I don't know the circumstances of Bray not rearranging games, so I can't comment. If they had a full team for the Saturday though, there'd be no reason for them to rearrange. It'd be nice of them to rearrange, but it certainly wouldn't be dickish not to in those circumstances.
I don't know what your catchment area has to do with anything?
If Jessel and Maze play against Balbriggan, it won't be their only game.
As far as I know they were asked about playing mid week in their club and declined the request.
History might repeat itself.......http://www.leinsterchess.com/players/code7517.htm
Not fair to Heidenfeld clubs playing Gonzaga in the early rounds....
But were they asked at short notice? It wouldn't be an issue to refuse then.
Did they have a full team already set for the Saturday? Why rearrange if so?
It's not comparable behaviour at all.
No worries, we all have opinions.
They were asked to oblige by playing at home and save travelling on a Saturday but chose not to (as is their right).
The other item shouldn't be ignored either, but it's just my opinion.....
It's not an opinion that they're not comparable; it's a fact
Elm Mount 4.5-3.5 St.Benildus “A”
Round 8 Dun Laoghaire 1-7 Gonzaga
What was result R8 Kilkenny v Dublin Universary anybody ?
I was not there but I am told Kilkenny scored 6.5 pts and I suspect Trinity only had five or six players. I don't know any individual results.
Last year (before Karl McPhillips defected back to his old club) we murdered them although we were away then also. This year Trinity will be relying on the weakness of others to avoid relegation, I suspect, especially as we face Dublin in the last round.
However, the other matches are against Bray and Benildus B, with some prospect of winning if our captain can field eight players on those occasions.
On a similar note, I believe Curragh actually scratched board 3 v Bray (the live boards give the game as 1. e4), so tree score there was actually 5.5-1.5.
Are Trinity and Curragh competing with each other to bring the league into disrepute? The season is too short to be giving some clubs effective points headstarts on others, even allowing for the provision in the league rules for play-offs.
Trinity in particular should be fined I think (in accordance with rule 5.3) Can you imagine, say, a League of Ireland team turning up to a match with ten players, or playing their u17 team in one match and the first team in another?
There's some ridiculous carry-on this season
We are all trying our best. In the end, the natural order will be restored.
I think people who don't know the circumstances of someone not turning up for a match should think twice about the comments they post on a public forum. This is my thirtieth season playing for the Curragh Chess Club and I have witnessed many incidents over the years, and, as team captain on many occasions, have had to juggle the requirements of our own players and opposing teams. I have made huge efforts over the years to accommodate playing games/matches in advance.
I personally, have never questioned the motives behind teams refusing or agreeing to move games or defaulting boards but, I don't think making unfounded allegations against teams or individuals is helpful to anyone. I have seen clubs on numerous occasions strengthening teams for particular matches and a quick glance through the league results will show this. The semi-rascist innuendo on your St Benildus blog (the three amigos reference) does your college no service.
Mark - have to take serious issue with your accusation of "semi racism", particularly for someone who starts off by saying people should think twice about comments made on a public forum.
There is nothing whatsoever racist in my comments - indeed, L1m1tless, a Curragh clubmate, refers to the Spanish Armada earlier in this very thread. Is one racist and one not? (Stupid question of course - neither is remotely racist, so why the hypocrisy in singling out one comment but not the other?). I think you need to retract your statement.
Also, where is the unfounded allegation? Either the match was a default or it wasn't. I am told it was; the live boards indicate it was; you seem to accept it was - where is the issue here? I'm suggesting Trinity, not Curragh, get fined for this matter because of their repeat offending (eight or nine boards already this season, across three matches).
Curragh have, in my view, brought the league into disrepute in a different way, which I've already discussed. One good turn often leads to another in the Leinster leagues - Team A accommodating a board switch one season often leads to Team B being more ready to return the favour the following season - and I think Curragh have shot themselves in the foot in a way with their actions here, and are probably likely to see fewer favours granted to them in the coming seasons.
Cdeb, I and another team mate traveled to Dublin after work (2 hour drive each way) to accommodate your Ennis team a few weeks ago. It's not like we don't try to help out other teams.
Indeed. But how's that relevant here? This is about ye making a mockery of the fairness and validity of the relegation fight. (And then throwing out daft accusations of racism instead of arguing the point)
I will acknowledge that of the three Curragh posters here, you are, in fairness, the only one who's acknowledged that we have a legitimate gripe here.