Yorkshire Chess News





Results of Appeals


On 25th February, while the webmaster was away for a few days’ holiday in Llandudno (hence delay in publication), Steve Westmoreland sent out the following note on the results of three disputes which had taken place.


I was pinged on Sunday about some issues within the Woodhouse Cup and asked to Chair up an Appeals Committee for a potential dispute between Sheffield and Ilkley. I then started hearing of other incidents and was asked to keep on going, with various members of the YCA compromised due to involvement with the various Clubs.


Due to the nature of the incidents, that bits have been published already and there are some oddities on the LMS, I would like to notify interested parties.


Please note on either end of an appeal or dispute, there is a human being. Including the poor volunteers reviewing it.



Appeal 1: Ilkley and Sheffield


A mobile phone went off during the game, with Ilkley incorrectly claiming a win. All players presumed FIDE applied ‘If it is evident that a player has such a device on their person in the playing venue, the player shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. The regulations of an event may specify a different, less severe, penalty’.


The YCA rules supersede FIDE, specifically A30 ‘Mobile phones and other electronic devices should be switched off prior to the start of the match.  If such a device makes a sound while the match is in play the player concerned shall be warned.  If the device then sounds for a second time the game will be forfeited.  Dispensation from this rule can be agreed by the controller or by mutual agreement between the captains prior to the start of the match.  The controller reserves the right to apply a more severe penalty for gross breaches of this rule’.


As a consequence of this, the match concerned is submitted as unrated but the result stands (Sheffield may yet appeal).


I spent lot of last week speaking to players on both sides and would to thank them was showing good sportsmanship and understanding on the matter. This was a pure misunderstanding of the rules and those involved appreciate this.



Appeal 2: Rose Forgrove and Alwoodley


A game was incorrectly declared a draw, after flag fall. The situation was King Rook vs King knight. The player with the rook ran out of time, with checkmate possible on the board.


The rule applied was A25 and Captains escalating disputes. In this case the dispute did not occur and the Controller was provided with a complete decision.


As an example:


Incorrect Decision is made and disputed at the match (what did not happen)


·             If this was disputed at the match:


·             If the dispute continues and it goes to the CC for a decision, then the game is declared a win for the player who did not lose on time where checkmate was possible.


·             If not and this goes to the Appeals Committee post game, then the game is declared a win.


Incorrect Decision is made and NOT disputed at the match (what happened)


The result is agreed without dispute (therefore games have officially ended), packaged as complete and sent to the CC.


·       A dispute is raised to the CC post event, who correctly says he was provided with complete results and cannot change.


·       The Appeals Committee have to agree the position of the CC as A25 was not followed as per the constitution e.g. there was agreement at the time of submission.


A big thanks to John who accepted the decision without complaint.



Appeal 3: Application of penalty point deductions


An appeal was made via three clubs on the inconsistent application of rule A5:


Any team which defaults a match without giving two days’ notice to both the CC and the opposing team will incur one penalty point deducted from their league point score. The only exception shall be severe weather conditions on the day of the match.


The appeal was accepted as a clear breach, for the club in question and the penalty was applied. It was applied to two other clubs that also breached that weekend. I have left to the League Controller and President to look back on other instances this season.


I do not like doing this but please can clubs make themselves aware of this rule.





These situations could have been avoided with a better understanding of the rules. The rules were not easily accessible though and I have requested these are added to the website. They can be found: https://yorkshirechess.com/resources. Please re-familiarise yourself with these.


Additionally, I have asked for the rules to be clarified and consequences added, especially to A25 (I had to consult with an England FIDE Chief Arbiter last week – decisions and potential appeals were extremely difficult). This will be enthusiastically taken up by fellow volunteers on the YCA. I have also requested that rule A30 is abolished and we join the rest of the world.


I have had two years in post on the YCA. This is the first time I have had disputes arising. May the next set be longer than two years.


Steve Westmoreland


Chair of the Appeals Committee (for the moment)


YCA Deputy President