07-04-2014, 06:44 PM
The President (and other senior CS officials) HAVE been called on, weeks ago actually. They were contacted by several of the disgruntled players, but as yet none of them have seen fit to reply in any way- either publicly or privately.
I discussed this issue with some of the interested parties at the weekend in Edinburgh - those who were unhappy about the situation are still unhappy, although one new voice (not a player) has asked me to let the matter drop lest we find ourselves in the same position junior chess has found itself in Scotland, riven by schisms and discontent at every turn.
Although I appreciate his point, I find this very difficult to do, particularly when our International Director makes public claims such as the one David quotes above re: council backing of his stance, the veracity of which is questionable to say the least.
There are a few solutions to this:-
-Firstly, our International Director could simply step down from the captaincy, admitting that his decisions were not and are not in the best interests of the teams. This would be the easiest course of action, and the 'honourable' and decent thing to do. Given the opacity of his arguments/decisions/comments so far I have my doubts that this will happen of its own accord, but it should be a serious option - one which those closest to him should think about pushing for.
-Secondly, the 'high heid yins' within CS could (and should) deal with this matter by contacting all parties concerned and trying to find an amicable solution. It doesn't need to be an official enquiry of any sort in the first instance, but burying their collective heads in the sand and hoping the problems will disappear (or not rear up again during the Olympiad with negative effects) is surely not the behaviour the majority of members would like to see from their elected representatives with regard to any issue?
-Thirdly, the players could release a joint public statement, either accepting the decisions and asking others to respect these in the interests of the team, or conversely asking for executive involvement in reviewing the ID's decisions (which is what I believe they have done privately with no response as I mentioned at the top).
I discussed this issue with some of the interested parties at the weekend in Edinburgh - those who were unhappy about the situation are still unhappy, although one new voice (not a player) has asked me to let the matter drop lest we find ourselves in the same position junior chess has found itself in Scotland, riven by schisms and discontent at every turn.
Although I appreciate his point, I find this very difficult to do, particularly when our International Director makes public claims such as the one David quotes above re: council backing of his stance, the veracity of which is questionable to say the least.
There are a few solutions to this:-
-Firstly, our International Director could simply step down from the captaincy, admitting that his decisions were not and are not in the best interests of the teams. This would be the easiest course of action, and the 'honourable' and decent thing to do. Given the opacity of his arguments/decisions/comments so far I have my doubts that this will happen of its own accord, but it should be a serious option - one which those closest to him should think about pushing for.
-Secondly, the 'high heid yins' within CS could (and should) deal with this matter by contacting all parties concerned and trying to find an amicable solution. It doesn't need to be an official enquiry of any sort in the first instance, but burying their collective heads in the sand and hoping the problems will disappear (or not rear up again during the Olympiad with negative effects) is surely not the behaviour the majority of members would like to see from their elected representatives with regard to any issue?
-Thirdly, the players could release a joint public statement, either accepting the decisions and asking others to respect these in the interests of the team, or conversely asking for executive involvement in reviewing the ID's decisions (which is what I believe they have done privately with no response as I mentioned at the top).