ECF, not BCF. BCF was done away with years ago.
Who thinks we should get rid of BCF ratings
Sort:
I dont understand why England having its own little system (ECF) is such a problem (doesnt the USA have its own system as well? if so I wonder if the major objection to ECF grades is that they consist of 3 digits, not 4 
). It does exactly what it is supposed to do: measure the relative strength of a particlar pool of players. Everyone who competes internationally (which, I would think is a very small proportion of ECF graded players anyway**) will get a fide anyway so they can just use them.
**this actually posses a great problem for introducing FIDE ratings: if most french players only play other frenchies, and the brits only play other brits then, over time 1400 FIDE (england) might not be comparable to 1400 FIDE (France)! meaning we still end up using damn conversion tables anyway.
...I have no point of reference to the rest of the world, especially amongst FIDE and USCF and even Scotland. Even the rest of the EU, for that matter.
And yes, this argument has been analysed before. Yes, I started my sentence with a connective.
But... I'm frustrated at the so-called 'conversions' that attempt to put BCF to other national figures... without realising the complex maths involved.
And yes, I know that chess.com works on different params too.
More fuel to my argument that... surely the chess world need a standardised ratings system, like every other sport? Surely it would help standardise the game? A factor necessary in international recognition by the IOC?