Posts: 370
Threads: 16
Joined: Sep 2011
Pat,
I would be very disturbed by the incident that you refer to of course.,
That is why there is need for such a motion.
To formalise things on a CS Level.
Again I must reiterate my disappointment at part of a previous posting about what you would do if you were an organiser.
If a disabled player turns up at 24 hours notice at an tournament, then the organiser's cannot be expected to make arrangements. That is why the onus is on the disabled player to inform the organiser of his/her needs as early as possible. The guidelines make that clear.
As for CS events, it is up to CS and I assume council to decide how to implement the guidelines as they as a national body deem as appropriate.
George,
The new guidelines came into effect on July 1 2014
Posts: 1,929
Threads: 263
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
George,
As per the minutes of the rules commission a few days ago, these recommendations are to be enforced in FIDE rated tournaments (although how that makes them recommendations if they are to be enforced...). The words are not Steves, they are the recommendations that have been presented to the various committees here in Tromso and to my knowledge have been accepted by all.
On to other points...
We cannot force them onto leagues and congresses here and so they have to remain recommendations for them, we can however adopt them for Chess Scotland events.
Lets take the Troon club as an example as Robin has mentioned it a few times. They play in the Spens. If the opposition team has a player who is in a wheelchair, would we prefer that they turn up on the day and we end up with a mess or the guidelines are followed, the opposition then have the onus to contact Troon and a satisfactory settlement is had by all!
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
Posts: 1,120
Threads: 70
Joined: Aug 2011
Steve Hilton and Andy Howie....
Give me some decent reasons why clubs like Troon and Edinburgh should enter CS national club events if you are proposing a motion at the AGM that may actively discriminate against them.
Posts: 370
Threads: 16
Joined: Sep 2011
robin moore Wrote:Steve Hilton and Andy Howie....
Give me some decent reasons why clubs like Troon and Edinburgh should enter CS national club events if you are proposing a motion at the AGM that may actively discriminate against them.
Robin read the motion your question has been answered
Posts: 360
Threads: 97
Joined: May 2012
Reputation:
3
Because the guidelines do not discriminate against any club.
If such a scenario ever took place then, as happens in the national club tournaments now, a neutral venue more suitable could be sought as is the case now with distance.
Indeed a case could be made to add such an addendum to the existing rules for the case of accessibility for disabled members of a team.
If your club premises, which in the case of 99% of clubs are not owned by the clubs, do not have to certain standards for accessibility by law, and they all should have done so by now, then any club cannot be held to account for the venue they play in not being accessible to disabled players as it must be assumed that it complies with the Acts in that all reasonable effort has been made.
Compromise would then be sought and no doubt achieved, I would hope.
If such doomsday scenarios as described occur with a member of the disabled community making demands there are remedies for that in the laws without having to go near any guidelines.
Posts: 289
Threads: 7
Joined: Aug 2011
Well, Alva Street is pretty irrevocably wheelchair-unfriendly, but I'm sure we'd manage to come up with an alternative venue (given notice) if necessary.
It's a shame that this seems to have the potential to affect events like the Winter Chess Festival (by my reading and from what's above, the invitational all-play-all would have been fine, but the open Swiss events running alongside would have potentially been in trouble - is this correct?), but I'm not sure that's really a good enough argument to oppose the motion. I can't imagine anyone would seek to apply it unreasonably.
Posts: 1,120
Threads: 70
Joined: Aug 2011
Would it not be reasonable to add an amendment to this motion that CS will pick up the tab for any club that require to make alternative arrangements?
Posts: 1,929
Threads: 263
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
Well given it has come from FIDE, no
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
Posts: 1,120
Threads: 70
Joined: Aug 2011
I mean for non Fide rated events, ie CS events like the Spens and the Richardson which this motion would apply to if passed.
Posts: 1,929
Threads: 263
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
With the limited budget we have?
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
