Cite me the appropriate Regulations

[jBirch]

Hi James,

I think t.20 is pretty clear on this, any type of body contact in all weapons should be sanctionned by a halt. That's the way I have seen and been recommended to call it in both the US and France, but it might be different in Canada.

Certainly just a light grazing isn't going to be called sometimes (in all weapons) just because most of the time the referees aren't really paying attention to that, just like sometimes some referees don't see the occasional foot stepping outside of the strip in foil or sabre, but it doesn't change the fact that it should be called regardless, when one sees it.

Then as a coach, why don't we teach our epeeists to fleche and deliberately cause body contact if they miss instead of running off the piste to the side? This is surely a better conclusion then giving the opponent an opportunity to riposte which they might or might not get.

James.

[davesaint]

Then as a coach, why don't we teach our epeeists to fleche and deliberately cause body contact if they miss instead of running off the piste to the side? This is surely a better conclusion then giving the opponent an opportunity to riposte which they might or might not get.

James.

The reason you don't teach this is because it may cause a card for jostling if the impact agaisnt your opponent is deemed to hard.


Dave

[kalivor]

Then as a coach, why don't we teach our epeeists to fleche and deliberately cause body contact if they miss instead of running off the piste to the side? This is surely a better conclusion then giving the opponent an opportunity to riposte which they might or might not get.

1. Corps a corps would not annul an immediate riposte, and more than passing the opponent or leaving the piste would. The touch can still arrive, and would stand so long as the riposte began before the corps a corps.

2. Corps a corps to avoid the touch is against the rules. It sounds like you're asking "why don't we teach our students to initiate corps a corps to avoid the touch"?

If corps a corps is deliberately caused to negate an opportunity to riposte (or avoid one), it is a penalty. Corps a corps, in and of itself, does not prevent an opponent from riposting or negate a touch which might be scored with the riposte.

[kalivor]

Because, as Oiuyt, and the rules stated, the riposte has to start before the bump or the pass.

In that specific case, it was described as "he bumped into me, then passed me, then I riposted". If someone has the time to bump into you, then pass you before you make your riposte, it is quite clear to me that the riposte didn't start before both the bump and the passing.

Ah, sorry ... my misunderstanding. I thought you were saying that it was impossible under any circumstance to begin a riposte that arrived after a corps a corps.

[chiz]

My opponent fleched, I parried and then turned as he bumped into me and I riposted. One light, Mine. The call was that he had passed and was off the strip when my riposte arrived. Which he surely was as he bounced off after knocking me back. So the touch was annulled.


I think what pissed me off most about this particular touch was that my opponent is a salle mate who proceeded to take advantage of the director's inexperience and insist on his interpretation before I could appeal. The actuality of the attack was that there was no way anyone could tell when my riposte arrived. The riposte was obscured by his running into me.

The halt comes with the body contact. From your description I think the contact was to avoid the touché, if so that is a yellow card for the first card a red card for the second.

Chiz