Rules Question: Touching the strip?

[shlepzig]

It was my understanding that you were not allowed to touch the strip with any part of your body (aside form the feet of course) during a normal action. I have been calling a halt during club practice when a fencers knee touches the strip, or when placing a hand on the strip for balance. One of the fencers has questioned this practice.

Does this fall under "irregular actions" or "disorderly fencing" in t.87 or is there another specific mention of this in the rule book?

Is there a specific definition of "irregular or disorderly" or is this an instance of "I know it when I see it" for the director.

Is there a specific exclusion for the passta sotto or is the touch to be delivered before the non-weapon hand touches the strip?

Thanks for the help.
Shlep.

[The0ne]

I just know when an action was out of control, I can't really explain all the things that I see and recognize as out of control, but it's usually pretty obvious. It is my understanding that you can touch the strip with your non-weapon hand for balance, and I generally allow a hand down for balance in a particularily long lunge or something.

[dunastor]

If you look at t.21, it says displacements are allowed, EVEN when the unarmed hand touches the piste.
It specifies that it is illegal to turn your back to your opponent (duhh...)

It nowhere explains the types of displacement, but what I gather from tournaments around here, is that normally 3 points of contact with the piste are allowed, no matter what part of the body... (though usually 2 feet and a hand, or 2 feet and a knee)

The only restriction I see is that the fencer must be in balance when making a touch...

I too am curious about actual reffing by FIE refs in this matter..

[oiuyt]

You may use the unarmed hand as a third point of contact.

Rule t.21: "Displacing the target and ducking are allowed even if during the action the unarmed hand comes into contact with the strip."

-B :)

[oiuyt]

Whoops, Dunastor beat me to it.

-B :)

[prototoast]

Yes, you are allowed 3 points of contact with the strip, but since it occurs infrequently, I have seen unknowing or inexperienced directors call a halt on that action.

[The0ne]

the same directors that call halts as soon as fencer get close--even though no-one has corp-a-corped. . . That's annoying!

[angriff]

So the passata sotto is still legal, even today? I'd thought it was outlawed..

[neevel]

Originally Posted by angriff

So the passata sotto is still legal, even today? I'd thought it was outlawed..

Still perfectly legal, just very rare. Actually, it's always been a rarely used action. Since it's unique and spectacular-looking, though, it tends to get depicted a lot in books, which can give beginners a false impression about how common it is or was.

-Dave

[Purple Fencer]

I woud term it this way: if the hand is down to STABILIZE yourself which displacing (like the PS) it's OK...if it's to STOP a fall in progress, that's not allowed and is cardable (are they still carding for falling? I;ve forgotton.)

[drseudo]

According to my coach, and knowledgeable people at the last couple tournaments I've been to, there isn't a card for falling anymore. If it falls under the category of disorderly fencing that's one thing, but just tripping and falling is no longer penalized.

(For a reference on this, see that video of Keeth Smart someone posted awhile back. Keeth advanced so fast on the other guy that he actually fell over backwards... no card was awarded.)

[dunastor]

The fall isn't punishable anymore since jan 2002 (ao together with the introduction of 3 minutes in a bout)

[shlepzig]

Thanks for the direction guys, I hadn't found the reference in t.21.

I have been seeing this with the younger fencers, that are not so well under control, and it will happen all the time. Usually, if the fencer could continue the phrase I wouldn't call the halt. I felt it was more clean-cut to tell the younger fencers that they couldn't touch the strip during the action or it would be considered falling. My rationalization being that if you required the hand to stabilize yourself, you were falling. When you see one knee and then two knees and then some hobbles forward a bit on the knees then popping back up on his feet while continuing the phrase, it looks cool, and I wouldn't say that this particular fencer was even out of control, but you have to draw the line somewhere. It made it easy for them to understand the calls and remove the interpretation of what was in control or not when I am asked why one fencer can do this and another can't.

It would be a different story if I were dealing with more experienced fencers in these cases. I also wouldn't have to make the call so often with more experienced fencers.

Thanks again for the help
Shlep

PS, With the younger set I also am guilty of calling halts when they are really close before the corps a' corps under the auspices of the rule that when the phrase can no longer be followed a halt should be called. On the 5th or 10th remise I feel it's appropriate with less advanced fencers. Just so they get the idea that you shouldn't end up there so often. Sometimes they need to be reminded that you can retreat as well as advance, and a remise is not the only response to an attack that goes passe.

[The0ne]

Originally Posted by dunastor

The fall isn't punishable anymore since jan 2002 (ao together with the introduction of 3 minutes in a bout)

Actually I think the yellow card for falling has been re-instated. . . That's why you put your hand down, to stop yourself from falling, and avoid a yellow card. . . Directors don't give out cards for what hasn't happened. . . Yeah, I mostly call halts when I can't track the remises very often, but it just bugs me when someone calls a halt before I've managed to get my prime off!!

[edew]

Starting next season, the fall and its consequences will be clarified: one cannot score a touch with an action that concludes or includes a fall. Dangerous actions that result in a touch for the person who makes the dangerous action will annul the touch and earns a warning (yellow or subsequent red) for the person making the action.

So, if one's moving along and hits a slippery spot and falls down, immediate halt, gets up no penalties. If one makes an attack that scores and falls down (presumably, even with an accidental fall), immediate halt, annul touch, yellow (or red) card.

Other items for next season: all warnings that are awarded during the action where a touch occurred (by the fencer who committed the warning act) will annul the touch. Right now, some warnings annul touch, some don't. Hard to remember (covering target in foil doesn't annul, but blocking with unarmed hand does), and not clear why not. So everything will result in annulment of touch by the person at fault.

[Purple Fencer]

Originally Posted by edew

If one makes an attack that scores and falls down (presumably, even with an accidental fall), immediate halt, annul touch, yellow (or red) card.

Annulment even if the touch arrived (thus halting the action) before the fall occurred, or annulment of a touch occurring DURING a fall?

I rememebr when Larry Dunn injured his left knee against me a few years back. He advance-lunged, hit me, and THEN his knee blew and he fell heavily to the ground. He was awarded the touch because he hit me before he started falling...but as he had to withdraw, his bout was voided.

What sucked was I was actually ahead of him for one....

[dunastor]

Originally Posted by edew

Starting next season, the fall and its consequences will be clarified:

First, I concerr about the annulment of touches made by the fencer at fault, including touches made while falling.

I can also see that a dangerous action warrants a card (t.87, which includes the touches while falling).

It doesn't say the fall itself is punishable...