Cumbernauld Chess Club

robert kelso · Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 10:42 pm Post subject: Glasgow Chess League AGM

We have received notification of the GCL AGM on Wednesday 14th May.

There was quite a substantial document which I have uploaded as a web page here Glasgow League AGM Information

Interested to hear peoples thoughts
_________________
Robert

Ian · Joined: 07 May 2006 Posts: 143

...which date clashes with the UEFA Cup Final Very Happy

Can't see the GCL being in a position to change.

Couple of thoughts:

Teams in the first division will consist of 8 players (alternatively, 6 players)
I'd prefer to see it stick to eight. I imagine 1st div. teams should have fewer problems raising eight players than teams in lower divs., also (obviously) allows more players from "smaller" clubs to play in the 1st div.

Quckplay finishes
2. A player may claim a draw when he has less than two minutes left on his clock and before his flag falls. This concludes the game. He may claim on the basis
(a) that his opponent cannot win by normal means, or
(b) that his opponent has been making no effort to win by normal means.

I'd like to see a condition that the claimant be required to demonstrate a draw or a drawing technique at the time of claiming. Too often players get to 1' 59" and say, "Right, I want a draw", irrespective of what's happening on the board; a lot of these claims are a joke and should be treated as sharp practice.

Proposal from Paisley YMCA Chess Club
Replace Rules for League Competitions 12.3 with
Mobile phones must be switched off prior to a match commencement. If a player has a valid reason for having his phone on, such as a work commitment, sick relative, missing team mate, etc then that player must inform BOTH team captains in advance of play starting and the phone must be in silent mode.
Having a phone on without this agreement will result in an extra two minutes being awarded to the opponent for a first offence. A second such offence or a ringing phone will mean automatic loss of the game.

I know it's "only" a local league, but I'm not a fan of being picky with FIDE rules and regulations and, AFAIK, FIDE states that a mobile phone going off = loss of the game. Let's skip the 2-min. warning and stick to that!? (Having said that, there are other things that happen during matches that are more distracting and more hassle than a phone going off.)

George Thomson · Joined: 08 May 2006 Posts: 108

Ian, I agree with you on the mobile phone thing. It seems ludicrous to me that you lose in the Central League but have two minutes deducted in the Glasgow league. There needs to be uniformity and if FIDE say the game is lost then the Game should be lost.
Personally I think I would probably overlook the incident and play on. (besides I would probably not even hear it ringing, I never heard David Johnstone' when he lost to Dunfermline)
I suppose it would all depend on who my opponent happened to be and whether there was any "history" there.

Ian · Joined: 07 May 2006 Posts: 143

Ian · Joined: 07 May 2006 Posts: 143

Just heard that at the AGM, the Crowwoood/Inverclyde kerfuffle was 'resolved' (ahem) by deciding to keep both teams in div. 1 next season. This means there will be 11 teams in div 1 and three teams will get relegated next year. This beggars belief.* My gut reaction is that [a] the GCL powers that be bottled this decision. (Why have rules if you're not going to enforce them? Perhaps some of them are SFA referees in their spare time!?) [b] this will increase our chances of being relegated. (Not being pessimistic, just pragmatic.) So, because the GCL indulged in a major spot of fence-sitting, an innocent third party is disadvantaged. Wonderful.
*I don't have the GCL constitution to hand, but surely, if the constitution specifies how many teams are promoted/relegated each year, this decison was, well, unconstitutional!? Can anyone clarify?

robert kelso · Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 7:07 pm Post subject: Crowwood / Inverclyde Kerfuffle

Ian,

My understanding of what happened was that earlier in the season several Inverclyde players never turned up for a match because there was a car crash on the M8 and they couldn't get of the motorway. Because of this they asked that their defaulted boards be ignored. At that time the management committee agreed this.

When we come to the end of the season Crowwood now argue that Inverclyde should end up below them as they had a number of defaults which the management committee has disregarded.

The managemnt committee having made their previous ruling felt it would be unfair to demote Crowwood and recommended the alternative that both should stay up.

Having listened to the arguments I supported the decision of the management committee.

I understand your feeling of disgruntlement about constitutions and unfiar treatment but at the end of the day it was the membership at the AGM that made this decision by a majotity of 10 - 1.

I am sure that we will step up to the plate and come 8th ot of 11 rather than 7th out of ten.
_________________
Robert

Ian · Joined: 07 May 2006 Posts: 143

Robert,

Thanks for the info. I knew the reason for the Inverclyde defaults and have a great deal of sympathy for them, but, well, these things happen. I once had to play a league game at Grangemouth while running up and down to the car park to see if the AA man had come to repair my car which conked out literally as we pulled in to the parking space. If that happens in the GL next season, can I now just 'default' my board at no cost to the team and await the mechanic?
With the precedent which has now been set, it seems to me that a team (or carload thereof) who are held up and going to be seriously late will now be better off just not turning up and taking a non-punitive default rather than risk playing with much less time on their clocks.
With you all the way on finishing 4th bottom! Very Happy