Away player excluded

[J T Melsom]

I agree with Geoff, this is far from anonymous to those with a little time on their hands. As the League Controller in an adjacent county I would initially award the match 6:0 to the visitors as the spirit of chess has been breached without due reason, being given. I would also consider a fine broadly equivalent to the travel expenses incurred by the player refused access to play. I would then find against the visiting club if any of their officers had sought to encourage the discussion of an internal league matter on a public forum, prior to the exhaustion of due process within league rules , probably leaving us with a match scored as a double default. It would irritate me intensely if my decision making were subject to debate before I had even been invited to make a ruling.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"I agree with Geoff, this is far from anonymous to those with a little time on their hands. As the League Controller in an adjacent county I would initially award the match 6:0 to the visitors as the spirit of chess has been breached without due reason, being given. I would also consider a fine broadly equivalent to the travel expenses incurred by the player refused access to play. I would then find against the visiting club if any of their officers had sought to encourage the discussion of an internal league matter on a public forum, prior to the exhaustion of due process within league rules , probably leaving us with a match scored as a double default. It would irritate me intensely if my decision making were subject to debate before I had even been invited to make a ruling."

I largely agree. If we have been given an accurate description of events and all available information, I would also want all the visitors compensated for travelling expenses and seek a ban from the league for the Home Secretary, (by which I mean the Secretary of the Home Club!)

[Thomas Rendle]

John, have you checked with the excluded player that he is happy for you to disclose the reason he was 'excluded'? If the answer is yes then let's have the name of the player and the reason. If the answer is no then we shouldn't really have this topic!

[Roger de Coverly]

Roger,

Had the League concerned been made aware by the home club that the away player would not be permitted to play for any away team at their premises?

No. Frankly I'm fed up with the petty feuding between Sandhurst and Camberley. The league rules aren't written with unsporting and bizarre behaviour in mind. A known default is supposed to take place on board 6 but that doesn't cope with the situation where one of the away team is prevented from playing. I have already been contacted by one of the captains who raised no objection to the Sandhurst board order and presumably does not wish to escalate the dispute.

I would like to know if the colours are correctly reported on the website.

[Sebastian Stone]

The home player was going to be playing on board six but the home club took the chance to strengthen their team by shuffing their boards downwards!

Adding insult to injury.

[John Upham]

John, have you checked with the excluded player that he is happy for you to disclose the reason he was 'excluded'? If the answer is yes then let's have the name of the player and the reason. If the answer is no then we shouldn't really have this topic!

Tom,
I am not aware of the reason that the player was excluded other than personal differences. All I have been told is that he was asked to leave.

[Thomas Rendle]

Probably best to ask the player then!

[Paul McKeown]

The only thing surprising in a match between Sandhurst and Camberley is that they don't come to blows. I assume the player retired hurt was Colin Lyne. Colin Lyne vs. Alec Aslett. Isn't that the line up we all want to see? Loser drops out of the Border League to avoid any further breachs of the Queen's peace.

[Roger de Coverly]

I assume the player retired hurt was Colin Lyne.

Colin is part of the A team squad and not eligible for this match which was BvB.

More worryingly, the Camberley A team are due to play away to Sandhurst B at the end of the season so there could be a repeat of this nonsense.

[Paul McKeown]

This is all very silly, then, as everyone is simply going to guess who was sent home, offended. Full facts or no post.

[Paul McKeown]

Guess it was Steve Harley, the captain, then. Same comment applies. Further silliness from these teams should result in their respective captains being banned until the end of the season.

[Ian Thompson]

This is all very silly, then, as everyone is simply going to guess who was sent home, offended. Full facts or no post.

I think it's easy to work out who it was. We were told it is someone who was nominated for Camberley B, but hadn't played in their previous matches this season. As far as I can see there is only one person meeting this criterion. I propose we refer to him as Player W from now on.

[Paul McKeown]

Righto. Must have been Matt Ward then. Steve Harley actually played in that match.

Carl, can we have a seperate forum for disputes between Camberley and Sandhurst, please, so the rest of us can ignore such querulous trivia.

[John Upham]

I wanted to hear your views the generalities of this incident rather than offering a guessing game to name individuals and clubs.

I suppose trying to be vague would have generated no interest so it was somewhat naïve of me to expect otherwise for which I apologise.

[Ray Sayers]

I am struggling to think of a charge that a Police officer could use to arrest the player in question.

'I arrest you on suspicion of being a member of a team which has been invited here'.

Sounds a bit like Constable Savage.

Chess is a game played on a board with 64 squares.