In 2011 BCM interviewed Dominic and published the result in the April 2011 issue.
Here is the interview in full
Why do think opinion will be seriously divided? Not everyone is in love with football, particularly match captains who have players who prefer watching it to playing chess.JustinHorton wrote: When you have a candidate who is going to seriously divide opinion, it's a particularly bad idea.
It's an interesting contrast. Neither league supports adjournment, but whilst the Central London League almost exclusively uses increments (as far as I am aware), the Mid-Sussex League is one of the remaining bastions of adjudication. It's a cheeky and mundane question, but were the ECF or factions within the ECF Council or Board to propose the abolition of adjudication, as President, where would he stand?Christopher Kreuzer( Dominic Lawson) wrote: I am active at club level--representing Lewes in the Mid-Sussex League and Pimlico in the Central London League.
The ECF has an increasingly ageing set of Grandmasters and International Masters. Were any of them prepared to state an ambition to be ECF President, even at the level of just being on the headed notepaper, I would have thought a certain amount of support could be guaranteed or organised. For ECF President an ability to be invited to appear on the Today programme or just Radio 4 and be credible is one of the desired skills.Jonathan Rogers wrote: and I don't think anyone would have stood a chance against him in an election.
You could plausibly argue a three way choiceNickFaulks wrote:I always assumed, on the basis of no knowledge at all, that Jon Speelman would have walked in if he had shown any interest in the post. He is impatient with nonsense, which might be a drawback.
John McKenna wrote:"... feels like another zany ECF election coming up.
It would be necessary to find convincing reasons for a majority of the voting membership at the AGM not to support him and to prefer a wild card choice by the Board. That does happen, for example when Malcolm Pein stood for non-executive director. Finding DL guilty of not liking football or insulting Campomanes isn't going to do it. In Malcolm's case it was because he gave the impression that he would treat the position as mostly honorary, with one of his employees deputising most of the time and the President (CJ as it then was) deciding what Board papers would be passed on.Jonathan Bryant wrote: I’ve been trying to imagine what DL would have to do to not be elected. I don’t think there’s anything.