Monday, 30 June 2014
WHAT IS IT WITH CLUB COMMITTEES AND THEIR INABILITY TO CARRY DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS PROPERLY ?............ ( Article by Professor Hu Chi Ku Chi )
A very sad and appalling truth needs to be acknowledged. No matter where in the world you care to look , club committees get it all wrong when handling out disciplinary suspensions and expulsions to misbehaving members. Is it down to ignorance of the law ? Is it down to a blatant arrogance that somehow small clubs are exempt from the law....or maybe they stand above it ? Well , down under in Queensland Australia a court was quick to overturn the committee's decision to expel a member from their bowls club.
The incident which triggered a rather bitter and costly legal dispute was an altercation between the member and his sister. This resulted in several people sending in letters of complaint about the " language used to describe her " . One of the letters came from the victim and her husband. The others were sent in from witnesses friends keen to offer their support.
However , the committee then proceeded to make a series of mistakes , which led to the court to believe that several irregularities had taken place , along side the complete absence of natural justice.
1. The plaintiff's solicitor had made several requests to the committee for information and answers, all of which were ignored. One involved the important question of whether or not he was allowed to legally represent his client at the initial disciplinary hearing.
2. So when the solicitor turned up with his client to the disciplinary hearing , only then was he told " no ". The committee decided on the spot to put a motion forward to exclude him , which of course was carried successfully. At this point both the member and his solicitor walked away. This resulted in the remainder of the hearing taking place in their absence.
3. The secretary had failed throughout to notify the member ( and his solicitor ) in writing the exact nature of the charge(s) made against him , opting instead to show him the letters of complaint . By not knowing the true nature of the charges, the accused member was severely prejudiced.
4. Although the member was offered the right of appeal , procedural obstacles were then put in his way to make his life more difficult.
5. At the appeal the member's solicitor wanted to know if a proper assessment had been carried out as to whether or not the alleged conduct did indeed amount to conduct , which would be sufficient to warrant suspension or termination of membership. No adequate answer was offered or given.
6. At the appeal much store was placed on the letters of complaint which were read out by their authors. This was followed by a secret ballot which resulted in the original ban being upheld.
7. Fairness , which is clearly the touchstone of natural justice , might well be satisfied by different procedures even in the same association in different circumstances , but in the court's opinion the more serious the outcome then the greater degree of fairness required .
8. Certain requirements laid down in the club's constitution were not fully met.
9. The member , in the absence of not knowing what the charges against him were , was never in a position to prepare submissions on an appropriate penalty , and perhaps search the minutes for comparable instances.
10. Once the committee incurs upon itself a duty to investigate, hear , determine and impose a penalty , then it must be even more meticulous in following its rules.
11. There will always be the suspicion of bias and prejudice if the punishment was unlikely to be as severe if a similar incident had occurred in a similar club , or if correct procedures had been carried out.
One final observation is that prejudgement will always undermine any argument that a fair hearing took place . Members of a club committee should only make decisions about a accused member at the end of the hearing but not before . So imagine then how a court might react to the chairman of an appeal panel telling the member in writing , that he agreed with the committee's decision to ban him several weeks before the scheduled date of the appeal hearing ?
A very sad and appalling truth needs to be acknowledged. No matter where in the world you care to look , club committees get it all wrong when handling out disciplinary suspensions and expulsions to misbehaving members. Is it down to ignorance of the law ? Is it down to a blatant arrogance that somehow small clubs are exempt from the law....or maybe they stand above it ? Well , down under in Queensland Australia a court was quick to overturn the committee's decision to expel a member from their bowls club.
The incident which triggered a rather bitter and costly legal dispute was an altercation between the member and his sister. This resulted in several people sending in letters of complaint about the " language used to describe her " . One of the letters came from the victim and her husband. The others were sent in from witnesses friends keen to offer their support.
However , the committee then proceeded to make a series of mistakes , which led to the court to believe that several irregularities had taken place , along side the complete absence of natural justice.
1. The plaintiff's solicitor had made several requests to the committee for information and answers, all of which were ignored. One involved the important question of whether or not he was allowed to legally represent his client at the initial disciplinary hearing.
2. So when the solicitor turned up with his client to the disciplinary hearing , only then was he told " no ". The committee decided on the spot to put a motion forward to exclude him , which of course was carried successfully. At this point both the member and his solicitor walked away. This resulted in the remainder of the hearing taking place in their absence.
3. The secretary had failed throughout to notify the member ( and his solicitor ) in writing the exact nature of the charge(s) made against him , opting instead to show him the letters of complaint . By not knowing the true nature of the charges, the accused member was severely prejudiced.
4. Although the member was offered the right of appeal , procedural obstacles were then put in his way to make his life more difficult.
5. At the appeal the member's solicitor wanted to know if a proper assessment had been carried out as to whether or not the alleged conduct did indeed amount to conduct , which would be sufficient to warrant suspension or termination of membership. No adequate answer was offered or given.
6. At the appeal much store was placed on the letters of complaint which were read out by their authors. This was followed by a secret ballot which resulted in the original ban being upheld.
7. Fairness , which is clearly the touchstone of natural justice , might well be satisfied by different procedures even in the same association in different circumstances , but in the court's opinion the more serious the outcome then the greater degree of fairness required .
8. Certain requirements laid down in the club's constitution were not fully met.
9. The member , in the absence of not knowing what the charges against him were , was never in a position to prepare submissions on an appropriate penalty , and perhaps search the minutes for comparable instances.
10. Once the committee incurs upon itself a duty to investigate, hear , determine and impose a penalty , then it must be even more meticulous in following its rules.
11. There will always be the suspicion of bias and prejudice if the punishment was unlikely to be as severe if a similar incident had occurred in a similar club , or if correct procedures had been carried out.
One final observation is that prejudgement will always undermine any argument that a fair hearing took place . Members of a club committee should only make decisions about a accused member at the end of the hearing but not before . So imagine then how a court might react to the chairman of an appeal panel telling the member in writing , that he agreed with the committee's decision to ban him several weeks before the scheduled date of the appeal hearing ?
Monday, 23 June 2014
Saturday, 21 June 2014
THE DEVIL'S DICTIONARY REVISITED...........
- Disciplinary hearing : an alternative name to a rubber stamp job
- Rack : a contraption often used by committees to extract confessions from members prior to a disciplinary hearing
- Closed hand : a highly effective weapon attached to the end of an arm
- Heart : an organ that often stops beating when partner allows a cold grand slam to go down by failing to remove the opponent's last trump
- Bridge talk : a god sent opportunity to commit a variety of indiscretions without thought or concern for others , spreading false and malicious rumours full of prejudice and loathing
- Steal ( a trick ) : the act of winning a trick that really belonged to the opponents , by means of diversionary tactics, cunning , stealth and/or deception
- Bridge teacher : a second rate player often found with one hand in his students' pockets as the other tots up his gross earnings
- Partnership : the state or condition of a union consisting of two superiors and their two inferior halves, making in all three
- AGM : an awe-inspiring illustration of how to keep members completely in the dark , and dissenters at bay with their damn awkward questions
- Direction : what a player needs to decide upon before firing a bridgemate across the table
Friday, 20 June 2014
LAW REPORT : BIGOT-JOHNSON v. EBU EDITORIAL STAFF
( Bigot was at war again, desperate to take the EBU editorial team to court over an alleged libel. One bulletin editor , on reviewing a prestigious national pairs event , described the winner Bigot-Johnson as " the luckiest player he had ever encountered .....someone who was able to walk on water , performing miracles at the table which had never been seen or witnessed before ". Clearly upset by the suggestion that his victory had nothing to do with natural skill and ability , Bigot was hell bent on suing the EBU for thousands. The following extract, taken from the trial's transcript , reveals a dramatic turning point in the case. Bigot of course represented himself. )
Counsel for the defendants ( CD ) : So is it true Bigot that you won this tournament with a score of 72.3 % ?
B-J : Too damn right I did....and what's more if I had been blessed with a half-decent partner it would have been much more
CD : Yet coming to this event.... not once did you ever manage to get over 45% in all previous competitions....... let alone your regular weekly club duplicates
B-J : No...as it happens
CD : And is it true that your EBU ranking is the eight of clubs , which puts you alongside beginners , rabbits and numpties ?
B-J : Yes.....but that ranking business is a complete and utter nonsense
CD : Moreover , we have witness statements from all your previous partners.....going back 20 years......who to a man and woman rate you as the worst partner they have ever played with
B-J : Oh....
CD : So let's gets back to the event in question which you won in a most spectacular way. Despite not knowing which suit is which...... you made wild leaps in every auction, only to find the perfect dummy on each occasion. You then managed with uncanny instinct to stay out of doomed games and slams , and every lead and switch you made in defence you miraculously found partner holding the exact layout.........and critical key cards........ needed to beat the seemingly rock solid contracts the opponents were in. It was almost as though you had seen all the hands before !
B-J : How dare you insinuate I cheated in some way. Why I owe my success to a pact I made with the devil..... who in return for my soul gave me a gift certain to guarantee me success at the card tables
CD : Well....this gift was certainly not one which involved mastery of a beautiful and exquisite bidding system designed to land players in excellent contracts , by being able to describe their hands with sublime precision and accuracy
B-J : No....
CD : Nor was this gift an ability to draw the correct inferences from the bidding ..... and play of the cards.....to determine the best line of play both as declarer play and defender
B-J : No......
CD : Indeed , no way do you have the skill of reading the cards....... which only top class experts can claim to possess
B-J : Ah...I do need to correct you there....for in a way I do read the cards exceedingly well..... by simply looking through the backs of them
CD ( holding up a card with its back towards Bigot ) : What card is this then ?
B-J : The jack of hearts
CD : Correct......so you do have this demonised power to make you invincible at bridge ?
B-J : Yes...yes....yes.......isn't it wonderful
CD : So let's recap then.....you have admitted that prior to your meeting with the devil you were a non-achieving, third-rate player........ who raw beginners looked forward to play against .......full of justified optimism and confidence
B-J : Yes...
CD : And that any objective onlooker..... unaware of your special gift ....... would automatically assume that you must be the jammiest player on earth
B-J : I guess so.....
Judge : Well , Bigot , I've heard enough. Since truth and fair comment are well established defences to claims of libel , I have no hesitation now in bringing this case to an end. There has been no libel whatsoever . The description of you being the luckiest player alive was in the circumstances a perfectly fair and reasonable comment.....and therefore you will be required to meet all the costs incurred by the defendants....... as well as your own
B-J : Bugger....
( Bigot was at war again, desperate to take the EBU editorial team to court over an alleged libel. One bulletin editor , on reviewing a prestigious national pairs event , described the winner Bigot-Johnson as " the luckiest player he had ever encountered .....someone who was able to walk on water , performing miracles at the table which had never been seen or witnessed before ". Clearly upset by the suggestion that his victory had nothing to do with natural skill and ability , Bigot was hell bent on suing the EBU for thousands. The following extract, taken from the trial's transcript , reveals a dramatic turning point in the case. Bigot of course represented himself. )
Counsel for the defendants ( CD ) : So is it true Bigot that you won this tournament with a score of 72.3 % ?
B-J : Too damn right I did....and what's more if I had been blessed with a half-decent partner it would have been much more
CD : Yet coming to this event.... not once did you ever manage to get over 45% in all previous competitions....... let alone your regular weekly club duplicates
B-J : No...as it happens
CD : And is it true that your EBU ranking is the eight of clubs , which puts you alongside beginners , rabbits and numpties ?
B-J : Yes.....but that ranking business is a complete and utter nonsense
CD : Moreover , we have witness statements from all your previous partners.....going back 20 years......who to a man and woman rate you as the worst partner they have ever played with
B-J : Oh....
CD : So let's gets back to the event in question which you won in a most spectacular way. Despite not knowing which suit is which...... you made wild leaps in every auction, only to find the perfect dummy on each occasion. You then managed with uncanny instinct to stay out of doomed games and slams , and every lead and switch you made in defence you miraculously found partner holding the exact layout.........and critical key cards........ needed to beat the seemingly rock solid contracts the opponents were in. It was almost as though you had seen all the hands before !
B-J : How dare you insinuate I cheated in some way. Why I owe my success to a pact I made with the devil..... who in return for my soul gave me a gift certain to guarantee me success at the card tables
CD : Well....this gift was certainly not one which involved mastery of a beautiful and exquisite bidding system designed to land players in excellent contracts , by being able to describe their hands with sublime precision and accuracy
B-J : No....
CD : Nor was this gift an ability to draw the correct inferences from the bidding ..... and play of the cards.....to determine the best line of play both as declarer play and defender
B-J : No......
CD : Indeed , no way do you have the skill of reading the cards....... which only top class experts can claim to possess
B-J : Ah...I do need to correct you there....for in a way I do read the cards exceedingly well..... by simply looking through the backs of them
CD ( holding up a card with its back towards Bigot ) : What card is this then ?
B-J : The jack of hearts
CD : Correct......so you do have this demonised power to make you invincible at bridge ?
B-J : Yes...yes....yes.......isn't it wonderful
CD : So let's recap then.....you have admitted that prior to your meeting with the devil you were a non-achieving, third-rate player........ who raw beginners looked forward to play against .......full of justified optimism and confidence
B-J : Yes...
CD : And that any objective onlooker..... unaware of your special gift ....... would automatically assume that you must be the jammiest player on earth
B-J : I guess so.....
Judge : Well , Bigot , I've heard enough. Since truth and fair comment are well established defences to claims of libel , I have no hesitation now in bringing this case to an end. There has been no libel whatsoever . The description of you being the luckiest player alive was in the circumstances a perfectly fair and reasonable comment.....and therefore you will be required to meet all the costs incurred by the defendants....... as well as your own
B-J : Bugger....
Thursday, 19 June 2014
THE DEVIL'S DICTIONARY REVISITED..........
- Club secretary : an appointed officer with a roving commission to lie
- Minutes : a piece of work based on fiction , half-truths and omissions
- Litigation : a process or machine which if you enter as a cow you exit as minced meat
- Misfortune : the only kind of fortune bridge players talk about
- Off-centre bids : lies which fall well short of psychs , often associated with poor bidders' appalling inability to describe their hands any degree of precision or honesty
- Zero tolerance : a god sent whipping stick providing those with axes to grind a plentiful supply of opportunities to rid the club of desirable members
- Bridge : a beautiful game designed to be played in a spirit of goodwill and great sportsmanship , but one which finds itself taken up by predatory sharks , bully boys , mean-hearted monsters and black-hearted villians
- Overbidding : a dangerous habit eagerly developed by both show-offs and hoggers, always insisting on winning competitive auctions with themselves as declarers
- Witticisms : sharp , clever remarks based on accurate observational skills and/or perceptive insight, which unfortunately are interpreted by the ZT enforcement officers as cruel , inappropriate , and offensive insults
- Scratch pair : another unfortunate habit adopted by most male players, keen to obtain immediate gratification to counter stressful situations at the bridge table
- Nose ( for the game ) : an essential part of a player's make up if wishing to sniff out the location of missing queens , cheats at the table and flying bridgemates
Wednesday, 18 June 2014
Tuesday, 17 June 2014
BRIDGE BULLIES : THEIR MODUS OPERANDI ........( Article by Dr. Sigmund T. Schukelgruber )
Any kind of psychological and emotional battering through verbal abuse kills the human spirit . It cripples the victim's self-esteem and sense of worth. In my opinion it is the major reason why so people who take up the game quickly leave it behind.
Bullies are usually masters of this evil art, and excellent actors. To those who are not witness to their despicable antics , a perpetrator often appears as " a wonderful person " or a " really friendly guy ". Little do they know how cruel and spiteful the bully can be when results do not go his way.
Indeed, bullies are highly skilled in brow beating errant and hapless partners , using a multitude of ways to show disapproval and to vent their anger , as the following list reveals :
1. Withholding : not speaking to partner when he is angry. Being snubbed or ignored by a wall of scornful silence speaks volumes about the extent of his contempt and displeasure
2. Countering : whatever view or opinion partner makes , the bully will reject it out of hand and make counterclaims of his own. Countering will often include condemnation and criticism of the victim's inadequate grasp and understanding of the game
3. Ridicule : a barrage of comments designed to make the victim feel extremely ashamed and embarrassed in front of stunned opponents and onlookers. If ever brought to task over his hurtful remarks, the stock reply is always the same : " I was only joking " . The truth, however , is that the intent was malicious.
4. Sidestepping : bullies are quick to change topics whenever their decisions are open to question or scrutiny
5. Accusing and blaming : the blame game is what bullies are expert at winning. No matter what mistakes they make at the table, partners mistakes were far worse , often being the reason behind theirs
6. Trivialising: here the bully cannot counter partner's observations or criticisms , and so therefore he feels compelled to trivialise them as being of no relevance or significance
7. Undermining : by constantly belittling partner's ability the bully uses statements like " You wouldn't understand " or " There's no point trying to explain to you..." . The object of this tactic is to sabotage the victim's integrity and status as a competent player
8. Threatening : this involves hinting that some kind of reprimand , punishment or unpleasant outcome is imminent , or using some form of psychological assault such as a clenched fist or dagger eyes. Once I heard a bully threaten his hapless partner by saying " I'm going to write up about this disaster hand and get it published for all to read "
9. Name calling : a bridge bully's vocabulary is very extensive with respect to derogatory words and savage insults. Worse of all are terms of endearment heavily loaded with intense sarcasm
10. Ordering : the bully has to be in control and to be the boss. He doesn't need to ask or seek permission to do things. Partner's role is to be both subservient and compliant and to obey his master's instructions
11. Judging and criticising : Nothing escapes criticism of the bully. Even the smallest faults at the table will be seized upon and condemned. Words like " you should have... " or " why didn't you do... " are dished out after each and every hand , irrespective of the result. Indeed, I was once bollocked for missing a chance of a third overtrick when just one had secured a global top
12. Denial : bullies don't make mistakes and are never in the wrong. Their role is to focus on partner's failings and shortcomings and never their own ( since these can't possibly exist )
13. Refusal to accept responsibility : partner is to blame for everything. And should the bully have made a mistake on board 14 , he will find a way to lay the blame on partner. " Your cock-up on board 13 caused me so much distress my brain was hurting, and I was unable to think straight ..."
14. Abusive anger : here the bully's histrionic outbursts are designed to harvest sympathy from others , and to publicity expose partner's failings. Attention must be drawn to the bully's plight , whereby his anger can then be looked upon as justified , a natural response to partner's ongoing provocation and incompetence
15. Symbolic gestures : these can involve walking off in a huff when partner's cocks up his declare play , stomping walks between tables, waving arms in a state of panic, acts of self-mutilation , ripping up his scorecard..... and so on
So yes.....bridge bullies are masters of psychological and emotional abuse. Yet all too often they belong in upper echelons of high ranking players , which somehow persuades their victims and club committees to turn the proverbial blind eye , as to what is really happening at the tables. Bridge bullies should be brought to task and FINED on every occasion , for it is amazing how the power of money can motivate people to change their behaviour overnight.
Any kind of psychological and emotional battering through verbal abuse kills the human spirit . It cripples the victim's self-esteem and sense of worth. In my opinion it is the major reason why so people who take up the game quickly leave it behind.
Bullies are usually masters of this evil art, and excellent actors. To those who are not witness to their despicable antics , a perpetrator often appears as " a wonderful person " or a " really friendly guy ". Little do they know how cruel and spiteful the bully can be when results do not go his way.
Indeed, bullies are highly skilled in brow beating errant and hapless partners , using a multitude of ways to show disapproval and to vent their anger , as the following list reveals :
1. Withholding : not speaking to partner when he is angry. Being snubbed or ignored by a wall of scornful silence speaks volumes about the extent of his contempt and displeasure
2. Countering : whatever view or opinion partner makes , the bully will reject it out of hand and make counterclaims of his own. Countering will often include condemnation and criticism of the victim's inadequate grasp and understanding of the game
3. Ridicule : a barrage of comments designed to make the victim feel extremely ashamed and embarrassed in front of stunned opponents and onlookers. If ever brought to task over his hurtful remarks, the stock reply is always the same : " I was only joking " . The truth, however , is that the intent was malicious.
4. Sidestepping : bullies are quick to change topics whenever their decisions are open to question or scrutiny
5. Accusing and blaming : the blame game is what bullies are expert at winning. No matter what mistakes they make at the table, partners mistakes were far worse , often being the reason behind theirs
6. Trivialising: here the bully cannot counter partner's observations or criticisms , and so therefore he feels compelled to trivialise them as being of no relevance or significance
7. Undermining : by constantly belittling partner's ability the bully uses statements like " You wouldn't understand " or " There's no point trying to explain to you..." . The object of this tactic is to sabotage the victim's integrity and status as a competent player
8. Threatening : this involves hinting that some kind of reprimand , punishment or unpleasant outcome is imminent , or using some form of psychological assault such as a clenched fist or dagger eyes. Once I heard a bully threaten his hapless partner by saying " I'm going to write up about this disaster hand and get it published for all to read "
9. Name calling : a bridge bully's vocabulary is very extensive with respect to derogatory words and savage insults. Worse of all are terms of endearment heavily loaded with intense sarcasm
10. Ordering : the bully has to be in control and to be the boss. He doesn't need to ask or seek permission to do things. Partner's role is to be both subservient and compliant and to obey his master's instructions
11. Judging and criticising : Nothing escapes criticism of the bully. Even the smallest faults at the table will be seized upon and condemned. Words like " you should have... " or " why didn't you do... " are dished out after each and every hand , irrespective of the result. Indeed, I was once bollocked for missing a chance of a third overtrick when just one had secured a global top
12. Denial : bullies don't make mistakes and are never in the wrong. Their role is to focus on partner's failings and shortcomings and never their own ( since these can't possibly exist )
13. Refusal to accept responsibility : partner is to blame for everything. And should the bully have made a mistake on board 14 , he will find a way to lay the blame on partner. " Your cock-up on board 13 caused me so much distress my brain was hurting, and I was unable to think straight ..."
14. Abusive anger : here the bully's histrionic outbursts are designed to harvest sympathy from others , and to publicity expose partner's failings. Attention must be drawn to the bully's plight , whereby his anger can then be looked upon as justified , a natural response to partner's ongoing provocation and incompetence
15. Symbolic gestures : these can involve walking off in a huff when partner's cocks up his declare play , stomping walks between tables, waving arms in a state of panic, acts of self-mutilation , ripping up his scorecard..... and so on
So yes.....bridge bullies are masters of psychological and emotional abuse. Yet all too often they belong in upper echelons of high ranking players , which somehow persuades their victims and club committees to turn the proverbial blind eye , as to what is really happening at the tables. Bridge bullies should be brought to task and FINED on every occasion , for it is amazing how the power of money can motivate people to change their behaviour overnight.
Sunday, 15 June 2014
A VERY NEARLY TRUE STORY ........ by Bridgemeister Gibson
Married couples falling out over bridge is one thing , but allowing bridge to destroy the marriage is another . The following extract from a recent divorce case reveals a cross no man should ever be asked to bear.
Judge : Is it true that you and your wife are both members of Chesterfield Bridge Club ?
George : Yes.....that's is where we first met almost 20 years ago
Judge : How long have you and Thelma been married ?
George : About 15 years.....
Judge : So what are you claiming as grounds for divorce ?
George : Unreasonable behaviour on her part
Judge : Please be more specific...
George : Shocking and outrageous abuse
Judge : And where did this alleged abuse take place ?
George : At the bridge club
Judge : What ! ....Did your wife ridicule and humiliate you in front of other members ?
George : No.....
Judge : Did she as your partner harass , berate and bully you at the table ?
George : Not at all...........not once did we ever partner each other
Judge : Well, what in heaven's name then did she do to you that was so despicable and abusive ?
George ( sobbing ) : Irrespective of who was present and looking on... she would beat me......beat me.....beat me
Judge : How often did she beat you ?
George : She beat me every time
Judge : My God.....no man should ever be made to suffer like that......divorce granted
Married couples falling out over bridge is one thing , but allowing bridge to destroy the marriage is another . The following extract from a recent divorce case reveals a cross no man should ever be asked to bear.
Judge : Is it true that you and your wife are both members of Chesterfield Bridge Club ?
George : Yes.....that's is where we first met almost 20 years ago
Judge : How long have you and Thelma been married ?
George : About 15 years.....
Judge : So what are you claiming as grounds for divorce ?
George : Unreasonable behaviour on her part
Judge : Please be more specific...
George : Shocking and outrageous abuse
Judge : And where did this alleged abuse take place ?
George : At the bridge club
Judge : What ! ....Did your wife ridicule and humiliate you in front of other members ?
George : No.....
Judge : Did she as your partner harass , berate and bully you at the table ?
George : Not at all...........not once did we ever partner each other
Judge : Well, what in heaven's name then did she do to you that was so despicable and abusive ?
George ( sobbing ) : Irrespective of who was present and looking on... she would beat me......beat me.....beat me
Judge : How often did she beat you ?
George : She beat me every time
Judge : My God.....no man should ever be made to suffer like that......divorce granted
Saturday, 14 June 2014
CONDUCT EXPECTED OF MEMBERS AT AGMs : A DEFINITIVE GUIDE BY BIGOT-JOHNSON
Manners are important. Members with no manners should be thrown into a big grinder and minced. Therefore it is now essential for members attending AGMs to be on their very best behaviour : polite , respectful , submissive and compliant. The rules to be followed are listed below.
1. Standing to attention when the chairman's presence is announced
2. No stepping onto, or dirtying , the red carpet laid down for the chairman's grand entrance
3. No heckling or shouting of abuse
4. No asking of awkward questions which might might cause committee members distress,
shame or embarrassment
5. Staying quiet whenever a committee member speaks, and then giving him/ her a warm
round of applause after he or she has finished
6. Giving up your seat to one of many of newly recruited members , called in of course as
gerrymandered voters to back all the committee proposals, resolutions and initiatives no
matter how absurd, insane or ludicrous they appear to be
7. Not interrupting any of the proceedings with irritating points of order and petty concerns
8. Refusing to vote against committee proposals, remembering that as a member your duty
of allegiance is to place the committee's needs over and above any personal objections
you have.... even if they are based on common sense , conscience and self-respect
9. If you feel compelled to speak then keep it short and complimentary
10. Taking every opportunity to thank committee members for their efforts , dedication and hard
work. Ignore the fact that they might well be a bunch of crooks or escapees from a local
lunatic asylum . It pays you to remember that without the committee your club would not be
the same talked-about place as it is today
11. No opting out from making a more than generous donation towards the chairman's
retirement fund, in recognition of the selfless, unpaid work he/she is carrying out on the
members' behalf
12. Turning a blind eye to any incident which would tarnish the good reputation of committee
members , or their supporters
Manners are important. Members with no manners should be thrown into a big grinder and minced. Therefore it is now essential for members attending AGMs to be on their very best behaviour : polite , respectful , submissive and compliant. The rules to be followed are listed below.
1. Standing to attention when the chairman's presence is announced
2. No stepping onto, or dirtying , the red carpet laid down for the chairman's grand entrance
3. No heckling or shouting of abuse
4. No asking of awkward questions which might might cause committee members distress,
shame or embarrassment
5. Staying quiet whenever a committee member speaks, and then giving him/ her a warm
round of applause after he or she has finished
6. Giving up your seat to one of many of newly recruited members , called in of course as
gerrymandered voters to back all the committee proposals, resolutions and initiatives no
matter how absurd, insane or ludicrous they appear to be
7. Not interrupting any of the proceedings with irritating points of order and petty concerns
8. Refusing to vote against committee proposals, remembering that as a member your duty
of allegiance is to place the committee's needs over and above any personal objections
you have.... even if they are based on common sense , conscience and self-respect
9. If you feel compelled to speak then keep it short and complimentary
10. Taking every opportunity to thank committee members for their efforts , dedication and hard
work. Ignore the fact that they might well be a bunch of crooks or escapees from a local
lunatic asylum . It pays you to remember that without the committee your club would not be
the same talked-about place as it is today
11. No opting out from making a more than generous donation towards the chairman's
retirement fund, in recognition of the selfless, unpaid work he/she is carrying out on the
members' behalf
12. Turning a blind eye to any incident which would tarnish the good reputation of committee
members , or their supporters
Thursday, 12 June 2014
Friday, 6 June 2014
DR. JOHN INVESTIGATES Part 3.........
Social norms, too , play an important role in the decision whether or not to cheat. If players perceive others as not abiding by the rules , then many forms of unethical behaviour must appear be acceptable, or subject to the proverbial blind eye. When the game has been corrupted by lax enforcement of the rules , then players are far more likely to be dishonest. Often the social norm within a bridge club is to harbour suspicions but to ignore them , and certainly not to voice them. The stigma of making false or high speculative allegations of cheating creates a fear factor , which the cheaters will exploit to the full. Given that many players subscribe to the old adage of " it's never right for the pot to call the kettle black ", there appears to be a perverse code of (dis)honour among cheats. If cheating is going on at other tables , then players will view their own behaviour as having very little impact.
Indeed, the incidence of cheating increases if players are placed in a position of power, either through age, seniority, rank , status , and in depth of knowledge of the rules. My research suggests that players who assume power are greatly tempted to abuse it. Indeed , society rewards and values power and achievement , encouraging the corrupt to cheat again and again.
Consequently, a mindset is created luring bridge players to engage in unethical self-promoting behaviour. Results of course represent that achievement , whereby the sole preoccupation is about getting tops. The enjoyment and experience of playing the game is of no significance. Cheats are not interested in " mastery " goals, only in notching up a large number of imps on each and every board.
Sadly , bridge is a game where referees and directors never observe play at the tables. They are so few of them. Sadly, they are called into action only after a table incident or an alleged breach of the rules has occurred. The real policing it seems has to be done by the players , on each other , at the table, but as mentioned before this rarely happens. There is always too much to think to consider wasting precious energy and concentration on what opponents may ( or may not ) be getting up to. Careful scrutiny of their behaviour is extremely difficult over 3 boards , if not impossible. When hard evidence is missing and only suspicions remain, then players will continue to feel safe in their own " anything goes " centre for approved cheating.
On a final note , pernicious cheating can become self-reinforcing. So when players cheat , they develop a tendency to rationalise their behaviour , which compounds their desire to carry on cheating. " I don't think I'm cheating " is one classic response. Another is " That's not cheating really " , or " It's the way I do things...... like every one else in this club ". Consequently , any one who is accused of cheating adopts an attitude , which fully justifies their actions. A classic case of self-delusion and/or denial. Either way , this line of reasoning , makes them feel better , but it also encourages them to cheat again. They rationalise unethical behaviour , they accept it , and they cheat once more. All I see are players becoming morally disengaged from their conscience , keen to forget moral codes of honesty and sportsmanship. Cheating , it seems , causes a self-justifying block on ethical considerations , especial those which would certainly undermine their chances of securing better scores , glory and fame.
Social norms, too , play an important role in the decision whether or not to cheat. If players perceive others as not abiding by the rules , then many forms of unethical behaviour must appear be acceptable, or subject to the proverbial blind eye. When the game has been corrupted by lax enforcement of the rules , then players are far more likely to be dishonest. Often the social norm within a bridge club is to harbour suspicions but to ignore them , and certainly not to voice them. The stigma of making false or high speculative allegations of cheating creates a fear factor , which the cheaters will exploit to the full. Given that many players subscribe to the old adage of " it's never right for the pot to call the kettle black ", there appears to be a perverse code of (dis)honour among cheats. If cheating is going on at other tables , then players will view their own behaviour as having very little impact.
Indeed, the incidence of cheating increases if players are placed in a position of power, either through age, seniority, rank , status , and in depth of knowledge of the rules. My research suggests that players who assume power are greatly tempted to abuse it. Indeed , society rewards and values power and achievement , encouraging the corrupt to cheat again and again.
Consequently, a mindset is created luring bridge players to engage in unethical self-promoting behaviour. Results of course represent that achievement , whereby the sole preoccupation is about getting tops. The enjoyment and experience of playing the game is of no significance. Cheats are not interested in " mastery " goals, only in notching up a large number of imps on each and every board.
Sadly , bridge is a game where referees and directors never observe play at the tables. They are so few of them. Sadly, they are called into action only after a table incident or an alleged breach of the rules has occurred. The real policing it seems has to be done by the players , on each other , at the table, but as mentioned before this rarely happens. There is always too much to think to consider wasting precious energy and concentration on what opponents may ( or may not ) be getting up to. Careful scrutiny of their behaviour is extremely difficult over 3 boards , if not impossible. When hard evidence is missing and only suspicions remain, then players will continue to feel safe in their own " anything goes " centre for approved cheating.
On a final note , pernicious cheating can become self-reinforcing. So when players cheat , they develop a tendency to rationalise their behaviour , which compounds their desire to carry on cheating. " I don't think I'm cheating " is one classic response. Another is " That's not cheating really " , or " It's the way I do things...... like every one else in this club ". Consequently , any one who is accused of cheating adopts an attitude , which fully justifies their actions. A classic case of self-delusion and/or denial. Either way , this line of reasoning , makes them feel better , but it also encourages them to cheat again. They rationalise unethical behaviour , they accept it , and they cheat once more. All I see are players becoming morally disengaged from their conscience , keen to forget moral codes of honesty and sportsmanship. Cheating , it seems , causes a self-justifying block on ethical considerations , especial those which would certainly undermine their chances of securing better scores , glory and fame.
DR. JOHN INVESTIGATES Part 2........
My latest research on cheating at bridge attempts to explore the environmental influences on players which create in their minds the perfect conditions to get away with unethical bahaviour. Crimes are more likely to be committed when detection is most unlikely. Ideal circumstances include busy noisy backgrounds, crowded dimly-lit rooms , lots of distractions going on , lack of policing , and unobservant victims. Take a crowded underground train for instance ( standing commuters packed in like sardines, unable to move, forced only to stare ahead ) where the conditions provide a paradise for pickpockets to go about their business. If cheats believe their actions will be unseen and anonymous, with very little chance of being caught, the temptation to cheat becomes all too great.
It is my contention that bridge rooms are like crowded underground trains : a background of noise from table conversations , arguments with raised voices , moving chairs, constant coughing and screaming calls for the director. So when players try to shut out this background noise they often shut out what is going on under their very own noses. Compelled by etiquette NOT TO STARE OR LOOK at opponents , the conditions are perfect for bridge cheats to apply their trade .
Moreover , players are also prone to cheat when they are feeling tired, either physically or mentally, and long sessions at the card tables do take their toll on players' mental stamina , which is often in short supply. The game of bridge by any standard requires high levels of focus and concentration : it is a very demanding and tiring game. Players will inevitably succumb to tiredness , and as a result the temptation to cheat becomes almost irresistible. Although players don't cheat spontaneously when sleepy or drained , their honesty and self-discipline are severely tested. Even more so in circumstances where their self-control is also badly depleted , and the pressure to get a really good board has reached crisis point.
My latest research on cheating at bridge attempts to explore the environmental influences on players which create in their minds the perfect conditions to get away with unethical bahaviour. Crimes are more likely to be committed when detection is most unlikely. Ideal circumstances include busy noisy backgrounds, crowded dimly-lit rooms , lots of distractions going on , lack of policing , and unobservant victims. Take a crowded underground train for instance ( standing commuters packed in like sardines, unable to move, forced only to stare ahead ) where the conditions provide a paradise for pickpockets to go about their business. If cheats believe their actions will be unseen and anonymous, with very little chance of being caught, the temptation to cheat becomes all too great.
It is my contention that bridge rooms are like crowded underground trains : a background of noise from table conversations , arguments with raised voices , moving chairs, constant coughing and screaming calls for the director. So when players try to shut out this background noise they often shut out what is going on under their very own noses. Compelled by etiquette NOT TO STARE OR LOOK at opponents , the conditions are perfect for bridge cheats to apply their trade .
Moreover , players are also prone to cheat when they are feeling tired, either physically or mentally, and long sessions at the card tables do take their toll on players' mental stamina , which is often in short supply. The game of bridge by any standard requires high levels of focus and concentration : it is a very demanding and tiring game. Players will inevitably succumb to tiredness , and as a result the temptation to cheat becomes almost irresistible. Although players don't cheat spontaneously when sleepy or drained , their honesty and self-discipline are severely tested. Even more so in circumstances where their self-control is also badly depleted , and the pressure to get a really good board has reached crisis point.
DR. JOHN LOOKS FOR ANSWERS AS TO WHY CHEATING IN BRIDGE IS SO ENDEMIC.... ( First instalment of a three-part article )
In all sports there are cheats but their opportunities to succeed are severely limited by the presence of camera technology, stern referees and eagle-eyed match officials. However in bridge the opportunities for cheating seem infinite. So much so that all manner of cheating strategies can be successfully employed , especially with regards to all the low level soft stuff.
Nevertheless, the opportunity factor does not fully explain why bridge players in particular succumb so easily to the temptation of cheating. It seems to me that some of the answers lie within the nature and make up of a typical bridge player.
Bridge players by definition are logical thinkers , adept at calculating the odds and taking calculated risks. If logic dictates that rules need to be circumvented to win , then surely all ways of doing just that need to be fully explored and exploited. Indeed , a cold rational formulae might well be applied : weigh up the benefits of the unethical action against the costs of committing it , and decide accordingly. One extra top might well turn a top ten finish into a championship winning score card.
Moreover , bridge players live in a world where moral standards in society are in perpetual decline. With each downward step in society's demise , with crooked politicians and businessmen leading the way , players simply follow suit succumbing to the temptations offered by cheating. In other words, cheating is the result of a lack of moral fortitude and self-discipline. Whenever a situation or opportunity arises to bend or break the rules they will attempt to exploit it . Examples include loose table talk or a sly peek at their opponents' cards.
Further research on bridge players have led me to believe that cheating is the result of a highly subjective reasoning process which includes three types of argument : how players perceive the world of bridge ( clubs being seen as centres for approved cheating ) , how they view their opponents ( low down cheating dogs ) , and how they think about themselves ( resistance fighters determined to do unto others what they have done to them ). All this reasoning seemingly occurs on a subconscious level , with choices and decisions being heavily influenced by situational factors, to be discussed in the next part of this article.
In all sports there are cheats but their opportunities to succeed are severely limited by the presence of camera technology, stern referees and eagle-eyed match officials. However in bridge the opportunities for cheating seem infinite. So much so that all manner of cheating strategies can be successfully employed , especially with regards to all the low level soft stuff.
Nevertheless, the opportunity factor does not fully explain why bridge players in particular succumb so easily to the temptation of cheating. It seems to me that some of the answers lie within the nature and make up of a typical bridge player.
Bridge players by definition are logical thinkers , adept at calculating the odds and taking calculated risks. If logic dictates that rules need to be circumvented to win , then surely all ways of doing just that need to be fully explored and exploited. Indeed , a cold rational formulae might well be applied : weigh up the benefits of the unethical action against the costs of committing it , and decide accordingly. One extra top might well turn a top ten finish into a championship winning score card.
Moreover , bridge players live in a world where moral standards in society are in perpetual decline. With each downward step in society's demise , with crooked politicians and businessmen leading the way , players simply follow suit succumbing to the temptations offered by cheating. In other words, cheating is the result of a lack of moral fortitude and self-discipline. Whenever a situation or opportunity arises to bend or break the rules they will attempt to exploit it . Examples include loose table talk or a sly peek at their opponents' cards.
Further research on bridge players have led me to believe that cheating is the result of a highly subjective reasoning process which includes three types of argument : how players perceive the world of bridge ( clubs being seen as centres for approved cheating ) , how they view their opponents ( low down cheating dogs ) , and how they think about themselves ( resistance fighters determined to do unto others what they have done to them ). All this reasoning seemingly occurs on a subconscious level , with choices and decisions being heavily influenced by situational factors, to be discussed in the next part of this article.
Thursday, 5 June 2014
Wednesday, 4 June 2014
BIGOT DESPAIRS AT HIS LATEST CROP OF STUDENTS..... ( A very nearly true story by Bridgemeister Gibson )
Cheating has plagued the world of bridge since the dawn of time. So much so that even Bigot's students were caught out using devious and underhand ways to enhance their test result scores.
Out of a class of fifteen mediocre students , all but two failed to score maximum marks . This fact alone caused Bigot to have his suspicions...... but having no proof nothing could be done.
However , one careless student had clearly exposed his guilt , and Bigot was on to him in a flash : "It's strange how you sat next to Amanda only to get the same 19 out of 20 score "
" So does that mean I passed ...like Amanda ? " asked the nervous young man.
" No.... because I'm failing you for cheating.....I'm extremely suspicious about the fact you both got question 14 wrong..... "
" You can't possibly know that it was me who was cheating... ", protested the red faced student , ".... for how can my wrong answer be any different to Amanda's "
" Because you sir are a complete muppet .... you see her answer to question 14 was I don't know .......whereas yours was neither do I "
Cheating has plagued the world of bridge since the dawn of time. So much so that even Bigot's students were caught out using devious and underhand ways to enhance their test result scores.
Out of a class of fifteen mediocre students , all but two failed to score maximum marks . This fact alone caused Bigot to have his suspicions...... but having no proof nothing could be done.
However , one careless student had clearly exposed his guilt , and Bigot was on to him in a flash : "It's strange how you sat next to Amanda only to get the same 19 out of 20 score "
" So does that mean I passed ...like Amanda ? " asked the nervous young man.
" No.... because I'm failing you for cheating.....I'm extremely suspicious about the fact you both got question 14 wrong..... "
" You can't possibly know that it was me who was cheating... ", protested the red faced student , ".... for how can my wrong answer be any different to Amanda's "
" Because you sir are a complete muppet .... you see her answer to question 14 was I don't know .......whereas yours was neither do I "
Monday, 2 June 2014
FIFTEEN DAMN GOOD REASONS WHY I KNOW THAT CHEATING GOES ON AT MY CLUB......( Article by Carp )
1. Nobody turns up with a cold but there's coughing going on at every table
2. No one suffers from deafness but everyone wears top-of-the-range hearing aids
3. Expertise counts for nothing
4. Players who call directors by their first names never get unfavourable rulings
5. Even 3 hours isn't long enough to play 24 boards given the vast number of hesitations
which occur on every hand at every table
6. There are more players on walkabouts than there are sitting down at the tables
7. More often than not it's the non-bidding partner of the doubler who turns up with the
biggest hand
8. There are so many changes in player's tempo one is left to wonder if time anomalies and
distortions only occur inside bridge clubs
9. Players are so obsessed with their national rankings that results have become their first
priority at the expense of ethical considerations
10. Body movements and facial expressions suggest that most players should have taken up
acting ( and not bridge )
11. Psychs never prove costly with partners so adept at fielding that a lucrative career in
county cricket would not beyond the realms of possibility
12. Players instinctively know what their partners hold despite never being able to explain
correctly what their bids actually mean , or what the play of a particular calls for
13. The number of co-incidences when the length held in a particular suit matches exactly
the number of exposed finger digits as players fan and re-fan their cards
14. The uncanny number of potential slam hands players somehow elect stay out of when
only game is making , as compared to the number of times dodgy-highly speculative
slams bid and made ( knowing of course good fortune will lend them a helping hand )
15. Whenever an anti-percentage play is undertaken , it bizarrely comes off
1. Nobody turns up with a cold but there's coughing going on at every table
2. No one suffers from deafness but everyone wears top-of-the-range hearing aids
3. Expertise counts for nothing
4. Players who call directors by their first names never get unfavourable rulings
5. Even 3 hours isn't long enough to play 24 boards given the vast number of hesitations
which occur on every hand at every table
6. There are more players on walkabouts than there are sitting down at the tables
7. More often than not it's the non-bidding partner of the doubler who turns up with the
biggest hand
8. There are so many changes in player's tempo one is left to wonder if time anomalies and
distortions only occur inside bridge clubs
9. Players are so obsessed with their national rankings that results have become their first
priority at the expense of ethical considerations
10. Body movements and facial expressions suggest that most players should have taken up
acting ( and not bridge )
11. Psychs never prove costly with partners so adept at fielding that a lucrative career in
county cricket would not beyond the realms of possibility
12. Players instinctively know what their partners hold despite never being able to explain
correctly what their bids actually mean , or what the play of a particular calls for
13. The number of co-incidences when the length held in a particular suit matches exactly
the number of exposed finger digits as players fan and re-fan their cards
14. The uncanny number of potential slam hands players somehow elect stay out of when
only game is making , as compared to the number of times dodgy-highly speculative
slams bid and made ( knowing of course good fortune will lend them a helping hand )
15. Whenever an anti-percentage play is undertaken , it bizarrely comes off
Sunday, 1 June 2014
SLAUGHTER HOUSE BRIDGE CLUB MEMBER CONTINUES TO OCCUPY PRIDE OF PLACE SPOT IN THE GUINNESS BOOK OF RECORDS.......
The Most Modified Bidding System Ever Conceived
First devised in 1993 by Terry " Tinkerman " Taylor , currently known as The Northern Pro ,
the Magic Club and Sparkling Diamond bidding system made its disastrous debut at Walnut Tree Allotment autumn teams event.
Twenty one years later after 273 major redrafts , and 43,736 refinements , adjustments , amendments, add-ons and alterations , this revolutionary bidding system is as far away from being the finished article as it was at the outset.
Never in the history of bridge has a system undergone so many changes and endless tinkering as this one........to the utter dismay and frustration of the 873 different partners roped in to test it out. Each and every one is still haunted by Terry's unrelenting pursuit of perfection, when forever being greeted with the opening line : " I've got another cracking idea that might work out better...."
The glazed and bewildered looks in their eyes provided testimony to the fact the the sheer number of modifications , completely blew their brains out. With no likelihood of the Magic Club and Sparkling Diamond bidding system being finalised , the current work-in-progress edition appears more than ever to be in urgent need of corrective modifications , if recent results are to go by. Nevertheless this record is being constantly broken every single day, as The Tinkerman continues to notch up even more changes in his quest for the perfect bidding system.
The Most Modified Bidding System Ever Conceived
First devised in 1993 by Terry " Tinkerman " Taylor , currently known as The Northern Pro ,
the Magic Club and Sparkling Diamond bidding system made its disastrous debut at Walnut Tree Allotment autumn teams event.
Twenty one years later after 273 major redrafts , and 43,736 refinements , adjustments , amendments, add-ons and alterations , this revolutionary bidding system is as far away from being the finished article as it was at the outset.
Never in the history of bridge has a system undergone so many changes and endless tinkering as this one........to the utter dismay and frustration of the 873 different partners roped in to test it out. Each and every one is still haunted by Terry's unrelenting pursuit of perfection, when forever being greeted with the opening line : " I've got another cracking idea that might work out better...."
The glazed and bewildered looks in their eyes provided testimony to the fact the the sheer number of modifications , completely blew their brains out. With no likelihood of the Magic Club and Sparkling Diamond bidding system being finalised , the current work-in-progress edition appears more than ever to be in urgent need of corrective modifications , if recent results are to go by. Nevertheless this record is being constantly broken every single day, as The Tinkerman continues to notch up even more changes in his quest for the perfect bidding system.