How to Protest!!
I have been asked by a player how he can contest an arbiter’s decision. This player admits that as a protest when he disagreed with the arbiter at a recent congress he knocked over his pieces so it is probably better that the player remains anonymous.
A few tournaments have an Appeals Committee which will meet if a player protests about the result of an arbiter’s intervention. The majority of these events have only one round a day. An Appeals Committee is unusual at a weekend congress as if it has to meet it can adversely affect the timetable of the whole event, the meeting delaying the start of a round. Usually there will be a fee involved in making an appeal which is returned if the appeal is upheld. It is also often returned if it is felt that the appeal whilst being rejected had some merit. An Appeals Committee usually consists of one or two (different) arbiters and two or three experienced players.
In League chess a disputed decision can also be put to the AGM for consideration by all the members.
So what should a player do if in dispute? Where it is a matter of Law the player may make a request to be shown the appropriate Law of Chess. When it is an arbiter’s interpretation the player should politely ask the arbiter to reconsider the decision. It is also reasonable to ask the arbiter to confirm the decision with a second (more senior) arbiter. Most arbiters welcome the opportunity to confirm or discuss a difficult decision with a colleague. .
Discussion may not, however, be possible for a variety of reasons, for example looming time scrambles may mean no other arbiter is free. It may also be inadvisable to delay a decision if the arbiter was concerned that the complainant was benefitting from having extra thinking time. Here you might appease one player at the expense of the opponent and indeed create acrimony between the players where only mild irritation existed before. Remember the arbiter’s first duty is to the tournament as a whole and this may adversely affect individuals.
The player may also have a word with the Chief Arbiter or Tournament Director after the game. This person should establish what happened and whilst it may be too late to correct a wrong decision, the player concerned will at least have some solace in knowing that his complaint has been considered earnestly. It may also provide a learning opportunity for the original arbiter.
National Chief Arbiters may also be willing to give an opinion on the situation.
As a last resort the player might consider stopping his clock and seeking another arbiter. This method does however have the risk that the other arbiter might consider the claim spurious and add on the time that the clock was stopped!!! For this reason I would hesitate to recommend this course of action.
Remember that for the most part (all!) arbiters receive no payment unlike Premiership referees, but like referees the occasional mistake will be made.
Players should certainly not show their disapproval at an arbiter’s decision by knocking the pieces over. Not only does this look bad but it disturbs innocent players and may result in a ban. Another action which may result in future banning is simply to walk out of the tournament without informing anyone. The idea of letting a clock run until the opponent wins on time is also not likely to gain you much support.
The best course of action, after asking for a second opinion, is usually to ask for the disagreement to be noted and continue the game. If a player feels unable to continue under the circumstances then his immediate resignation should be given.
If a player is really upset by a decision it is not unreasonable to ask for a few minutes away from the board (with the clocks stopped) in which to regain his composure.
Arbiters are reminded that if they are in any doubt about a decision it is usually advisable to seek a second opinion. When working with an inexperienced arbiter I often let them handle any disputes to gain experience, but I am present to offer advice and sometimes a push in the right direction if I feel such action is necessary.
Arbiters at the start of their careers should be aware that their decisions, even when correct, are more likely to be challenged. Once the players get to know you and trust your integrity they are much less likely to challenge a decision, or at least to question it as vehemently.
On the theme of protesting an arbiter’s decision the late Richard Furness had the following incident at the Hastings International.
A foreign player (a male adult) protested the arbiter’s decision not to allow his stuffed toy to sit at his board, the opponent having complained that it was distracting. The arbiter did provide a seat for the teddy bear to sit on. However, the player refused to play unless his bear could view the board!! Since the player had been at the board at the start of play the result was recorded as a loss on time, not a default, with the player’s FIDE rating affected accordingly. A protest to FIDE by the player concerned was unsuccessful.