Congratulations! Hairul for being nominated to the MCF committee. I am glad for you that your contribution to chess has been recognised.
An aside: I am wondering if the comments from anonymous in "MCF Latest news" has any bearings to this. I do not really know Hairul and so I was scratching my head why this person seemed so keen to create a problem between us. Then I recalled an incident from a distant past. I was nominated to the PICA committee in 2006 after my son won the MSSPK in 2005. My first glimpse of the inner workings. I soon realised they were not interested in any contribution from me. In fact my son was now attacked openly in front of me. Small things at first like making him stand for a long time when he wanted to hand in his results. Pretending not to see him. Of course I was conflicted. Afterall I was in the committee and could not be seen to go against the other committee members.
Anyway things came to a head when Mark was barred from even attending the selection for Merdeka Team. So I openly spoke up. In the end, Chan the current President, called me and said that he would ensure that my son is not victimised if I resign from the committee!! I did.
Remember that was in 2006. Very honestly I did not now what to make of it at that time. I had never experienced that type of behaviour before. For a while I even questioned Mark. It took me more years of careful observation to come to my conclusions. This seems to be the modus operandi. They bring you into the committee not for your contribution but to control you. Hard to believe isn't it. That there are people who would ask you to join their committee so they can attack your son!!?
Did they really think I was more interested in the position than my own son?? Are there people like that? I won't tolerate this sort of behaviour even if it was done on somebody else's child.
I am not saying that MCF condones this type of behaviour. So I'd like to think that Hairul is nominated for the right reasons. But I still continue to wonder if there is a connection given anonymous's behaviour. More careful observation could be revealing.