wing.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Well I imagine being told they need to "get over" someone being gay could be seen as offensive to those who don't really care at all. Until they realise the message isn't aimed at them.

Exactly. It is similar to being told that we must be tolerant of others, when one meaning of being tolerant is tolerating someone only so far and no further. I don't want to live in a tolerant society, I want to live in an accepting society. Or those ridiculous statements saying that victims of terrorist outrages are innocent victims (implying, of course, that some victims are not innocent and some terrorist outrages are justified). The 'innocent' is superfluous. There are many subtexts within seemingly simple messages, and the Stonewall T-shirt one is not as simple as it seems at first glance.

[Nick Thomas]

Less offensive and more provocative (to some). This morning should have been about the winners and nothing more.

What was provocative about it exactly?

You would have to ask those who were 'provoked' by it.

Well the point is I don't know who was offended/provoked/something else and by what exactly. Neither do the rest of the people who are discussing this I think. I know that a female arbiter found the reference to sexuality inappropriate but then it becomes cloudy...