[the saint]

OK. My two-pence worth.

As someone who feels better qualified than most to talk on this matter (an-ex English Junior who still works with the squads and the players involved), I actually think that the EBU selection committee has taken a simple practical view on this matter irrespectove of whether it flaunts the Geneva convention, the Magna Carta or the Law of Total Tricks.

I cannot speak for every junior squad around the world although I'm certain that most will be the same, but they are intensely competitive places. On the most part, the juniors all get along (not always, but its not a perfect world). The fact is that a junior has a very limited shelf life, and each of them believes that they should be playing in every event within their limited timespans because they are the best their country has to offer. This is right, and I wouldn't want to select a junior that thought they were second-best to anyone. This competitive edge manifests itself in many ways - the most significant for BBO commentary issues being point scoring i.e. the continual need to prove that you are better than our peers. Quite simply this is because you want to be selected ahead of everyone else.

BBO commentary does quite rightly have an unwritten code of conduct, but this 'edge' has been known to come through. This, as we have seen, causes friction. Firction in a squad and amongst teammates is unhealthy and this must be one of the driving reasons behind the EBUs blanket ban on U20s and U25s commentating on each other. I can't see that that is so wrong.

I'm not saying that Open, Women's or Senior's bridge is less competitive - far from it, but the 'shelf-life' is longer and the participants are generally more mature.

The EBU and its committees have done many completely absurd and ridiculous things. I don't think this is one of them.

[roghog]

Walddk, on Jul 12 2006, 12:29 PM, said:

Since this is not stamped "classified" or "confidential", you can get all of it (written by Paul Bowyer) in full:

Letter 1:
"The EBU selection committee met last week and, amongst other issues, discussed U25s (and U20s) commentating on BBO. The committee believes that it is inappropriate for any U25 or U20 player to commentate (via the internet on BBO) on any event involving U25 or U20 players.

In short, no-one in either junior squad is allowed to make comments on-line about matches involving fellow squad members.

Failure to comply with this regulation will lead to indefinite suspension from the squad".

Vivid contrast, eh? The Saint's gentle reasoning versus the Committee's brusque
diktat...