Fencing.Net - Your Guide to Fencing & Fencing Equipment

rsy · 11-20-2006, 10:35 AM

Can anyone goive me a refernce or a site where the new USFA rule on non-combativity is written down? Thanks.

-r

RITFencing · 11-20-2006, 10:45 AM

Sadly, I don't believe the rule has been updated.

I attended the tail end of a ref seminar this past weekend, though, where it was discussed.

Basically, in a DE, if the fencers are making no attempt to hit each other (the unofficial not was doing so for about 15 seconds), the first offense is a yellow card for each fencer and the bout moves to the next encounter with no 1 minute break. The second offense is a red card for both and the third is a black card. The exception here is that during the third encounter, if there is more than one minute left, you move to the final minute. If there is less than one minute left, you don't call it.

That's the best I can recall. We were also told to start applying this at a local level, which I personally think is good for all rules. Local and regional events exist to prepare fencers for national ones; the same rules should be applied and the same standards of proffesionalism should be held.

However, my advice: Do not try this at home without reviewing it with your local FOC! (And there just happens to be a seminar near you where you can do so!) I'm going to refrain from reffing until I get a chance to go over this more thoroughly because while I do believe it's important to know and apply the rules at all levels, I don't feel confident enough in my own knowledge and familiarity with this one, so I'm just going to do what any ref should do when they do not feel up to the task and pull myself.

counter riposte · 11-20-2006, 10:53 AM

There is no black card for Non-combativity.

The third offense would be in the third period. If the fencers are non-combative during the first two minuites of the final period, the referee may halt the bout, give a yellow/red card for the offense and determine priority. The bout then moves to the final minuite, which is fenced IN ENTIRETY. Should the score be tied at the end of the minute, the person with priority wins the bout.

The written rule was given to referees at Albuquerque, the first NAC in which the rule was implemented.

dekko · 11-20-2006, 11:01 AM

I'll take a shot. We were handed a sheet explaining it at the Alb. NAC. Basically there is no more passivity, there is noncombativity. Here how it was explained to us. If the fencers are just bouning and clicking blades but not really trying to hit each other for a while, ref's descretion on 'a while', both fencers get the card and move to the next set of 3 minutes with no break. If this happens again, they get carded, move to the last set, again no break. If it happens in the third set, they get cards and priority is assigned even if the score is not tied. They fence for one minute, not sudden death but for the whole minute. Who ever has the most points wins, if it's tied the priority comes into play.

Couple of things, the card given should be in the proper order. If they have a failed weapon then NC is called they get a red card. Also, there is no black card for this, all jokes aside. Second, ref's descretion on the 'while' part. Some refs may call it after a minute, some 2 minutes, some 15 second, etc. There was no time given to us for how long we should let this go before it is called. Also, note this is for all three events, although sabre not an issue it could be called, and was, in foil but this does affect epee big time.

I may have missed a couple of fine details but these are the broad strokes.

Mauler · 11-20-2006, 11:10 AM

Scroll down to t.87 (4/5/6) -- 5c and 6c do not apply in USFA domestic competitions.

Check out Third Group -- again, USFA referees are not instructed to proceed with exclusion (competition) and suspension (tournament).

If you're looking for more official, USFA-specific version, follow these steps:

Go to a division/club/tournament that tends to routinely hire referees who regularly work NAC/SN/JOs.
Hang out in the referee lounge.
Incite random rules discussion in any topic you wish clarified.
Remember the bits and pieces of random info divulged by whichever referee who has attended (with relative success) the most recent NAC/SN?JOs.
Come home and post your findings at an internet board for verification and complaint/debate.

If you are a working referee, follow these steps:

Go to a USFA/NCAA tournament that tends to routinely hire referees who regularly work Satellites/WC Champs/Olympics.
Hang out in the referee lounge or (after the competitions) the bar.
Incite random rules discussion in any topic you wish clarified.
Remember the bits and pieces of whatever was said by anyone in the room still semi-sober. Extra priority points if the said referee had recent contact with Refereeing Commission delegates (i.e. worked for them in last event).
Come home and post your findings at an internet board for verification and complaint/debate.

KD5MDK · 11-20-2006, 11:13 AM

A good description of when to call it was when a reasonable referee (ie, possibly not you) would think "Gee, I wish one of them would do something".

We were advised to be lenient in our interpretations, but it was still applied a number of times at Albuquerque and there was noticeably more fencing in the last days. Again, the criteria means that the fencers must not be attempting to score: trying and missing (Y14 Epee) is not non-combativity, no matter how often they miss. At the same time, bouncing back and forth and tapping blades IS. I am more generous towards fencers who have previously shown substantial inclinations towards scoring than those who don't.

Use Counter-riposte's description as a guide for now, with the following note: If the score reaches 15 (or 10 for Veterans), stop the bout then, do not continue until the minute is up.

Addendum for Mauler: Best yet, invite FOCs out to dinner. Ask not too many rule questions, and mostly have them tell stories.

Mauler · 11-20-2006, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by counter riposte

The written rule was given to referees at Albuquerque, the first NAC in which the rule was implemented.

Disclaimer: What was handed out to the refs in Albuquerque is NOT the written rule. It's a guideline/cheat-sheet for the working refs. Very much like the flowchart circulating around...

Mauler · 11-20-2006, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

Addendum for Mauler: Best yet, invite FOCs out to dinner. Ask not too many rule questions, and mostly have them tell stories.

And there lies the secret to knowledge, wisdom and enlightenment.

counter riposte · 11-20-2006, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mauler

Disclaimer: What was handed out to the refs in Albuquerque is NOT the written rule. It's a guideline/cheat-sheet for the working refs. Very much like the flowchart circulating around...

Addendum to Disclaimer: What was handed out is the only "written" information that has been distributed within USFA circles.

MyrddinsPrecint · 11-20-2006, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

Addendum for Mauler: Best yet, invite FOCs out to dinner. Ask not too many rule questions, and mostly have them tell stories.

Even better--- have FOCs invite YOU out to dinner.

HDG · 11-20-2006, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mauler

Disclaimer: What was handed out to the refs in Albuquerque is NOT the written rule. It's a guideline/cheat-sheet for the working refs. Very much like the flowchart circulating around...

Anybody wanna upload one or both of these?

seak · 11-20-2006, 11:57 AM

A certain occasional f.net poster believs NC should be called in sabre if no touch has been scored in 10 seconds (regardless if they're trying or not) cause that's just wrong : )

KD5MDK · 11-20-2006, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HDG

Anybody wanna upload one or both of these?

The passivity flowchart (which no longer applies anyway, being for passivity) has been posted here, by me in fact.

The statement on Non-combativity was not available in electronic form that I can recall, and contained an ommission anyway. If someone has an updated version they'd like to post, I'm sure that would be welcome.

CvilleFencer · 11-20-2006, 12:31 PM

Just curious, does anyone know the rational behind this one? There were already standards for refusal to fence and collusion, so that does not seem to fit. I suppose it could have been done to speed up the fencing/events, but that seems somewhat wrong also since there is a card attached, and depending on the situation could drastically change the tactical situation of the bout... I would not really have a problem with this rule if there was not a card attached and if there was a firm guideline for the time that it takes to be considered NC...

Being an epeeist, I am a firm believer in that you only need to win by one touch. However, hypothetically, if you are fencing a strong counterattacker or parry reposter and are up one, it is stupid to play their game. If they want to tie things up or win, they have to come for the touch. Unless of course you have a card for a weapon or something like that. If there is a one point difference in the third period, you have a card for something else and he does not and NC is called (according to some in as little as 15 seconds!!!), the bout now effectively goes to a coin flip. Why not just let people fence? I don't get it...

KD5MDK · 11-20-2006, 12:42 PM

How about you make it look like you're trying to score? I would say unless both fencers are absolutely still/moving backwards that 15 seconds is too short to call.

CvilleFencer · 11-20-2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

How about you make it look like you're trying to score? I would say unless both fencers are absolutely still/moving backwards that 15 seconds is too short to call.

I am always looking to score, even if I am just standing around.

The description that I heard, and granted I was not at the last NAC, was that mearly keeping distance or "clacking blades" (which I read as setting up footwork/distance patterns and/or jocking for position) was not sufficient to avoid an NC card. Is your understanding different? For example, if I am keeping just out of attack range but am not actively attacking, such as waiting for or setting up a distance or timing play, that would not be considered NC? How about if it took a minute?

KD5MDK · 11-20-2006, 01:18 PM

If you opponent who is behind isn't doing anything either, yes.

oiuyt · 11-20-2006, 01:23 PM

Rationale is to remove "boring" fencing from the television audience (*cough*). This is (presumably) why there is no such thing as non-combativity in pool bouts.

The FIE (Roch) wants lots of activity. Patient, tactical, fencing with lots of subtle adjustment of distance and masking of intentions is difficult for an uninformed audience to get excited about. Lots of attacks, counterattacks, ripostes, and remises are easy to see and look athletic and cool.

Guidelines I've been given are more in the 30-40 second range. And yes, this absolutely does come into play in epee and foil at times. Including while both fencers are trying to set up actions (but not actually triggering them).

-B

MyrddinsPrecint · 11-20-2006, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seak

A certain occasional f.net poster believs NC should be called in sabre if no touch has been scored in 10 seconds (regardless if they're trying or not) cause that's just wrong : )

We had a practice where we were timing sabre actions...... most normal actions were taking no less than 4 seconds, and the only time we saw 15 second actions was when we had an experience alum fencing a brand new fencer who is sometimes shy about attacking, and the alum was trying to draw out phrases as long as possible............. It was interesting and informative, if not very helpful.

Mauler · 11-20-2006, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CvilleFencer

<