16-09-2016, 11:47 AM
Alan Tate Wrote:Matthew Turner Wrote:It seems to me that selection criteria such as a certain numbers of games in the previous period of time are not really necessary.Matthew Turner Wrote:I don't really see that bonus related pay (in the context) is really going to work.
Care to expand?
You have a view about how active a player should be in the lead up to an Olympiad and how important that is. Andy B has a slightly different view, I have a slightly different view again, Adam Bremner has a different perspective. Why try to make us all think alike? Get a selection panel together and allow then to use their judgment. Candidates should know that if they are not very active that this may count against them, but surely this is self evident?
I have no idea how performance related pay would work, but I just cannot see it being an incentive. With the sort of finances we are talking about at present I would have thought most players would see any scheme as offensive.
If you want some incentive scheme them I think it would be a great idea to offer a payment to the next Scottish born GM. You can probably raise some money from members and it has commercial possibilities because it would probably run for some time and tap into publicity at lots of different events.