Chess Scotland Noticeboard Forum Index Chess Scotland Noticeboard
A place for chess nuts to boast over an open forum
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

English Deregister Non-Members
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Chess Scotland Noticeboard Forum Index -> General Chess Chat
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
David Deary
Queen


Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 98

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:34 pm    Post subject: My two cents for what its worth... Reply with quote

For me how much Mathew has contributed or not to CS is irrelevant. Yes its great and good and I wouldn’t even attempt to dispute it and its very admirable. It’s a shame that some of our current Scottish GMs don’t take the view and follow his example. However, this doesn’t sell me on the point of changing nationality and shouldn't influence the decision!

There is also the current CS criteria that he simply does not meet. The criteria obviously needs changed but it is like that for a reason and it is immaterial until his Scottish ‘grandparentage’ is confirmed. Has this actually been confirmed? Are we going to the extent of birth certificates etc. or are we taking hearsay? Surely someone has confirmed this?

Furthermore, the reasons for rules of nationality is to avoid national teams turning into club teams and just capturing the world’s best players. Hence the need for the nationality criteria to stop this from occurring.

I also think allowing Mathew to play for the Scottish Championship and the Olympiad is a slap in the face to the current Scottish players who would invariably lose their place in the team. On those grounds I would not be comfortable with him playing for Scotland or for the Scottish championship.

Mathew is also in his mid/late thirties and it is only now he is seeking to change nationality. In other sports where this does occur like the examples cited earlier the distinction is that the players are much younger when they switch nationalities. Also if you were an England International cap in football you then cannot switch to play for Scotland as an International cap.

On a broader point going forward is CS’s position for the future that it will never deregister all FIDE active players who do not have a current CS membership?

Finally, no CS funds should be used for this endeavor in my view and in the instance any compensation has to be paid it should be footed by the player.

Please note I have no personal issue with Mathew but I am very uneasy with the road so many are proposing and there are many outstanding questions.
_________________
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional!


Last edited by David Deary on Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:48 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
robin moore
King


Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am gonna be greedy here,

1/ Matthew has become a massively important member of "Team Junior Scotland" and we should try all legal avenues to get him SCO Fide status.

2/ Let's pay these chancers down south hee-haw and see what happens. That isn't my SNP hat I have on by the way, I simply feel we may have a fair case for this. After all, they effectively forced him out, why should they profit by their actions?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
admin
Site Admin


Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

David,

Anyone can play in the Scottish Championship. Not everyone can be champion.

The problem has arisen essentially because the ECF see FIDE grades as a way to force membership. Both Dougie Bryson and I contacted FIDE last year when a question was raised about Chess Scotland Membership being required for a FIDE grade. It was confirmed to both of us independently that it is the National Body that has to be a member. What the individual member nations do us up to them.

There are several nations that have no membership at all. Russia and New Zealand are two that spring to mind.

The ECF have decided that you have to be a member of the ECF to be registered with FIDE. Matthew has not been an ECF member for some time. He has been a member of Chess Scotland for 5 years that I am aware of (Dick will correct me). Matthew has stated that he does not want to be considered for the Olympiad squad or Scottish Champion.

I'll be totally honest, I am not forseeing a massive influx of "refugees" from England. We are not going to change the eligibility rules to allow any Tom, Dick or Harry to change nationality. There has to be a good reason for it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
David Deary
Queen


Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 98

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

admin wrote:
David,

Anyone can play in the Scottish Championship. Not everyone can be champion.

I'll be totally honest, I am not forseeing a massive influx of "refugees" from England. We are not going to change the eligibility rules to allow any Tom, Dick or Harry to change nationality. There has to be a good reason for it.


On your first sentence quoted - I am fully aware that anyone can play in the Scottish Championship but playing semantics obviously makes you think you are winning the debate. Razz

Edit - I have changed the words in to for in my previous post and hope it meets with your approval. Wink

Your second sentence worries me even more. I would rather a rule was set for everyone and thus it is fair as it applies to everyone rather than bending the rules for special cases. Its not fair or consistent and I would rather if we changed the rules it applied to all.
_________________
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
admin
Site Admin


Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

David Deary wrote:
Your second sentence worries me even more. I would rather a rule was set for everyone and thus it is fair as it applies to everyone rather than bending the rules for special cases. Its not fair or consistent and I would rather if we changed the rules it applied to all.


That is exactly what I want to see. Although it is down to the AGM to decide. I don't want a rule that lets every man and his dog change federation. Maybe I didn't word it correctly.

Right I am basking in 27C heat. Time to go for a swim
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
JR
King


Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 447
Location: Edinburgh

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A 10,000 compensation fee? Just another example of why we should leave the joke that is FIDE.

Maybe I have mis-understood the situation, but surely no-one is suggesting that Chess Scotland would even consider paying 10,000 euros to FIDE to change a players federation?!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AMcHarg
King


Joined: 19 Nov 2008
Posts: 623
Location: Livingston, Scotland

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JR wrote:
A 10,000 compensation fee? Just another example of why we should leave the joke that is FIDE.

Maybe I have mis-understood the situation, but surely no-one is suggesting that Chess Scotland would even consider paying 10,000 euros to FIDE to change a players federation?!


I think the suggestion is that the compensation would be due to the ECF, if they decided to pursue it. I don't know what the compensation is for though?

I'm not sure of the legalities of it, but usually compensation is granted to compensate an organisation for anticipated losses as a consequence of an action, or to ease in the recovery from a particular action which was deemed unlawful - and I fail to see how any loss by the ECF, as a result of Mattchew switching Federation, could come close to 10,000 Euros in any reasonable time period.

It seems particularly large given the circumstances, which seem to imply that Matthew was effectively pushed out the door?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Alan Tate
King


Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 377
Location: Edinburgh

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have somewhat mixed feelings about this - it seems like it's coming down to a Scotland/England thing (isn't that getting a bit old?). If Matthew were Irish, would there be any problem? I wonder if there would be an issue with him playing for Scotland in this case.
It does seem a bit unfair to give someone the flag and not let them play for this country (or be eligible for the national title). I don't see much difference between Andrew Greet becoming Scottish Champion and this.
However the general idea that anyone can change federation and play for another country makes me feel uneasy, but this is perfectly within 'the rules'.

With regard to the compensation/transfer fee point, this seems completely invalid as the ECF have let Matthew go so he is essentially a 'free agent'. At least that is what common sense dictates.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AWIC
King


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 221

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig Pritchett wrote:
It sounds that the motion is therefore to extend the relevant CS criterion to include "grandparents" rather than just "parents". That's fine, as far as it goes. But you still haven't actually said whether it meets FIDE's stated criteria. There must be straightforward FIDE written detail on this somewhere (surely not even FIDE "just wants the money" on such matters). If the written FIDE criteria permit "Scottish grandparents" then there's no problem. But do they? I remain uncertain.

[snip]

Is CS really sure that FIDE will allow the "grandparent" rule to apply to its definition of a national? I think it would be prudent to be certain.


I think the appropriate FIDE rule is C 05 1.3

This suggests that a player may be a member of at most one federation and that they must satisfy either citizenship or residency qualifications (although possibly (the absence of an “or” after 1.3 (b) makes this unclear) there is a FIDE “catch-all”). There is no mention of “grandparents” or even place of birth. As Craig says, it would be prudent to be sure as there is the possibility of a 5,000 fine for breach. (I assume that’s 5,000 Euro although the website isn’t clear)

As admin says, I think if you are a UK citizen you are probably (in FIDE’s eyes) eligible for any of the British Isles’ federations other than Ireland. However, CS has different qualification requirements.

Furthermore, as far as I know, there is nothing (other than the willingness to stump up the cash) to stop absolutely anyone from being a CS member.

The debate appears to be to what extent the CS criteria should be amended to allow members to represent Chess Scotland either in a team competition, or in an individual FIDE competition. The suggestions appear to be either to introduce a “grandparent” rule, or a second class “we like the cut of so and so’s jib, but they won’t be able to be champion, or play in the Olympiad but maybe the Europeans” rule.

As regards fees, again, from FIDE’s website, there appear to be 3

1 – a notification fee of €250

2 - a compensation fee of up to €10,000 (possibly waivable) – Ian has given reasons for this existence

3 – a transfer fee of up to €5,000 (only relevant if you are seeking to accelerate the residency requirements)

Who will pay these fees?

Finally, is it true that Matthew was “forced out”? And is it appropriate that Chess Scotland should be taking a view on the actions of another Federation?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stuart Blyth
King


Joined: 11 Sep 2008
Posts: 209

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Has someone explained why Matthew Turner can't/won't register with the ECF?
If so, apologies, and can you point me to the post?

If not, then why is this? It's an interesting/controversial matter being discussed on a noticeboard/forum, so it seems reasonable for this information to be made available.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
paul roberts
Bishop


Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 24

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:23 pm    Post subject: change of federation Reply with quote

Matthew Turner and I both played in the european junior championship in 1993, during which time he mentioned that he was eligible to change federation to scotland, if he so wished, on account of his scottish grandparent(s). Admittedly I haven't spoke to him for a while, all I can say is that whenever our paths crossed at tounrnaments in the mid to late 90s he was polite and courteous. In my opinion, every opportunity should be made to welcome him to change federation, as it's probably a decision he's been thinking about for some time. Maybe it would be easier if he moved up here?!

I won't be able to attend the AGM to propose anything, though this debate also brings into focus issues on who is eligible to be scottish champion. In my opinion John Shaw was the real 2010 scottish champion as the actual one, Andrew Greet, has been living in scotland for a relatively short period of time. I stress, this is a personal opinion, and I fully respect the existing rules.

Maybe it would be worth considering that to be eligible to be scottish champion you should be both:

(1) resident in scotland for a minimum of 5 years
(2) to have changed your federation with fide to scotland
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DMB
King


Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stuart - remember you said we should go down the road of some compulsory levy from all players rather than the current voluntary CS membership scheme. Well the ECF followed your advice. Either you join the ECF or you cant play graded chess.

"If money is an issue, then find a different approach. Would a fairer, more inclusive option not simply be to introduce automatic membership for anyone playing graded chess matches, and to generate money through some kind of levy"

http://scotchess.s4.bizhat.com/viewtopic.php?t=1792&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
David Deary
Queen


Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 98

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DMB wrote:
Stuart - remember you said we should go down the road of some compulsory levy from all players rather than the current voluntary CS membership scheme. Well the ECF followed your advice. Either you join the ECF or you cant play graded chess.

"If money is an issue, then find a different approach. Would a fairer, more inclusive option not simply be to introduce automatic membership for anyone playing graded chess matches, and to generate money through some kind of levy"


You've got Stuart on that one sort of... Wink
Do you ever forget anything Dougie?

Perhaps you can shed some light on the numerous questions posed on this page of the discussion as there are several points that require clarification. I would have expected CS officers to have investigated this issue before opening it up on the noticeboard. If this is the case can we have some answers please.

Edit to add: With four weeks to go to the AGM (Unfortunately I cannot attend because of another stag doo. Everyone seems to be getting married this year!) I am pretty concerned that this is being rushed through.

In my view before we can change the rules, CS should ensure it is not in breach of FIDE rules and there is no possibility that the ECF will seek compensation before the AGM. As if they do I don't much fancy the liability that CS could be exposed too or the needless legal wranglings.

Also with such a fundamental change in the nationality rulings of CS it would perhaps be wise to communicate to all CS members by email or letter notifying them of this proposal. Or is this too forward thinking? Rolling Eyes Or even communicate the existence of the AGM as adding it as a news article/calendar item on the website is not an effective means of communication!
_________________
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
robin moore
King


Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is without a doubt one of the best topics, if not the best ever topic discussed on the noticeboard. I am going to try and cool things down for a moment by mentioning flags and ancestry. When Korchnoi played against Karpov in the world title match in the Philipines his playing flag was in dispute. Korchnoi had just defected to Switzerland from the former USSR and according to Raymond Keene's disputed book of the match, the Swiss national flag, the skull and crossbones and a white flag with " I escaped" were put forward as possibles for Victor. I believe a white flag with "stateless" was eventually agreed on. Clement Freud, actor, gambler, sarcastic radio guest, restaurant critic, dug food comercial, Isle of Wight MP (deceased) had this unique brammer....

In 1978 I was on a parliamentary delegation to Japan and returned via China during the Cultural Revolution, a choice also made by young Winston Churchill, then the Conservative MP for Stretford. I was debriefed by the Minister for Information who asked if there was anything at all I would like to ask. I said: "Yes. Everything you do, you do with extreme care and precision. When I ask questions that your government does not like, my driver calls for me five minutes later than arranged. When I ask if there are any blind or handicapped children in China, I get cabbage soup for dinner.
"Now I am in your country with a colleague, than whom I am older, have been in parliament longer, have held higher positions in our respective political parties: we are both staying at the Peking Palace Hotel and his suite is bigger than mine. Why?"

The Minister, very embarrassed, finally said: "It is because Mr Churchill had a famous grandfather."

It is the only time that I have been out-grandfathered.

Robin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stuart Blyth
King


Joined: 11 Sep 2008
Posts: 209

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dougie/David

Sorry have I missed something? Is there some obvious connection? Have I changed my mind without bothering to tell myself?


Not sure of the relevance, but I'm not aware of changing my mind on anything I wrote on that past post, to which DMB pointed us. However, I'm now reassured in the knowledge that, should I change my mind but not realise it, someone will be on hand to remind me!

ps still find it odd that a discussion like this is taking place, and the background hasn't been made available. (Were we talking about a general rule change, then maybe this wouldn't matter, but given we're talking about a specific individual and a possible rule that will always be applied on a 'case by case' basis, then it seems essential to know the background, I'd have thought) (edited to remove odd emoticons)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Chess Scotland Noticeboard Forum Index -> General Chess Chat All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 3 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group. Hosted by phpBB.BizHat.com