That's not quite true - we do know what's going on, we just don't know what all the results are...

Well, maybe CGCU shoudl sack someone?? Maybe if someone can't organise a football match at IC, they shouldn't be doing anything!

Echoes of DocSoc...

We've been here before.

Give volunteers some slack. You may not be entirely happy with the way someone's running something but that fact is that he could be bothered to do something and no-one else could. Such people should be given credit and encouraged to build on their achievements rather than criticised for their shortcomings.

just kick a ball, have fun and let ppl in the office know the results so they can publicise the whole thing..

It's an absolute disgrace to call Sumeet "useless." I've had no problem with him, he does what he HAS to do - send out fixtures and the contact details of all the Captains. EE have played 2 games and they were both organised well...apart from the results...if only I could get my 'keeper to stop playing like Fabian Barthez...

As the person who wrote the questionnaires, perhaps I should explain a bit of background which the author has ignored. Clubs chairs were given the opportunity to anonymously rate the performance of key C&GCU officers. A number of positive options were provided, as was a neutral 'satisfactory' option and a negative option - 'useless'.

Yes, I agree with Mustafa - the author of this article needs to remember that our organisation is built on volunteers. If we're going to publicly humiliate folk, then we are running the risk of people not wanting to help out with Union activities in the future.

Not completely true. Elected student officers, who have put themselves forward for abuse out of some misguided sense of altruism, are and always have been fair game.

But I think everyone is missing the point here in focusing on one line and ignoring 3 other paragraphs...

I totally disagree with that - I think you'll find that most of our volunteers put a significant amount of time into Union activities and don't expect this sort of abuse. There are probably a small minority who like such abuse though - the author of this article wouldn't happen to be one by any chance? Ah well, as he hasn't used his real name to post this article, we couldn't tell if he was a senior Union officer could we?

(sigh) Shall I repeat? The object of this article is not to 'abuse' any particular individual. The wording of the article is: "much of the blame has fallen onto...". I would not regard this as abuse, especially since it was specifically worded so as not to be insulting. The key points of the article are that a) there are acknowledged to have been some problems with the football tournament and b) these will hopefully be solved by next term. Storm in a teacup anyone?

You mentioned in your article that most of the SEQ responses described the person in question as "useless" - I haven't looked at the SEQ results in great detail but I seem to remember that quite a large number of them didn't select any option for the question about the DSO... personally I think the SEQs are a very useful way of collecting feedback, but the results should be used to discuss matters internally and to find out what improvements should be made. They should NOT be used to humiliate people on a public news site.

I think everyone should calm down. People maybe unhappy about the way the football has run this term, but I am sure that things will improve. I agree that criticism should be directed directly to the individual rather than publicly on Live! - Give the guy a chance, nobody is perfect. Let's leave it at that.

Who is this shady Martin Merton figure anyway? He's almost as bad as Simon Scrapmetal :-)

Mr Martin,

I strongly advise that the next time you decide to write an article, you get your facts straight before running the publication. If you believe that you have done this, then please read the rest of this message:

1) THREE weeks worth of matches have been played.

2) Which senior C&G figures 'seem have no idea of what is going on'? And how can that be, since the tournament was discussed in depth at the last Exec Meeting?

3) If only rumours are circulating about the matches you have not heard about, why don't you ask the right person (like me) about them? What are the rumours anyway?

4) The administrative 'cock-ups' occured in the mechanical engineering case only! This was due to a lack of communication from THEM to ME!

5) If you are only aware of DoC matches taking place, then why don't you speak to the correct person about the others?

6) ISE has failed to turn up to any of its matches so far. I spoke to them personally before the start of the tournament, and they assured me they would be entering a team. It is NOT my responsiblity to ensure that teams turn up to their matches! However, since they have not turned up, I will investigate the matter further.

7) The tournament is in no way running behind schedule!

8) C&G is in no way hard pushed to ensure the tournament ends before the exam period!

9) You said in your article that 'Much of the blame has fallen onto tournament organised Sumeet Bhalla'. Please elaborate further on this?

I am particularly anxious to hear your response to (9). Unless you come up with valid points, I am demanding a retraction be published!!!

Two further points:

1) why is your real name not published

2) Learn how to write in proper english next time!

Summeet,

You are, like everyone else seems to be, labouring under the impression that this article is an attack on you personally - this is not the case. If you have taken offence from the sentence you mention in 9) then I apologise, it was intended as a statement of the opinion of some individuals and not a judgement. You will note that the article does not hold you responsible for the variety of problems that have beset the league (such as the always-rubbish ISE organisation).

Doh, now you've spelt Sumeet's name incorrectly Martin... you really need to improve your journalistic talents!