Observation of a referee

[rsy]

If there is a claim that a referee is incompetent or prejudiced and should be oberved by the bout committee, what are the committee's obligations? I am not referring to a fencer's appeal of a referee's decision, but rather more along the lines of, "Mr. X has been assigned to referee my strip and my past experience with him has been such that I want someone from the bout committee to observe him." I searched the USFA rules, but I could not find anything on this other than the general authority set forth in t.97. Is there something more than this general authority?

-r

[mrbiggs]

I'm also interested in the reply to this, because I was a bout committe for a tournament once, and I had more than a few complaints about the directors, then we had problems with coaches taking matters into their own hands...suffice it to say that I'm interested in the actual rule for what a bout comittee does for a ref who is being complained about.

[Mauler]

For the purpose of my reply, I'd like to separate "Bout Committee" and "FOC Rep." Ideally, you want to have separate individuals or groups handling the operation (BC) of the event and maintaining the quality of refereeing (FOC).

Fortunately, many of the "local" events I have been attending lately started employing this idea, borrowed from what they have seen at the national level. While the "Bout Committee" is handling the organizing and operating the whole tournament, there's at least one "FOC" who walks around the venue all day concentrating on nothing but the quality of refereeing by assigning, observing and educating the referees on the fly. If you notice an individual who seems to be walking around from strip to strip, observing for a few moments, giving quick tips to the referee and moving onto next strip, then that's the person I'm talking about.

That individual is the one you want to talk to regarding this matter. It's ultimately his/her responsibility to ensure that as much as possible, every single point of every single bout in every single event of the day is refereed to the highest possible standard. That includes keeping tabs on possibility (real, remote or even perceived) of bias, affiliation, past history, etc. ANYTHING that would lead to a potential conflict. By approaching this individual and letting him/her aware of the predicament you MAY face in the proposed assignment of the referees, you are in fact helping out his/her job as well as the referee's!

Realize, however, if you approach this "FOC" and request that the currently assigned referee BE OBSERVED, that's all you're going to get. No more, no less. The FOC's obligation, at that point, is to simply go over to the strip and observe the performance of the referee. A good FOC will not interfere with the bout nor comment on the referee's call (except for misapplication of rules, and even that only if appealed) until the bout is over. AFTER THE BOUT, he/she will take the role of an educator to the observed referee and/or the fencer/coach who requested the presence of the FOC in the first place.

In reality, when a referee realizes that he/she is being "observed" by the FOC, there is a hightened sense that he/she must perform at the highest level possible. In a way, it can be a good thing. The referee will pay attention to every detail of the bout possible and try to do the best possible job. If the allegation was regarding a potential/known bias, then this should put a stop to it, at least for this bout. On the other hand, be aware that by bringing extra pressure to the referee, you're potentially creating an unpredictable and very messy outcome. Some referees thrive on pressure and actually perform exceptionally well with added pressure. Some turn into jellos.

There is a better solution to the problem you seem to be suggesting on this topic, however.

When you encounter the situation where you realize that your next DE bout has been assigned to a particular referee that you believe will create an unfair environment for fencing, IMMEDIATELY walk over to the FOC in charge of that event (since he/she is the one who did the assignment in the first place) and inform him/her (don't complain) that "THERE IS A POTENTIAL CONFLICT IN THE REFEREE ASSIGNMENT."

Don't say anything more. No explanation should be needed, nor should it be asked for.

Good FOC will simply swap the referees in the easiest manner possible at the moment. Say, have referees in two adjacent strips switch places. Properly trained referees won't even bother wondering why. It's just a ROUTINE PART of what they do. It's not in the FOC's interest to have you stuck in a bout with a referee who will not allow you to fence at your best for whatever the reason. Far from it. FOC will do his/her best to assign the most appropriate referees to the bouts at every level of the event as humanly as possible. Part of the FOC's job is to constantly keep track of the referees' performance and make appropriate assignments for further rounds. That's where the observation comes in.

When FOC walks into the venue at the beginning of the day, he/she is perfectly aware that the referees present have varying degrees of competency across every facet of their duty. By definition, every referee in the room isn't up to the level the FOC wishes they are at. Nevertheless, the FOC realizes that the performance of EVERY REFEREE is still his/her responsiblity. Instead of complaining or blaming, a good FOC is VERY ACTIVE in constantly educating the referees on duty.

The referees who respond well to that "on the fly education" improve with every bout. And those who perform the best are the ones the FOC notices and promotes to the next round. The process continues all the way up to the Finals. Hopefully, the FOC didn't have to jump in at some point and take over the refereeing. One of the measures of a good FOC is that throughout the day, there were minimal complaints, they didn't have to interfere and they remained unnoticed in the background, letting the referees ref. Similar to how the good referees strive to go unnoticed and let the fencers fence.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Mauler

When you encounter the situation where you realize that your next DE bout has been assigned to a particular referee that you believe will create an unfair environment for fencing, IMMEDIATELY walk over to the FOC in charge of that event (since he/she is the one who did the assignment in the first place) and inform him/her (don't complain) that "THERE IS A POTENTIAL CONFLICT IN THE REFEREE ASSIGNMENT."

Don't say anything more. No explanation should be needed, nor should it be asked for.


Good FOC will simply swap the referees in the easiest manner possible at the moment.

Is it really as easy as that? No questions asked about "What sort of conflict"?

And if so---what happens if this same tactic is then used by one of the fencers in the DE to which the ref in question is switched? That is, if the "conflict" is alleged to exist not just by one fencer but by many?

[haroldbuck]

Originally Posted by Mauler

For the purpose of my reply, I'd like to separate "Bout Committee" and "FOC Rep." Ideally, you want to have separate individuals or groups handling the operation (BC) of the event and maintaining the quality of refereeing (FOC).

While this is wonderful in theory, in practice how often do tournaments have an experienced, competent referee that they can spare to have wander around observing bouts instead of being pressed into duty to actually referee?

[Mauler]

Originally Posted by haroldbuck

While this is wonderful in theory, in practice how often do tournaments have an experienced, competent referee that they can spare to have wander around observing bouts instead of being pressed into duty to actually referee?

Unfortunately, not that many. Certainly at any given non-national event. I have been fortunate to observe that many tournaments at my nearby area have started following suit with this goal in mind. Some picked it up faster than others. And they are working out very well.

It's a management choice that has to be made by the tournament manager (usually division chair, club owner), and the "chief referee" of the day. If they see the value in this, and set their foot down and declare that "we don't know how yet, but we're gonna make this work!" then it will happen over time. If not, it won't. People who run efficient, high-volume, high-level tournaments are not supermen, they just understand the ins and outs very well.

The tournament manager has to ask him/herself, "I know I'm taking money from these folks and I'm supposed to provide them with something... But what?!?" And the most experienced referee in the house (regardless of his/her official designation of the day) has to ask him/herself, "Do I really want to be stuck being requested/demanded to ref every single round of the day for 12 hours because we all know there's no one else here today who can ref like I can?"

Most tournament managers are unpaid volunteers. Most of them do what they do for very honorable personal reasons. However, it's difficult for them to see themselves as a functionary in a recreation industry. And if they can't, it's that much more difficult to even consider the customer satisfaction aspect and simple management technique such as delegation of responsibility.

Yes, It's a good feeling for a competent referee to go to tournaments in different areas and be thanked and be praised for a job well done. In fact, so well, "no body else in the division could possibly follow suit." It's even a better feeling to learn that you're special. However, as the "star referee," one must make a choice. "Am I going to make sure that I remain the best referee in the area, or should I help out with training EVERY REFEREE who's here today so that one day they'll all be as good as me? (or hopefully even surpass me?)"

Fencing is a very small community. It's a relatively unique industry in that it allows few key individuals to have a great control over a large geographical area with very little outside input/supervision. Course of fencing in the local/surrounding areas are greatly affected by the choices made by the few individuals. Oftentimes, these are individuals who took up the responsibility because fencing has had a profound personal influence on them and they feel a personal obligation to give something back. Oftentimes, they do this without any fair training or support, and it's a process of discovery with great deal of unpleasant feedback throughout the learning process. Years of fighting back pressure and "ungrateful/unknowledgeable" folks only help developing a certain flavor of "personality" in the Bout Committee personnel that gets in the way of progress.

Whenver I walk into a fencing tournament in whatever the role I am in (fencer/referee/FOC/BC/spectator), I always ask myself (and a few others) this question:

If we hired a customer satisfaction consultant to secretly evaluate this function, what would be our score? Yes, someone who professionally evaluates retail industry, hospitality, restaurants, etc on a regular basis. Have them look at us. It can be a frightening thought.

[Mr Epee]

Thank you, Mauler.

Wonderfully put.

I wonder if anyone has every distributed a customer satisfaction survey with the registration material. I think that might be a great idea...

1. How would you rate the quality of this event?
2. Did the referees understand and properly apply the rules?
3. Were the strip assignments, and announcements easy to understand?
4. Was your event reseeded for any reason?
5. Did the event start on time?
6. Were there long delays in your event?

Etc...

If I were managing a regional circuit, I would require this form at every event. Too many problems, and the event is cut loose.

Good job!
This would not

[Mauler]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Is it really as easy as that? No questions asked about "What sort of conflict"?

As far as what happens there and then, yes, it's that easy. Their task at the moment is to identify and eliminate conflicts. They will have plenty time later in the day to investigate the nature of the conflict.

Referee certainly doesn't need an added factor that could affect his/her focus and mental fortitude necessary for optimal performance for the following rounds. Remember, his/her job doesn't end when your event does! And the FOC certainly doesn't need an extra complaint that is sure to come if the situation isn't rectified. Nor does he/she want to have to jump in to referee at later rounds because every referee on duty "got eliminated."

A good referee figures out a way to be as useful as possible for the longest duration before being relieved. A good FOC doesn't like to prove that he/she is the best referee in the house. Believe or not, their mutually beneficial solutions often lead to serving the fencers' best interest.

And if so---what happens if this same tactic is then used by one of the fencers in the DE to which the ref in question is switched? That is, if the "conflict" is alleged to exist not just by one fencer but by many?

System that exists is allows a referee to ref as much as possible before meeting his/her limitations. Usually that limit is discovered in the form of increasing number of complaints/requests regarding the specific referee. Ideally, referees are trained to identify their own limits and inform the FOC of that before they become assigned to a round that's beyond their abilities. This helps minimize the disasters.

So what happens when the referee is bounced from one strip to the other because of similar complaints? Then clearly that referee isn't fit to ref that round. Believe or not, finding out how to minimize conflicts on and off the strip is part of a referee's "skill" as well. That "skill" is highly appreciated and valued, albeit completely unwritten and unofficial.

There is an assumption that fencers will look out for their own interests as well. If you, as a fencer, weigh the balance between having a potentially conflicting/incompetent referee ref your bout compared to the replacement referees available who may be even worse, then you, as a fencer, are expected to make a choice between requesting the exchange or not. So after having considered that, you, as a fencer, make that choice and request the exchange, then the FOC will certainly recognize that and act on it.

Those who do, however, abuse this system are easy to spot. And they find that they can't work the system as easily as they could in the beginning.

[haroldbuck]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

2. Did the referees understand and properly apply the rules?

Shouldn't the athlete have to prove they understand the rules before they can evaluate whether someone else understands them?!

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by haroldbuck

Shouldn't the athlete have to prove they understand the rules before they can evaluate whether someone else understands them?!

No, because the competitor is the customer (I don't understand why most organizers don't get this)... and the customer is always right.

And the purpose of the survey isn't to get anyone fired... it's to gauge peoples impression of the event.

--------------------

[keith]

Originally Posted by haroldbuck

Shouldn't the athlete have to prove they understand the rules before they can evaluate whether someone else understands them?!

but, depending on the level of the competition, it is quite possible to encounter a whole range of opinions on what is an attack in foil or when to call halt in epee. Mauler's points apply to this - it isn't hard to pull your ref pool together at the beginning of the competition and get everyone on the same page. Assuming a situation where not everyone is a well qualified ref, but you have a few experience people to do the hand holding.

I agree with Mr Epee that organisers should want to know how the competitors felt about the tournament.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by rsy

what are the committee's obligations?

None.

Absolutely none.

There is no obligation of the BC or FOC rep or referee assigner to observe a referee on request. And that's all it is, a request. Not a demand. Not a right.

That said, usually there will be observation following such a request. Partially to see if there is indeed a problem and/or to allow for further education of the referee in question and/or removal from future bouts if warranted, and partially because it's easier and makes the competition continue more smoothly when the BC/FOC provides the requested observation.

The assigner (or BC, or FOC rep, whatever) is not REQUIRED to do a darn thing however.

This is similar to a request for hand/foot judges. The referee may get them if s/he feels the need. There is no obligation for them to be provided, for them to be provided if one or both fencers requests them, for them to be provided if the coach(es) of one or both fencers requests them, to be provided in gold medal bouts, etc.

-B :)

[mfp]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

None.

Absolutely none.

[...]

This is similar to a request for hand/foot judges. The referee may get them if s/he feels the need. There is no obligation for them [...] to be provided in gold medal bouts, etc.

Then someone should update the rules the USFA publishes

t.36 The Referee fulfils his/her functions with the aid of an apparatus for the automatic registering of touches; he/she may also be assisted by two judges watching for the use of the unarmed hand or arm, substitution of the valid target, touches scored on the floor in épée, leaving the strip to the side or the rear or any other offence defined in the Rules (cf. t.120). The judges are obligatory for all individual competition finals (whether of 4 or 8 fencers) and for the final (2 teams) of team events.

[rsy]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

None.

Absolutely none.

Thanks for answering my question.

-r

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Mauler

As far as what happens there and then, yes, it's that easy.

There is an assumption that fencers will look out for their own interests as well. If you, as a fencer, weigh the balance between having a potentially conflicting/incompetent referee ref your bout compared to the replacement referees available who may be even worse, then you, as a fencer, are expected to make a choice between requesting the exchange or not. So after having considered that, you, as a fencer, make that choice and request the exchange, then the FOC will certainly recognize that and act on it.

Well---that's very good, then. I shall have to try this if such a situation ever arises again. ( I've had only one occasion on which I might have considered such an option---the ref was also a coach working at the salle of the fencer I was facing in a DE, and despite being a good ref generally made some awfully questionable calls in that bout...such that the fencer from his salle won the bout on them. )

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

None.

Absolutely none.

There is no obligation of the BC or FOC rep or referee assigner to observe a referee on request. And that's all it is, a request. Not a demand. Not a right.

Originally Posted by mfp

Then someone should update the rules the USFA publishes

Oiuyt gets served

Oiuyt,

You generally seem to know what you are talking about, but I am really disturbed by your post.

The truth is that organizers/referees/BC etc. DO have a very real responsibility to run their event in the most fair way possible. Your flippant approach towards this responsibility is shocking, but does mirror a sadly common attitude among many referees/organizers.

This attitude is bad for fencing

Shame on you!

[fluidfencer]

I believe Oiuyt was trying to remind us that the BC or FOC must balance the request of an individual to the demands of all the fencers at the tournament, although I don't claim to speak for him at all. That requires judgement on the part of the BC, FOC and tournament organizers. I am as customer-oriented as they come, but one decision can affect others within the complexities of a tournament. There are also times when requests are made in the heat of competition and are not at all reasonable. A good BC or FOC representative can probably tell the difference after gathering the facts.

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

Oiuyt gets served

Oiuyt,

You generally seem to know what you are talking about, but I am really disturbed by your post.

The truth is that organizers/referees/BC etc. DO have a very real responsibility to run their event in the most fair way possible. Your flippant approach towards this responsibility is shocking, but does mirror a sadly common attitude among many referees/organizers.

This attitude is bad for fencing

Shame on you!

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by mfp

Then someone should update the rules the USFA publishes :)

Touché.

Not the first time I've been wrong here. Was going based on information from a conversation involving multiple FOCs in Denver about this very topic last month.

Mr. Epee-
My answer about the obligations of the BC/FOC/referee assigner/tournament organizer is the correct answer to the question posed. Note that in the next paragraph I discussed why those people generally fulfilled such requests despite not having an obligation to. This, in turn, is fulfilling the responsibility that you mention.

If you haven't realized that I frequently use an irreverent (or flippant) tone in many of my posts here by now.... Mmmm.

-B :)