+- Forums (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Members Only (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-16.html)
+--- Forum: General Chess Chat (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Richardson and Spens Cups (/thread-2345.html)
Pages:
1
2
Richardson and Spens Cups - Jim Webster - 09-02-2025
It appearing that the Spens Cup rules are being ignored and contrary to the rules as published.
The Spens Cup is for member clubs only according to the Rules as published. Nor is there a Management Meeting (with published minutes) to change this requirement.
http://chessscotland.com/documents/csinfo/Rules/Spens_Cup_Rules_2022.pdf
Quote:Spens Cup - Rules
Introduction
The competition for the Spens Cup shall be open for competition for Clubs who are Chess Scotland members. The winner shall hold the Spens Cup for one year.
According to the Constitution it is the Management Board and or Council that has the authority approved by any changes to the published rules.
There is at least ONE club who does not meet the criteria for club membership. WHY?
WHO approved such an unauthorised change to the Rule Book?
I always understood that the rules were there for a reason, and not at the whim of selected officials to change them in such a random fashion.
The Richardson Cup does not have the requirement.
RE: Richardson and Spens Cups - Ianbrownlee - 09-02-2025
(09-02-2025, 09:23 PM)Jim Webster Wrote: It appearing that the Spens Cup rules are being ignored and contrary to the rules as published.Thanks Jim
The Spens Cup is for member clubs only according to the Rules as published. Nor is there a Management Meeting (with published minutes) to change this requirement.
http://chessscotland.com/documents/csinfo/Rules/Spens_Cup_Rules_2022.pdf
Quote:Spens Cup - Rules
Introduction
The competition for the Spens Cup shall be open for competition for Clubs who are Chess Scotland members. The winner shall hold the Spens Cup for one year.
According to the Constitution it is the Management Board and or Council that has the authority approved by any changes to the published rules.
There is at least ONE club who does not meet the criteria for club membership. WHY?
WHO approved such an unauthorised change to the Rule Book?
I always understood that the rules were there for a reason, and not at the whim of selected officials to change them in such a random fashion.
The Richardson Cup does not have the requirement.
I actually thought the Richardson Cup also had this requirement of CS membership although I appreciate the difficulty of getting clubs to play since the number of member clubs have dramatically fallen from 41 to a dire 24. Maybe there are more members if the club membership list is somehow out of date or other clubs paid a late entry after December. FIDE and venue fees would contribute to the cost of running these tournaments so maybe a rethink is required. If club membership is not a condition of entry, then maybe more clubs would enter. Consider the low numbers of entering these CS club tournaments against the rampant success of the SNCL and maybe ask Glynis how to reinvigorate our national club tournaments!
RE: Richardson and Spens Cups - John Watkins - 10-02-2025
Richardson & Spens Draws
[N.B Please note that following an initial error, the draw was amended on the 6th of February]
What does this mean?
RE: Richardson and Spens Cups - Alex McFarlane - 10-02-2025
(10-02-2025, 10:35 AM)John Watkins Wrote: Richardson & Spens Draws
[N.B Please note that following an initial error, the draw was amended on the 6th of February]
What does this mean?
Due to some confusion the entry of Edinburgh was missed/not known by the organiser of the tournament.
There was a revised draw to rectify the situation.
RE: Richardson and Spens Cups - Jim Webster - 10-02-2025
According to the list of clubs published on the CS Website - Edinburgh is not currently a member club of Chess Scotland.
Clubs were required to complete their membership by 31 December.
https://www.chessscotland.com/clubs/find-a-club/
Why are the published Spens Cup rules being ignored/bypassed?
Rules are there for a reason.
RE: Richardson and Spens Cups - Alex McFarlane - 10-02-2025
There are no rules being bypassed or ignored
I'm always happy to attempt to answer questions sent to me. However, when these questions are put directly onto a public forum without consulting any of the appropriate officials I cannot help but feel it is an attempt at some form of petty points scoring. I may expand on the damage that such needless negativity can cause in a later post.
RE: Richardson and Spens Cups - Andy Howie - 10-02-2025
Quite frankly, it is time some necks were wound in.
No rules were broken, all clubs are members of Chess Scotland for both tournaments. There was an issue with one club that was not known about until the draw was initially posted. That club them contacted us and it was resolved.
Karen was due to update the club membership list at the weekend. Both Karen and my daughter were travelling to see Mary Poppins in Edinburgh and were involved in a serious road traffic accident. Having just been down to the car to clear out our belongings as the car is a write off, I am grateful that everyone walked away from that one with relatively minor injuries.
I am quite frankly disgusted that people will just fire unfounded accusations here without having the common decency to speak to the people involved first. There is no need for it and people need to grow up.
RE: Richardson and Spens Cups - Jim Webster - 10-02-2025
Are you really saying that posting relevant questions on the Forum are not unacceptable unless directed to individuals beforehand.
The following points are publicly available for all to see and nothing to do with points scoring
1. The Draw is published on the front news page
2. The list of member clubs is published on the website
3 The rules for the Spens Club are available on the Website (Information/Rules)
The membership has the right to know the facts rather than hiding such selective emails, so that individuals only see replies possibly under "confidential/private" emails.
What happened to transparency and the rights of the membership to ask/post questions. I always believe that the forum was available for members to raise points of interest to all and if necessary, called to account.
Any damage or negativity is denying facts be publicly answered and available for all to see.
I ask the questions
- under the rules and published information how it can be justified that the rules have not been bypassed or ignored?
I personally am not interested in point scoring, more a case of publicly asking relevant questions on an open Forum.
-
RE: Richardson and Spens Cups - ruairidhmckay - 10-02-2025
(10-02-2025, 02:31 PM)Jim Webster Wrote: Are you really saying that posting relevant questions on the Forum are not unacceptable unless directed to individuals beforehand.
The following points are publicly available for all to see and nothing to do with points scoring
1. The Draw is published on the front news page
2. The list of member clubs is published on the website
3 The rules for the Spens Club are available on the Website (Information/Rules)
The membership has the right to know the facts rather than hiding such selective emails, so that individuals only see replies possibly under "confidential/private" emails.
What happened to transparency and the rights of the membership to ask/post questions. I always believe that the forum was available for members to raise points of interest to all and if necessary, called to account.
Any damage or negativity is denying facts be publicly answered and available for all to see.
I ask the questions
- under the rules and published information how it can be justified that the rules have not been bypassed or ignored?
I personally am not interested in point scoring, more a case of publicly asking relevant questions on an open Forum.
-
Hi Jim,
With regard to above, I went back and read your initial message at the top of the thread. You might disagree, but I can certainly see how the tone and nature of it might have led Andy and Alex to respond in the way they have.
I have immensely enjoyed my time working in the Chess Scotland Executive over the past 15 months and I have a tremendous amount of respect for the hard work that both Alex and Andy do. The issue in question has been resolved and had you approached us with your concerns we could have filled you in as best we could.
Ongoing tension between those who should be sharing enjoyment of the different developments of chess in Scotland isn't ideal. There is surely space for all of us to be doing our own constructive things to support different chess projects.
RE: Richardson and Spens Cups - Jim Webster - 10-02-2025
Quote:Alex McFarlane wrote...
However, when these questions are put directly onto a public forum without consulting any of the appropriate official ....
Andy Howie wrote...
I am quite frankly disgusted that people will just fire unfounded accusations here without having the common decency to speak to the people involved first.
Ruairidh McKay wrote...
and had you approached us with your concerns we could have filled you in as best we could.
Does this mean that we must only be answerable to officialdom without the right to free speech and asking openly questions on the forum.
Simply answering the questions that raise concerns would have circumvented all of this.
Raising private questions can be seen as overriding the right to ask public questions on the Forum.
These are questions, in my opinion, that should be permitted to be asked. I personally was not aware that I have to asked first questions in private emails being asked "disgusting" allegations.
I did not make any allegations, unfounded or otherwise, but is simply presented facts and asked questions of the forum.
Quote:Ruairidh McKay wrote...
There is surely space for all of us to be doing our own constructive things to support different chess projects.
There is much great work being done on behalf of Chess Scotland and its Directors/officials - Chess Scotland would not exist without the countless hours by them and I greatly appreciated the work being done on our behalf.
It does not however take away the right to ask questions of interest on the forum when awkward questions are presented there.