Posts: 457
Threads: 46
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
I see a few comments have been made on the selectors. Without actually looking up who they are I assume that, as in the past, they could be regarded as automatic choices.
In Scotland we have a limited number of people willing to do things. Forming a selection panel is not easy. Ideally you do not want people who are likely to be considered but when you look at those in contention for places in the European team then we have to go quite a way down the grading list before we would come to suitable candidates for a selection committee.
I think it is the lesser of two evils therefore to have one or two strong players whose inclusion is near certain on the committee than to go down to below 2000 for selectors.
Posts: 1,000
Threads: 94
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
2
I am going to take another break from the noticeboard for a while. I shall be back in May.
To my great regret I seem to attract controversy on the noticeboard on any topic.
Again I reiterate that I am open to discuss anything in person, by email or phone.
I shall be going to the Olympiad and promise to do my best.
Goodbye.
Posts: 72
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2012
Alex McFarlane Wrote:I see they Coulw comments have been made on the selectors. Without actually looking up who they are I assume that, as in the past, they could be regarded as automatic choices.
In Scotland we have a limited number of people willing to do things. Forming a selection panel is not easy. Ideally you do not want people who are likely to be considered but when you look at those in contention for places in the European team then we have to go quite a way down the grading list before we would come to suitable candidates for a selection committee.
I think it is the lesser of two evils therefore to have one or two strong players whose inclusion is near certain on the committee than to go down to below 2000 for selectors.
I don't really think the fact they could be regarded as automatic is a reason for them to be on selection panel, it is just not morally right. You don't get the best footballers selecting themselves for the national side or in any other sport!
You also don't need strong players on the selection panel, anyone is capable of looking at results, activity etc and making an informed decision on who deserves a place.
Like it or not having players in contention on the panel leads to bias, intended or not. Ideally the panel should be completely independent with no personal links to those in contention.
Posts: 72
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2012
Well I think there is a lot more to this issue than most people here know about and probably not my place to say.
The last I heard the selectors were all players with a realistic chance of making the team, one of which I believe was selected. So nothing has really changed even if John Shaw was not on the panel!
Posts: 1,120
Threads: 70
Joined: Aug 2011
I am becoming increasingly concerned about the financial implications of this situation. As we all know money is extremely tight in the CS world at the moment. The ladies team was announced on the 8th of January. Here we are at nearly the end of March and as far as I can make out three Open team places have still to be filled.
If we are mostly using the Edinburgh-Oslo-Tromso route for travel, the price of that last return leg (if there are any seats still available) could go nuts the nearer we get to the event.
Posts: 400
Threads: 9
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
1
I have been reluctant to post on this as I'm clearly not privy to the facts or half-truths as I see flying around this thread.
Can anyone confirm or deny the preference from the players was to appoint a 'foreign' GM as Captain? someone who has made no contribution to scottish chess. I have to say, when finances are as tight as they are, our scarce resources should be focussed on those who actually make a contribution to scottish chess and not on paying for friends of players on our Olympiad team to go on a jolly paid for by CS! [-x
I appreciate the above may be controversial and will retract it if it is incorrect as I said there is so much incorrect information flying around this thread already and I don't wish to add to it.
Andy M maybe shouldn't have appointed himself as Captain, however, I think Joe makes a reasonable point that top players shouldn't be appointing themselves either! My view is that International chess has been a bit of a closed shop for too long and a bit of transparency and accountability needs thrown on this whole process. I think this needs looked at either by the Constitutional working party as suggested by Jim or CS Council needs to look at the whole process in its entirety.
I think Andy M deserves some credit to counter his “dictatorial” appointment as Captain as he has tried to keep costs down and had to proactively chase the players to book flights. I think this should be considered before the man is condemned. Also, I’m no apologist for Andy M, I tried to bump him at the AGM because of his conduct last year and on that score I also think he has improved.
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional!