19-08-2014, 11:30 PM
Ok Andy, et al, let me post as an organizer if I may?
I see nothing in this motion which would cause me as an organizer to reach for the aspirin, or antacid!
In truth there are very few disabled people who participate in a tournament, they can and should be accommodated. Let's take a look at the extra space required? Well if a person, such as Steve Hilton,
(hope you don't mind me using you as a real life example!) is playing he really needs a longer table to accommodate both him and any helper, so theoretically the tournament has two players where it could have 4. But wait a minute, how many tournaments are full to bursting point? Very, very few. So, not a problem. How about the 3 meter aisles to accommodate a wheel chair? Also not a problem as worst case scenario is fewer aisles. ( We have all had to squeeze past other players before, and if you have been to the cinema, well what can I say?).
Access? Most commercial and public buildings have disabled access. (Schools, Universities, sports facilities, etc).
So what exactly does this motion do for me as an organizer? It formalizes what is already being done. I simply do not see that it would add to my headaches. I speak as a former organizer and assistant organizer of the West of Scotland, Glasgow Congress, and a few simuls at both club and Glasgow Art Gallery and Museum. I also speak as the man who was able to talk with club players in Dresden (2008 Olympiad) and from travelling around Scotland to visit tournaments in 2008.
As a former club secretary of Glasgow Montrose I was acutely aware of our access problem at the RAFA club, and when we moved to the Novotel one of the things I made sure of was that the lift (elevator) would overcome former problems.
I have played in a few tournaments in the States now, and each of them were in venues which ALL could access.
It is how things are already going. How in fact they already are. Not a problem for this organizer.
(I apologize for the spelling but have an American auto-correct!)
I see nothing in this motion which would cause me as an organizer to reach for the aspirin, or antacid!
In truth there are very few disabled people who participate in a tournament, they can and should be accommodated. Let's take a look at the extra space required? Well if a person, such as Steve Hilton,
(hope you don't mind me using you as a real life example!) is playing he really needs a longer table to accommodate both him and any helper, so theoretically the tournament has two players where it could have 4. But wait a minute, how many tournaments are full to bursting point? Very, very few. So, not a problem. How about the 3 meter aisles to accommodate a wheel chair? Also not a problem as worst case scenario is fewer aisles. ( We have all had to squeeze past other players before, and if you have been to the cinema, well what can I say?).
Access? Most commercial and public buildings have disabled access. (Schools, Universities, sports facilities, etc).
So what exactly does this motion do for me as an organizer? It formalizes what is already being done. I simply do not see that it would add to my headaches. I speak as a former organizer and assistant organizer of the West of Scotland, Glasgow Congress, and a few simuls at both club and Glasgow Art Gallery and Museum. I also speak as the man who was able to talk with club players in Dresden (2008 Olympiad) and from travelling around Scotland to visit tournaments in 2008.
As a former club secretary of Glasgow Montrose I was acutely aware of our access problem at the RAFA club, and when we moved to the Novotel one of the things I made sure of was that the lift (elevator) would overcome former problems.
I have played in a few tournaments in the States now, and each of them were in venues which ALL could access.
It is how things are already going. How in fact they already are. Not a problem for this organizer.
(I apologize for the spelling but have an American auto-correct!)