News

National developments, strategies and ideas.
User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: News

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:03 am

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:00 am
As regards taking over, I already addressed this in another thread, but coming back to it. Here is the ECF Board: https://www.englishchess.org.uk/about/ecf-officials/. 12 votes. 5 of them I consider part of the group we are discussing.
This strikes me as a lot. Also, would there not be the possibility of somebody who was nominally at the head or the organsation being employed by another member of its Board?
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: News

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:50 am

"there are a lot of wrong'uns and English Chess has a problem identifying them."

You cannot guarantee to “spot a wrong ‘un”. The problem lies more with covering up for them, which tends to be the default option in many organizations.

"Bullying is a difficult one because it is not a precisely defined term. "

Yes - Most bullies and other abusers probably think that their behaviour is acceptable or even helpful. I always smile when I see a notorious bully complaining that other people are bullies. Still, I suppose recollections vary.

J T Melsom
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: News

Post by J T Melsom » Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:57 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:50 am

Yes - Most bullies and other abusers probably think that their behaviour is acceptable or even helpful. I always smile when I see a notorious bully complaining that other people are bullies. Still, I suppose recollections vary.
Or the defence that the victim gives as good as he gets, as if this helps resolve the problem.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: News

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:04 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:50 am
You cannot guarantee to “spot a wrong ‘un”.
Of course not, but you can ask the question "why do we keep doing this?", a question English chess very much does not ask.
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:50 am
The problem lies more with covering up for them
Kind of, but if there's a large overlap between the reasons they aren't spotted, and the reasons they are covered up for, then there's not really any "more" here.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: News

Post by Paul Cooksey » Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:49 am

A shame for me we have moved on.

Kevin - do you consider wrong'uns a significant issue for the ECF? I know Justin does, but my feeling was it is not a widely held view.

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7179
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.

Re: News

Post by John Upham » Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:53 am

For my benefit, at least, could we have a definition of a "wrong'un" ?

Are we talking Brian Ratcliffe Eley / Hilary Clifford Thomas / JN Walker type persons or something else?
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: News

Post by Paul Cooksey » Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:56 am

I already defined it as someone I could not vote for regardless of their competence. The discussion is partly about how many people fall into that category.

Justin thinks a lot, I think a few. I assume we are all including the names you list.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: News

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:40 pm

"Kevin - do you consider wrong'uns a significant issue for the ECF?"

It depends on your definition of "wrong'un"! When criminal records checks became compulsory, a few arbiters decided to take this as an insult and retire (which I understand), but someone told me that one of those arbiters had to give up due to his shady past - so clearly people knew but hadn't done anything. One organization accepted a volunteer junior organizer and then found there was an unresolved case on his record, so members of the committee just asked him to resign. It was pointed out forcefully by one individual that the guy had to be sacked, as if he got caught, the whole committee could be held responsible. Eventually, he did go and then fought the original case and was cleared. The organization falsified the records and deleted the guy's name from the official records.

Britbase https://www.saund.org.uk/britbase/pgn/1 ... iewer.html contains (about halfway down) an interesting piece by John Poole on the first 75 years of the BCF, including the comment, “For 20 years I. Cohen was honorary treasurer and his efficient handling of the finances was a most important factor: he handed over to Peter Ezra in 1970 and posterity must speak for the present treasurer.”
The slightly odd wording of the second bit presumably meant, “Let’s see if he lasts 20 years!” Unfortunately, Mr Ezra subsequently had difficulty explaining why BCF money was in his personal account. He was allowed to resign and pay money back to BCF. A few years later, another organization was not so kind-hearted and called the police, who talked to previous employers of Mr Ezra. It is safe to say police and the later employers were not amused by the BCF’s (in)actions. I don’t know if he got any other treasurer jobs when he was released.

I wasn't thinking just of alleged sex offenders, but people who cheat (or aid and abet cheating), or take bribes to favour individuals, or try to ban individuals for spurious reasons. E.g. omitting someone from a junior squad as the junior's father was legal representative for someone suing BCF, volunteering to coach juniors, then leaving them out of the team, when the parents say "no", or publishing vindictive articles abut such players, Getting employees to handle disputes relating to their employers (or write reports on them), Leagues favouring some clubs and cheating other clubs in the league, etc.
You could argue this is life and could happen in any work place.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1910
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: News

Post by Roger Lancaster » Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:49 pm

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:56 am
I already defined it as someone I could not vote for regardless of their competence. The discussion is partly about how many people fall into that category.

Justin thinks a lot, I think a few. I assume we are all including the names you list.
Very hard to quantify without knowing all the possible candidates personally. There would then probably be some I would discount because, although they wouldn't fall into the "wrong uns" category, I had little faith in [for example] their management skills. As to those I'd discount through considering them thoroughly obnoxious, I'd guess [and I'm here excluding the three names mentioned who are in the past] possibly half-a-dozen. That includes a smaller number, perhaps three, of past or present contributors here.

I've since read Kevin's piece above where, in his penultimate paragraph, he cites cases where individuals aren't obnoxious per se but aren't straightforward and/or objective in their dealings. On reflection, I think he's right in which case I've probably under-estimated somewhat.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: News

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:08 pm

Re: Peter Ezra, of whom I had not heard before today, the final paragraph of page 2 here looks interesting.

I should say that when I started using the phrase about wrong 'uns, I didn't just mean outright thieves, but also people who plainly, even on a short acquaintance, couldn't be relied upon to tell the truth. CJ de Mooi and Andrew Paulson would be obvious examples.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1910
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: News

Post by Roger Lancaster » Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:23 pm


Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: News

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:37 pm

"Peter Ezra's death reported at..."

Criminal records don't prevent you being a councillor then - I'm not surprised. I think BCF's Ezra cover-up wasn't to protect him, but to try to avoid BCF looking stupid for employing him. Of course they looked much worse when the news broke. You might also ask how the accounts were amended and published without comment.

"I should say that when I started using the phrase about wrong 'uns, I didn't just mean outright thieves, but also people who plainly, even on a short acquaintance, couldn't be relied upon to tell the truth."

Yes - I have remembered someone else, who clearly did some sort of financial fiddle, but people either didn't care or didn't notice, as somebody was loudly bemoaning the fact that the individual didn't get a B(E)CF post.

I also recall a senior BCF official loudly saying after Brian Eley skipped bail, "I hope he doesn't come back and that he dies abroad." Well, yes, if BE did return and was interviewed by police, he might start naming people who had helped him. Police didn't exactly bust a gut trying to get him back either.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: News

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:49 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:37 pm
Criminal records don't prevent you being a councillor then - I'm not surprised.
I'm not sure if he was ever charged and convicted. I thought his "offence" in the case of the BCF was that he opened interest bearing accounts in his own name and transferred BCF funds into them. I don't know if it was ever established that he siphoned off some of the amounts or the interest on them. I think Chess magazine of the period published whatever details it could establish.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: News

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:56 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:49 pm
I thought his "offence" in the case of the BCF was that he opened interest bearing accounts in his own name and transferred BCF funds into them.
Image
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Ian Thompson
Posts: 3551
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: News

Post by Ian Thompson » Sun Aug 01, 2021 2:03 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:49 pm
I thought his "offence" in the case of the BCF was that he opened interest bearing accounts in his own name and transferred BCF funds into them. I don't know if it was ever established that he siphoned off some of the amounts or the interest on them.
That's pretty much my recollection as well. Money he received meant for the BCF was first paid into an account of his own, left there for a little while to earn some interest, and then passed on to the BCF.

When found out, I think he denied any wrongdoing, but agreed to pay the BCF the interest he had earned, which was a substantial amount.