[Cyberyeti]

gordontd, on 2012-December-31, 05:43, said:

Nicola Smith got an award quite some time ago, but hers was an MBE.

I believe Rixi Markus had an MBE too.

[mycroft]

Absolutely, blackshoe - and the British military awards are different as well. Some of them (most of them) aren't strictly valour/bravery awards, or for specific actions (many RAF Bomber Command DFCs were "you survived a tour, you must have done something brave during it" (heh. I think that spending 30 nights in a tin can when one-in-twenty not coming back was an acceptable result is acceptably brave in itself), but the British class structure of the time meant that the equivalent award for non-officers was rarely if ever awarded for the same things the "non-specific" DFCs were).

The Order of the British Empire is an award of chivalry, not an award of valour.

And it is quite an honour, congratulations Mr. Robson. But remember the Goon Show (one of so very many relevant):

"Major Dennis Bloodnok, OBE, MT, MT and MT."
"What are all the MTs for?"
"I get tuppence on each of them!"

[blackshoe]

There's some of that in US military awards as well. When I was on CINCPACFLT's staff as a LT, I served on the committee that reviewed awards recommendations from the fleet. The idea was to screen out the ones who shouldn't get whatever it was, and pass on the ones that should. It was quite an eye opener, serving on that committee. "You can't give him that, he's too junior", in spite of the awards manual explicitly stating that the rank of the proposed recipient was not supposed to be a consideration, was about the mildest of the "oddities".

I do confess to some fondness for some of the trappings of monarchy, including orders of chivalry and achievements of arms.

[Vampyr]

It is a shame that Andrew Robson got to where he is now due to sponsorship by the EBU, and now refuses to affiliate his large privately-owned club.

[PhilKing]

Vampyr, on 2012-December-31, 18:00, said:

It is a shame that Andrew Robson got to where he is now due to sponsorship by the EBU, and now refuses to affiliate his large privately-owned club.

It's entirely possible that talent and hard work played a part and that EBU sponsorship played less than a 1% part.

Maybe he feels his members would get insufficient benefit from affiliation to the EBU. When Robson came through the Juniors, funding was through the BBL (and representation was for Great Britain - not England or the EBU). The BBL staff numbered one full time and one part time person and they were able to raise sufficient funds for international events and training programs, and when people entered a BBL congress or simultaneous pairs, that was where almost all the money went. Sponsorship was more likely to come from clubs like the Young Chelsea, which offered free premises for junior training weekends and reduced membership and session fees. Now most of the money just pays for a bloated EBU bureaucracy.

[blackshoe]

Isn't "bloated bureaucracy" redundant?

[PhilKing]

blackshoe, on 2012-December-31, 19:20, said:

Isn't "bloated bureaucracy" redundant?

Doubt they will ever be made redundant.

[blackshoe]

Oh, good. I'd forgotten the English meaning to "redundant" when I wrote that.

The first amendment to the US Constitution begins "Congress shall make no law abridging the Right of the People…" It has been suggested that the Founders should have put a period after the word "law". Works for me.

[pirate22]

One of the worst decisions the cash cow EBU ever made-to charge a fee for
attending a live club to play bridge.. although it was explained what was behind the
scheme,and a free vote,but it closed down a lot of small clubs,wuth no discretion
for pensioners and persons of very low incomes and pension's,
Ned Paul campaigned extensively against the proposal.
Must say the extra information coming in on this topic is interesting..and informative
BBL must examine this . Regards all

[Vampyr]

pirate22, on 2012-December-31, 20:32, said:

One of the worst decisions the cash cow EBU ever made-to charge a fee for
attending a live club to play bridge.. although it was explained what was behind the
scheme,and a free vote,but it closed down a lot of small clubs,wuth no discretion
for pensioners and persons of very low incomes and pension's,
Ned Paul campaigned extensively against the proposal.
Must say the extra information coming in on this topic is interesting..and informative
BBL must examine this . Regards all

Why have clubs closed down? They have all had the option to disaffiliate.

As for the bloated bureaucracy, there was a promise that shifting much of the administration to the affiliated clubs, the EBU would be able to streamline its operations. I do not know whether they have done this, but other comments on this thread suggest that they have not.

[paulg]

Vampyr, on 2012-December-31, 18:00, said:

It is a shame that Andrew Robson got to where he is now due to sponsorship by the EBU, and now refuses to affiliate his large privately-owned club.

PhilKing, on 2012-December-31, 18:24, said:

It's entirely possible that talent and hard work played a part and that EBU sponsorship played less than a 1% part.

Maybe he feels his members would get insufficient benefit from affiliation to the EBU. When Robson came through the Juniors, funding was through the BBL (and representation was for Great Britain - not England or the EBU). The BBL staff numbered one full time and one part time person and they were able to raise sufficient funds for international events and training programs, and when people entered a BBL congress or simultaneous pairs, that was where almost all the money went. Sponsorship was more likely to come from clubs like the Young Chelsea, which offered free premises for junior training weekends and reduced membership and session fees. Now most of the money just pays for a bloated EBU bureaucracy.

I'd also say that the EBU that supported Andrew as he was 'growing up' was a very different organisation to the one that exists today, probably consisting of just two and a half full-time staff. And if the EBU cannot get a large London club to affiliate, perhaps it needs to look at what it is offering.

[Cyberyeti]

Vampyr, on 2012-December-31, 22:09, said:

Why have clubs closed down? They have all had the option to disaffiliate.

As for the bloated bureaucracy, there was a promise that shifting much of the administration to the affiliated clubs, the EBU would be able to streamline its operations. I do not know whether they have done this, but other comments on this thread suggest that they have not.

Because my club was a small club that charged negligible table money (you paid if you lost, was teams every week) that only had 2 tables (was 3 a while back). The only benefit we had from affiliating was to be able to enter club teams in the NICKO and Garden cities, we didn't award master points. Disaffiliating stopped us entering teams, and nobody wanted to do the extra admin, so we disbanded.

This was for many years by a long chalk the best game in Norfolk, and you had to be invited to play, then to pay your £1 life membership. Everything was done to reduce the admin, the EBU didn't help.

[Hanoi5]

Didn't a movie director recently reject an honour similar to this one from the Queen?

[gordontd]

Hanoi5, on 2013-January-01, 11:53, said:

Didn't a movie director recently reject an honour similar to this one from the Queen?

Quite a number of people choose not to accept them, but we don't generally know much about it because they are asked in advance if they would be likely to accept an honour if it were made. So, they aren't usually awarded the honour unless they've indicated they would accept it, and many of those who have said they don't want the honour keep quiet about it.

The sticking point for many is the use of the words "British Empire" in the title.

[SimonFa]

Hanoi5, on 2013-January-01, 11:53, said:

Didn't a movie director recently reject an honour similar to this one from the Queen?

Danny Boyle, main organisor of the Olympic opening ceremony turned one down, as have a few others.

Having watched the opening ceremony I'm not surprised as he hardly hid his left wing idealism under a bushel.

[mycroft]

blackshoe, on 2012-December-31, 19:20, said:

Isn't "bloated bureaucracy" redundant?

Well, we'll have to set up a standing committee to determine the truth of that and other statements. That will require a room, a secretary, several new "points of view", and, of course, meetings to determine the reporting structure and timeline...</Sir Humphrey Appleby, GCB, KBE, MVO, MA (Oxon)>

[pirate22]

There were a lot of small clubs with say 40 members mostly players of the age 50 upwards,
the rent was at modicum,td was usually a competent player,and table money was usually at
a minimum to cover rental cost.plus EBU charged money for masterpoint certificates.
Then the EBU in its wisdom,wanted to do away with paper masterpoints,so they wanted two pounds
on top of the club table money {that was in some cases 100% extra} yes it was all announced,
and a free vote ensued.Lots of members voted with their feet-and refused.they were really
not interested in master points,anyway so lots of players dissapeared,along with the small
clubs..... a crying shame.

[Cyberyeti]

pirate22, on 2013-January-03, 11:55, said:

There were a lot of small clubs with say 40 members mostly players of the age 50 upwards,
the rent was at modicum,td was usually a competent player,and table money was usually at
a minimum to cover rental cost.plus EBU charged money for masterpoint certificates.
Then the EBU in its wisdom,wanted to do away with paper masterpoints,so they wanted two pounds
on top of the club table money {that was in some cases 100% extra} yes it was all announced,
and a free vote ensued.Lots of members voted with their feet-and refused.they were really
not interested in master points,anyway so lots of players dissapeared,along with the small
clubs..... a crying shame.

I was under the impression P2P fees were about 30p not £2. the table money at the club I play at now is only £2.

[Blue Uriah]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-January-03, 12:10, said:

I was under the impression P2P fees were about 30p not £2. the table money at the club I play at now is only £2.

Indeed, it was 29p at the time. And master points were included in that cost, so the real increase was only about 16p per person. If the club bosses tried to claim it was a £2 increase and this drove the players away then they're the crooks in this story.

[Cyberyeti]

Blue Uriah, on 2013-January-04, 04:26, said:

Indeed, it was 29p at the time. And master points were included in that cost, so the real increase was only about 16p per person. If the club bosses tried to claim it was a £2 increase and this drove the players away then they're the crooks in this story.

Well it was if your club awarded master points, two clubs I used to play at didn't.