26-01-2014, 01:53 PM
George Neave Wrote:andyburnett Wrote:I hope that the working party also discuss 'opt out' possibilities for players - I haven't the remotest desire to play someone who isn't there physically (if you'll pardon the pun).
Indeed. Seems like lot of nonsense to me. Better spend the time and energy running few more congresses e.g. Grangemouth, Perth, Hawick, Aberdeen, East of Scotland/West of Scotland - where are they? Live chess events commutable from the capital have all but vanished in past couple of years. Surely this is the top issue of the day?
It is only part of the problem George, the main concern has to be to reverse the trend of falling numbers at tournaments. Remoteness is a serious issue which has to be looked at. Not just remoteness in a geographical sense, but remoteness because of disability. You have to understand the difficulties disabled players face when travelling especially by rail to a tournament. Support at stations is inconsistent to say the least. I can understand people's reluctance to play someone who is not physically present, but if that person cannot be present because of their disability and playing by remote is the only option, then I would say you cannot refuse to play such a player because in that case, you would be refusing to play on the grounds of disability which is contrary to FIDE rules