NAC Div 1, Rules

[southernsword]

deleted

[Victor]

Did the allegedly damaged-blade fencer diddle with his weapon before the ref checked it himself? And upon testing, was the blade still capable of registering a valid touch?

[Mr Epee]

Did the director check the tip of the "damaged" to see if it would still record a touch on the Machine?

That's pretty key to the situation you describe.

[kalivor]

If the epee fencer with the "malfunctioning" weapon played with it before presenting it to the referee for inspection, the point should stand.

Otherwise, it should be like any other point which could potentially be annulled -- is the tip still capable of registering a touch? If so, the touch should stand.

I thought the intent of the nullifying rule in the case of equipment failure was to assure that in all touches both opponents are assured of having had an equal opportunity to score with valid and functional equipment.

I'm not clear where this failed. There was a "simultaneous" attack, with one light. From your description, I assume it ended in a corps-a-corps, and the fencer who didn't get a light had a horrid bend in their blade.

Clearly, one of three things happened: Either the fencer who didn't get a light hit after their opponent, they didn't hit with the tip, or their weapon wasn't functioning.

In the third instance, the director can test the tip, and if it doesn't function they should annul the hit. The first two are valid actions which should not result in the hit being annulled.

Getting your epee bent is not cause for an annulment. The epee didn't just bend itself, it bent upon contact with the other fencer ... generally something which registers a light, if the tip works.

[telkanuru]

If I remember the ref's test correctly, if "after a halt, if fencer x's weapon is found to have a malfuntion that could have been caused through fencing" one annuls the opponent's last touch and confiscates the weapon, with no other quantifiers applying.

[kalivor]

If I remember the ref's test correctly, if "after a halt, if fencer x's weapon is found to have a malfuntion that could have been caused through fencing" one annuls the opponent's last touch and confiscates the weapon, with no other quantifiers applying.

Yes, but how is a bent blade a malfunction? This, I'm not seeing. If it won't register a touch, then sure, but the complaint seems to be that the blade bent too much.

t.68 has additional quantifiers that must be followed in order to annul a touch.

Among them:
(d) A competitor who makes a modification in, or changes his equipment without being asked by the Referee to do so, before a judgement is pronounced, loses his right to the annulment of the touch.

So, if there was fiddling with the equipment, no annulment is possible.

Now that I'm quoting rules, for that matter, the annulment rules in this section are all about failures of the electrical equipment. That is -- whether or not the equipment will register touches properly. A "severely bent blade," in and of itself, does not sound like such a problem.

[CvilleFencer]

If the weapon worked even after the "bend" the touch stands. If the weapon was dead after the bend, with the fencer not having fiddled with it at all, the the judge can annull the touch.

[Victor]

If the weapon worked even after the "bend" the touch stands. If the weapon was dead after the bend, with the fencer not having fiddled with it at all, the the judge can annull the touch.

And there ya go! Answered easy as pie.

[kalivor]

And there ya go! Answered easy as pie.

I don't get that. Why is pie so easy?

[MHS Fencer]

It was my impression, and I may be wrong, that if the weapon doesn't work that the director COULD annul the touch, but that he didn't necessarily have to if, in his judgment, there was no grounds for annulling it. In most cases, they annul the touch merely out of form, but it strikes me as if there are situations in which a touch should not be annuled on the basis of the action.

[telkanuru]

If the fencer dosn't ask for his weapon to be tested, he or she has no right to have anything annulled. The director is under no obligation to test, the fencer must request it. If he requests it and the director refuses, then it's a bout committie problem (or the fencer should make it such). It seems to me from what was said that the fencer merely asked to replace his or her weapon, not for a test. No foul.


Kalivor- if the blade is bent and this causes a wire break, and no light regesters, the hit should be annulled.

[CvilleFencer]

[B] It is the director's job to handle the electric equipment and verify that it is functional, why else would they inspect the connectors, the wires under the guard pad, the tip contact and weight springs before each bout?

A ref's job it to insure that no manifest cheating exists, to maintain order on the strip and to interpret and apply in a fair and even manner the rules. It is not his or her job to be a coach, baby sitter, or even a nice guy. If you are fencing at a Div 1 event and you don't know enough to ask for your weapon to be tested you should really should not be fencing at the event to begin with. In this instance, had I been judging and going from what you described I doubt I would even have let him switch weapons without him at least attempting to straighten the blade.

Know your rules! Know your rights as a fencer and know the responsibilities of everyone in the room from the bout committee to the Armorers and Judges. Most importantly know what your rights and responsibilities as a fencer are. If you are so rattled by something like a hard hit or a bad call in epee that you can't remember something like asking to test a questionable weapon it is no ones fault but your own and you deserve to lose. I speak here as someone who did not follow the above advice and lost until he finally wised up and began trying to follow the old adage of "A wise man knows every intricacy of the rules that govern him. It makes it much easier to twist them or use them for himself!"

[oso97]

Sure, I can cite such an occurance. A couple of them in fact. I've been on both sides of the equation. I can also cite some occurances of when an appeal was not held up and why.

I was serving as a member of the Bout Committee at a tournament earlier this season. During a foil bout, a referee issued a card for reversing the shoulders. The fencer carded appealed, and quite properly, the referee was overrulled.

Later on this season, at our Divisonal JO Quals, I was refereeing a sabre bout. After an action, one of the fencers swore he hit his stop cut, but his light didn't go off. I myself had actually seen cut land on valid target, well ahead of when I thought the opposing fencer could have scored. Nonetheless, what I "think" I saw doesn't count, only what I can replicate. Still though, I was willing to give a little leeway to chase down the problem. We replicated the problem a number of times on the cuff and lame, but not every single time.

Okay, so at this point I could require the lame/cuff to be changed, but something else had caught my eye. Not every time the sabre contacted the lame in the exact same spot did the problem reveal itself. I figured at this point the issue was a lame that was "barely" legal with resistance near the cuttoff. So I called the armourer over (he was right next to the strip anyway) and asked his opinion. Using an ohmmeter, we couldn't find a spot on the lame that was bad outright bad. A couple of borderline spots, but not really bad. So we looked at the sabre. Sure enough, there was a patch of oxidation on the blade. Not rust, mind you, but black oxidation. Testing IT, we found that touches scored with that part of the blade would not score.

Now, at this point, had I been thinking properly, it would have been "weapon went bad, touch annulled." But, despite the fact that I've made the proper rulling more times than I can count in epee and foil, I've never seen a weapon that failed like that in sabre, i.e. "went dead in the middle of the bout after passing the initial weapon test" short of a catastrophic failure, like the sabre falling apart. So I screwed up and said "your weapon is dead, touch stands" because I was thinking that well, he showed up to strip with a sabre with a ton of oxidation on, so its his fault.

Nonetheless, the fact remains, that the weapon DID pass the inspection at the start of the bout. So, the fencer's coach appealed, and quite properly, the BC overruled me, and told me to annul the touch.

Lesson learned, and from now on I'll inspect the sabres as closely as I inspect epees at the start of a bout! Or I'll at least LOOK at them.

Okay, so the other kind of thing though, where the BC does NOT overrule the referee.

Most of the time this comes down to a very simple thing. The BC WILL NOT and SHOULD NOT overrule the referee on matters of fact, only on a missapplication of the rules (otherwise then you get into some really hairy issues). Clever and experienced referees can make almost any screwup they commit as a question of fact (i.e. "what they saw"). Additionally, when you appeal to the BC, the onus is on you to prove that the referee is in error with respect to his application of the rules.

Okay, so if you want to win an appeal, here are some hard and fast rules to remember. Lets examine the following situation and how you could screw up and loose an appeal (and get carded for unjustified appeal) and how you could win.

This is epee.
Fencer X (you) attacks. Fencer Y counter-attacks while stepping off strip. Two lights.

The referee says "Two lights, double touch."

#1 get the referee to clearly explain the call. Make sure you're not arguing over, for example, weather or not the foot was off strip. If the referee says "no, it was on" theres nothing you can do, other than ask for side judges. If the referee says "it was off, but he scored before leaving strip" there is nothing you can do, because this is a matter of fact and the referee CANNOT BE QUESTIONED/OVERRULLED/ETC ON MATTERS OF FACT.

#2 Ask your questions as specifically as possible. Instead of asking "Sir, was he off strip?" instead, ask "Sir, was he off strip WHEN HE SCORED THE TOUCH?" If he says "no" see above. If he says "yes" then you have your opening.

#3 Cite rules as clearly and completely as possible. Instead of saying "he was off strip, his touch shouldn't count" say "The rulebook clearly states that if a fencer cannot score a touch after stepping off strip with one foot, but can be scored upon if it occurs in the same action. Therefore, his touch should be annuled, and mine should stand."

If the referee doesn't agree, THEN you have a valid case to present to the BC. Now you have to frame it correctly. Tell the referee, politely, that you would like to ask for a Bout Committee ruling on how he is applying the rule concerning scoring of touches while being off strip. Where possible, when asking for a BC, do so in such a matter that the question clearly conveys the rule in question. While the BC is gathering, head down to the end of the strip, and grab your rulebook that you keep in your fencing bag, and start thumbing through it to find the exact rule number and phrasing.

[kalivor]

The director did not test the weapon at all. The director replied to the fencer that in his judgement, the fencer who scored should retain their point and that the weapon that was bent couldn't have scored a touch

Did the fencer ask for a test? If so, then this is wrong. They should have checked to make sure that the weapon was still functional, and annulled the hit if it was not.

If the reply was as stated, they should have appealed. They would have won such an appeal (regardless of what southernsword says -- while I, too, have never seen a successful appeal, they've all been denied for good reason. It seems that when a real mistake is made, the referees can manage to sort it out and correct themselves before it gets to a bout committee).

telkanuru -- I agree, but a *bend* in the blade, no matter how freakish, is unlikely to cause such a failure. Given the original description, I was under the impression that the blade was still functional, and the argument was that the bend in it made it impossible to hit with, or somesuch.

[telkanuru]

[B]
In the case in question, I watched the fencer ask that the point be annulled due to the malfunction of the weapon. The director refused and stated his judgement as the reason.

You're being very sketchy with details. What is ment by 'his judgement'? Did the fencer ask that the weapon be tested? Did it work if/when it was tested? What was the 'malfunction'?

Perhaps you just get poor bout committies. The only problems I've ever had were with my knowledge of the rules, not incompetence on their part.

[peet]

I once successfully appealed two referees' rulings in one day. Once for myself, and once for a teammate. Also done it several other times.

Honestly, i felt bad calling the BC into it twice in one day, but hey, ya gotta get the rules applied correctly...

Now what to do when the ref IS the BC? That's a tough one.....

-p

[oiuyt]

I've seen a number of cases where BC rulings have overturned what the referee did. But most things that fencers argue about are NOT rules applications, merely that they saw/felt something other than what the referee saw and they're arguing matters of fact.

OSO's post is a good one with some nice points about how and when such an overturn is or isn't possible (although I'll take exception to a part of that post later in this post).

I've never seen one contradicted by a bout committee or corrected by another director as to the appropriateness of a call or action taken by the director. It is not an easy job, but the national events should have a higher standard in both directing and in an appeals process for the athletes.

A referee shouldn't be publically corrected by another referee. If there's a misapplication of the rules it's the BC's job to correct it.

Quoting for the USFA Referee's Handbook:

Referees are to respect other Referees to the utmost. It is improper to publicly indicate disapproval of the actions of other referees.

National events have a very high standard of refereeing. The appeals process is not even close to what you're describing (despite your 7 years of experience with it). Speaking as a national-level referee, there is nothing casual, slipshod, or haphazard about referee education and development in this country, especially as one starts to enter the higher levels. Do referees make mistakes? Yes, absolutely. Do they occasionally misapply rules, either through error or misinformation? Yes, on occasion (especially at local levels). Do the FOC members work to help minimize these occasions and prevent reoccurrances? Absolutely. Will all of this be obvious to the fencers? Absolutely not.

Okay, back to the problem I had with OSO's otherwise very good post....

#3 Cite rules as clearly and completely as possible. Instead of saying "he was off strip, his touch shouldn't count" say "The rulebook clearly states that if a fencer cannot score a touch after stepping off strip with one foot, but can be scored upon if it occurs in the same action. Therefore, his touch should be annuled, and mine should stand."

When citing the rules as clearly and completely as possible make sure that you're also citing them correctly. :) A fencer MAY score a touch with one foot off of the strip (as well as be scored upon). It's TWO feet off the strip that does not allow the scoring of touches (although the fencer can still be scored upon).

-B :)

[CvilleFencer]

Southernsword, just out of curiosity was this the strip near the Armorers bench towards the back of the room that had Dragonetti, Saitoc (spelling?), Warmack and others fencing on it?

[Victor]

It's a hard lesson to learn, but it would benefit a lot of fencers to realize this: Know The Rules. Not just a vague, general sense based on observation and word of mouth, but a genuine study of the canonized standards.

'Cause you can't defend your rights if you don't know what those rights are and how to argue for them.

[kalivor]

OK ... here we go ...

You CANNOT appeal statements of fact. The referee states what happened, and that's what happened, regardless of anybody else's perception.

So, if someone had two feet off the strip, and then they hit you ... you ask "was my opponent off the strip when he hit me?" and the referee says "No. They didn't leave the strip at all," then you're screwed.

What you CAN appeal is misapplication of the rules (or a failure to apply the rules). Generally, you want to ask for a clarification from the referee -- find out EXACTLY what happened. Remember, you don't get to decide what happened, the referee does.

So, in the above example, the referee instead replies "Yes, your opponent was off with both feet, but they parried while they did so, so I must allow the riposte," THEN you have an appeal. The referee saw the same thing you did, but misapplied the rules.

As for other stuff ...

However in the action, it appeared that the one with the bent blade was probably the first to make contact with his opponent and that the blade was "run into" by the opponent who took a hard shot to the groin area before his own blade made contact, scoring a touch that was awarded to them.

It's really not the referee's job to then test the blade. Generally speaking, if a fencer feels that they should have had a light, they ask for a test. More than a few epee fencers will also ALWAYS ask for a test on the final touch of the bout (assuming they didn't get a light).

All this took place in the presence of the FOC representatives and all they could say was you have to question it before unhooking, etc. the same old line of reasoning I hear all the time. I would think that an FOC rep would be there to evaluate and intervene when observing a director who is seeking an improved rating, etc.

I don't know what it's like in the U.S., but when I'm being observed (in Canada), the most I get is a quiet comment TO ME between bouts. How is a referee supposed to maintain order on the strip, and demand the respect of the fencers if the FOC is sitting right there, overruling them left, right and centre?

The FOC has to let the referee make the calls.

Yet, with new rules, like giving black cards to anyone around the strip or on the strip causing a disturbance of the order, etc., that would intimidate anyone from arguing a point of rules or action

Ha! There are plenty of group 3 and 4 penalties which are poorly defined. They exist in such a manner to empower the referee to kick you out. All referees in all sports have this power. Would you rather the referee have no recourse?

...because basically if the director is staring at the ceiling or reading their notes, etc. they can't make a judgement about what they didn't see and so the bottom line is it is always their call, their judgement no matter how good or bad a job they do.

As it should be ... who's judgement should be used? Yours? When you're on piste? A bit biased there. Maybe your coach. Or their coach? I'm confused. Of course, we'd all like referees to do an excellent job, but that's not always going to happen.

I just don't understand the "appeal" process when a fencer is in a pool or a D.E. and a director of the bout fails to maintain order on the strip, or fails to penalize brutality that give the offender an advantage, or an ignoring or misapplication of a rule.

Failing to maintain order? There's not much to do at the time. Mention it to the Bout Committee, and they might observe, then remove the referee following the pool/DE bout that they're currently refereeing.
Brutality? Well, the referee gets to decide whether or not something is "brutal." So no real appeal, here.
Misapplication of a rule? Now you can go somewhere!

What exactly should the fencer do?

Step One: Ask for a clarification of what happened. Do so politely. Phrase the question in such a way that the referee must state that the rule you think is being ignored or misapplied should apply to the situation. Hopefully the referee has seen the same thing you did.
Step Two: Assuming that Step One is successful (the referee agrees that the infraction occurred, but doesn't see it as an infraction), mention the correct call to him: "Shouldn't his hit be annulled, then?" "That's a red card, though, is it not?"
Step Three: Assuming that the referee has not changed their call at this point, say "I would like to appeal this call to the Bout Committee, sir."

At all time remain civil and respectful. The referee will continue to be the refereee post-appeal. Remember that whatever the referee says in Step One is WHAT HAPPENED. The Bout Committee will not listen to your version of events, only the referee's.

Also, if you complain and it gets rejected, you get penalized for bringing the issue to the Bout Committee by being carded for the offence of questioning basically.

Yes, you do. Otherwise people would constantly appeal. If you know the rules, and have had the referee tell you clearly what they saw, you should know if a rule's been misapplied or not. The Bout Committee has better things to do than respond to appeals all day. This way, people save their appeals for when they're fairly certain that they're right.

If a coach, parent, or teammate acts as witness, support or advocate they can be carded for interferring with the order.

You make this sound like you appealed a statement of fact. "Witnesses" don't matter. The referee decides what happened, then applies the rules. You can only appeal the latter, not the former.

... they risk offending the director or committee which due to the subjective nature of the judging could have further negative consequences.

If you call the Bout Committe for something subjective, they will be annoyed, though likely not offended. It makes it clear, right off the bat, that you're not familiar with the rules.

The point is right or wrong, what IS the proper procedure for objection to a call that will get the desired results and not risk a penalty for objecting?

Start with Step One above ... if the referee says that everything fell within the rules, then it did. Your differing opinion will have been noted. If you're polite about it, you probably won't have offended anybody. Continue fencing.