Friday, September 9, 2011

Feedback from KL Open.

Ref: Here.

I was informed that MCF would fight for a player if any player is rejected from a tournament without proper grounds. Lets assume this is the case. So what is the issue for KL Open?

Apparently the case in KL Open was that the entry form from the player was not received so there is no case to answer. Lets examine this argument.

In all cases it is the player who fills in the forms. So there is no dispute there. However in the case of KL Open, you cannot get the form other than by email to Peter Long. And he chooses whether he wants to give you the form or not. So he is using a loop hole. Is that justifiable?

Lets look again. In many cases it is the parent who gets the forms and passes it to the players. Actually this is healthier. We do not want the players to get involved in administrative matters or in fact the ugly face of the politics in Malaysian chess. That is why many sports uses managers for just this reason. The players job is to play chess. Politics will affect their state of mind.

We do not have to look far to see many examples in our local scenario. That is why FGM applied for the forms as a chess academy. And those emails were not answered.

A simple way to stop further abuse of the system and abuse of the players rights is simply not to allow organisers to do it the way Peter has done it.

If this is stipulated in MCF guidelines then no Association organisers can abuse the system in the future:

Forms must be freely available to anyone applying. The players fill in the form and the payment made. If the organiser then has solid grounds to reject, the organiser must state those grounds in writing and submit it to both MCF and the player.

Then Malaysian chess can grow. We will have guidelines and will no longer be subject to the malicious intent of ill spirited organisers. We cannot allow Malaysian chess to remain in the control of cowboys if we want to get to the next level. Malaysian Chess does not belong to Peter. KLCA is a State Association meant to serve the Malaysian chess public. This has clearly been subverted.

Note: Peter may have borrowed a page from the Perak Chess Association. That's how they do it too.

No comments:

Post a Comment