‘Perplexing” is a rather unusual choice of words! Do you, by chance, have handy a list of the names of those who sat on the two committees?

Hi Judy,

Both the EO Committee and the A&C committee have, as far as I know, a large number of members. When a case, like the Passell one, comes up, a subset of committee members is chosen to hear the case. So, while the complete membership of both committees can be determined, there is no way that I know of at the moment, to determine who actually sat on the two committees in question.

P.S. The complete membership of the Ethical Oversight Committee is

Name Term Ends
Jan Martel, Chair 2018
Robb Gordon 2016
Mike Kamil 2016
Jerry Helms 2016
Hendrik Sharples 2016
Dennis Clerkin 2017
John Fout 2017
Bob Glasson 2017
Kevin Wilson 2017
Cheri Bjerkan 2017
Peter Boyd 2018
Bart Bramley 2018
Lesley Davis 2018
Jill Meyers 2018
Karen Walker 2018

The chair and members of the Appeals & Charges Committee are appointed by the ACBL President, and serve concurrently with him. There doesn’t seem to be any listing of the current members.

P.P.S.

The following were posted on BWs as being part of the A&C Committee:

SHARON FAIRCHILD
PAUL JANICKI
RAND PINSKY
GEORGIA HETH
ROGER SMITH

As of August, 2015, members of the Appeals & Charges Committee were:
GEORGIA HETH, Chair
DONALD MAMULA, Vice Chair
SHARON FAIRCHILD
PAUL JANICKI
RAND PINSKY
ROGER SMITH

Apparently two members of the A&C Committee were missed in the list above, so the following should be added:

BETH REID

RUSS JONES

Allow me to preface my remarks by emphasizing that what I am about to say is NOT focusing on Mike Passell and his ‘alleged wrongdoings.’ My comments address the operation of the current American Contract Bridge League and its primary and auxiliary committees which are responsible for the fair and honorable dealings and dispositions of miscreants, wrongly accused individuals, valid and invalid accusations, etc.

BEWARE HOWEVER!!!!! There is an ENORMOUS DIFFERENCE in BRIDGE between an ETHICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE and any other jury-like assemblage trying to arrive at a fair and honorable resolution of a problem at or away from the table. Sadly, there are a miniscule few who are qualified to serve on an EOC. Following is an ideal example of the differentiation of qualifications. After the recent brouhaha involving Mike, many opinions were voiced publicly and on the Internet. There ensued countless explosions of individuals (both pro and con), a meeting was held by the current Ethical Oversight Committee and a profound statement was issued. Whether or not you agree is unimportant!

Before we go into that, let me educate those who are in the dark as to what the original standards and backgrounds for qualifications for EOC members are. Bobby introduced the highly respected concept in the Eighties which was accepted with rave reviews by the respected bridge experts of that era, realizing it was mandatory to be the standard bearer for handling serious issues.

It became accepted practice that those sought-out experts be fair minded, unprejudiced, unbiased, objective and not subject to unsolicited influence or attempted invasion by unqualified busybodies, players, sponsors, mentors or other intruders. In other words .. all appointed to the EOC by this august nominating committee some thirty years ago (with that first meeting held in New York) would have no political ties and their dealings and decisions would be TOTALLY TRANSPARENT, HONORABLE, CLEAN, PURE AND SIMPLE. The original cast along with Bobby were bridge icons including Ralph Cohen, Bob Hamman, Edgar Kaplan, Paul Soloway, Roger Stern and several others — totaling fifteen in all. Bobby named his ‘baby’ the ETHICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. All dealings involving that Committee MUST BE TOTALLY TRANSPARENT and EASILY UNDERSTOOD. However, as many of you read about it in The Lone Wolff, a future President-Elect of the ACBL was unanimously convicted of blatant cheating and reported to the ACBL BOD. You can imagine their reaction: Humiliation and Embarrassment. But, that didn’t stop them. Here is the resultant saga in a nutshell:

Although the ACBL Board of Directors had no official affiliation or authority whatsoever to interfere with this independent group (the EOC), they proceeded thusly:

(1) Fired the National Recorder, Bob Rosen, who headed and oversaw the investigation; (2) Ignored the unanimous conviction of their President-Elect by the well respected expert EOC; (3) Took over the whole shebang, degrading it to their own standards and began making independent political appointments; (4) Were solely responsible for the absence of honor, credibility, fairness and equality … vanishing along with Bobby’s dream, i. e., the creation of a respected and honored bridge organization similar in purpose and accomplishment to our own Supreme Court.

NOW SADLY .. HERE WE ARE TODAY .. A QUARTER OF A CENTURY LATER. AND .. what do we have to show for it?”

There is no room in top level bridge protocol for rank and file players (despite their executive titles) to initiate far reaching bridge-changing decisions which affect the future of either individuals, partnerships or the game itself. Rather than belabor the details, inferences and curious suggestions following the subject appeal, I just wanted to share and support Mr. Cronin’s bewildered amazement after the shock of learning the latest developments!

There is a distinguishable dissimilarity between a vastly qualified Ethical Oversight Committee inundated with names of recognized successful bridge playing authorities and a well-intended Appeals and Charges Committee who had this dropped in their lap.   Perhaps a reasonable solution is to stop selecting ACBL Board members as Appeals and Charges Committee personnel and  instead choose their members from amongst the numerous non-professional experts available and willing to serve.

The ACBL needs much restructuring .. and it is COMMITTEE ISSUES LIKE THESE THAT SHOULD TAKE PRIORITY .. AT ALL COSTS!!