28-08-2014, 06:44 AM
John Dempsey Wrote:Stephen went down this road and acquired his "card" so to speak. but many may decide they do not want to. The lack of such "proof" makes the arbiters job more subjective than it need be. If this goes ahead at council, then perhaps additional safeguards for arbiters aught also be considered?
They all do their very best. Let's look after them
John, good to hear the CS are able to legally deal with confidential information. However I beg to differ about the need for certificates to be obtained and supplied to CS and kept on file centrally and supplied to the arbiter locally.
The extra level of bureaucracy costs time and money (certificate is not free) and could easily create an additional barrier to disabled participation. The key point that FIDE makes is that potential entrants who need extra assistance make details known to the organisers asap.
Lets put that another way.
What advantage would I have as a player if I falsely claimed I was visually handicapped and wanted to use a second set and record moves via a dictaphone?
What advantage would I get if I turned up in a wheelchair and requested enhanced access to my board? It wouldn't help me play any better.
What advantage would I get at the board if I falsely claimed I was deaf?
If I falsely claimed cerebral palsy and wanted to bring an assistant to listen as I called out my moves moves my pieces and press my clock? Again I can't see me getting advantage as a player.
Earlier this month I was arbiting at a congress in England. As a walked past his board a player (who walks with a stick) requested that I take his hand to help him stand up. This I did and I provided him with a taller chair for the rest of the event to assist him the chair moved with the players. I very much doubt that this player is registered as disabled - I expect that he would have simply bought a own walking stick some years ago when he perceived a need for it.
The mood this thread is taking is that I should have checked whether or not he had lodged a disability certificate with the national body, read the cetificate, and then make a medical judgement on how to assist him and then take action.
I have a much simple system. I listen to players' requests. If reasonable request and easy to meet I do so.
Let me give another anecdotal example. Many many years ago Jacqui broke her ankle (chess injury if that's relevant) and had a heavy plaster over the injury. We were due to play a congress a few days later.
We borrowed a wheelchair for the weekend to solve her mobility problems.
Congress venue had wheelchair access. Any help required from from organisers happened without question.
Under the proposals being made on this thread would we have had to purchase a piece of paper from a medicine man to prove the ankle was really broken. Or perhaps supply the ECF or the arbiter with a copy of X ray to let the arbiter take a medical judgement?