CFC national appeals committee does nothing
Noritsyn given rectal massage by NAC
As expected. While I have met some extraordinarily competent arbiters in my experiences as a grandmaster, generally most arbiters are mediocre. FIDE prefers mediocre arbiters, truth be said. It says so, with slightly more subtle wording, in the handbook. Arbiters are encouraged to base their decisions only on what they see. In that way tournaments are easier to manage. The less arbiters see, the easier it is to make manageable decisions. And FIDE is happy because in this way scandals and controversy are kept to a minimum.
But of course, scandals and controversy happen anyway.
It says in the FIDE handbook that arbiters are also supposed to ensure fair-play. But isn’t there a contradiction with the first point I made? Ensuring fair-play is a more complex task than merely seeing. It requires perception. Making a decision based only on an examination of superficial circumstances misses out on the why and how the given set of circumstances came to be in the first place.
And with that insight, as Shakespeare wrote, lies the rub. Arbiters can and often do make mistakes. And FIDE deliberately covers this up…
Ofcourse it was no surprise that the appeals committee rejected Noritsyn’s appeal. While I disagree with a number of the NAC’s formal arguments that were recently made public, I would have also voted to reject his appeal, having served on numerous appeals committees at international (and Canadian) events:
- The game was already over
- No protest occurred during the game, nor immediately following its conclusion
- Neither the arbiter(s) nor the players observed any infraction.
- No clear infraction of any specific rule was later observed, even with the video as witness.
So, naturally, any competent arbiter would rule against the appeal of Noritsyn. Arbiters are trained to make rule-based decisions. Whether Sambuev’s actions were deliberate or accidental never entered the equation…
What would FIDE’s Anti-Cheating Committee say?
Noritsyn was poorly advised to address the issue of Sambuev’s actions – shown in the video – to the National Appeals Committee: he should have gone directly to FIDE’s ACC (anti-cheating committee). And Noritsyn still can. The ACC is especially created to deal with suspicious behaviour on the part of a player. Behaviour that arbiters might ignore or otherwise over-look because it does not explicitly violate any specific rule.
More to the point, the ACC can retroactively forfeit an offending player, take away any prize or prize money, and even suspend from further tournament play. While (in this particular case) a decision by the ACC would most probably not be taken before the World Cup takes place in September, Noritsyn could hope to earn a spot on the National Team before next year’s Olympiad.
Most of us have seen the video. Many, I would say a majority, have concluded that Sambuev’s actions were infact cheating. Being deliberate or not is completely irrelevant. Better still, only a majority of the ACC would be necessary to find Sambuev guilty of cheating…