Appeal
The Appeal Committee have considered the Appeal of Guisborough concerning the match between Guisborough and Peterlee scheduled for Monday 20th February.
The captains agreed that the match would be defaulted in Guisborough’s favour following problems with Peterlee raising a team.
The Association have overruled the decision to default the match and have imposed a decision under rule 6.1.2 (late application for postponement) that requires the match to be rescheduled and have penalised Peterlee one match point as stipulated.
Guisborough have appealed against this decision on the grounds that the matter should have been dealt with under rule 6.6 (unilateral failure to fulfil a fixture).
The Appeal Committee find that the rules do not permit captains to offer or accept default of matches. Both captains were at fault and the matter would properly have been dealt with under rule 6.7 (joint failure to fulfil fixture).
The Appeal Committee find that the matter should not have been dealt with under rule 6.1.2 which concerns late applications for postponement. As far as the Committee is aware, no such application was made.
The Appeal Committee do not agree that the matter should be dealt with under rule 6.6. Clearly this rule cannot apply where there is agreement between the captains.
Since the Appeal Committee cannot replace one misapplication of the rules with another, the appeal fails. The Committee add the following comments.
- The rules regarding postponement of matches are clear and coherent.
- No application was made under rule 6.2 (exceptional circumstances). Had such an application been made, it might well have been accepted.
- The members of the Association are free to revisit the rules and to alter the powers and penalties available to its elected officers.
The Chairman of CCA has issued the following statement to clarify the actions to be taken from the appeal. This statement has been issued in agreement with the Chairman of the Appeals Committee.
The Appeal Committee which was set up to consider an appeal made by Guisborough Chess Club to claim an unfulfilled fixture from Monday 20th February against Peterlee Chess Club as a 5-0 win for Guisborough under rule 6-6 is defeated.
The obsevations made by the appeal committee that the events surounding the unfilfilled fixture were more appropriately dealt with under rule 6.7 are noted, however imposing a 2 point penalty on Guisborough Chess Club, who although partly to blame for the failure to fulfil the fixture (by coercing with Peterlee Chess Club to unilaterally agree a match result) would be extremely harsh, particularly when the main perpetrator for cancelling the match was Peterlee Chess Club.
The observations made by the appeal committee, although welcome, do not form the core objective of the appeal, which was to consider Guisborough Chess Club’s appeal.
It is therefore decided that in the interests of fairness that the league organisers original decision will stand.
Ron Stather