Cards and Touches

[graymalkin]

Ok, here's something that I don't understand: how can a card and a touch be awarded in the same stop of the action in a bout?

How does it make sense for the Director to award a touch and a yellow card for corps-a-corps (or any other offense) at the same time? Like, as soon as a cardable offense occurs on the strip, there should be a halt, and even if one fencer scores a touch just at the halt, the touch shouldn't be awarded, because in the Director's mind, the touch was after the halt, which was called for the foul.

Similarly, if a fencer scores a touch, there will always be a halt, and any foul that happens after the halt A) is even more likely to be accidental than a foul that occurs during the action, and B) doesn't affect the action anyway.

I'm going to get a head-start at defending this point right now and bring everyone's attention to the rules regarding the fleche. We all know that if one's fleche lands, one's leaving of the strip is not carded, but if it doesn't land (i.e. there's nothing to stop the action), one is carded for leaving the strip.

Basically what really bugs me is the idea that the two actions can be called simultaneously. Like, really, how do the two things happen at the exact same moment? I mean, certainly when they do happen at the same time, it should be called accordingly, but in much of the directing I've seen lately, there's been an overabundance of these types of calls, and in most cases, the call's been completely wrong. So many of the cases I'm referring to have had a clear pause between the foul and the touch, but these Directors insist on calling both, even though in many cases their original halt was obviously for one or the other.

Why is this?

[graymalkin]

Originally Posted by graymalkin

I'm going to get a head-start at defending this point right now and bring everyone's attention to the rules regarding the fleche. We all know that if one's fleche lands, one's leaving of the strip is not carded, but if it doesn't land (i.e. there's nothing to stop the action), one is carded for leaving the strip.

Sorry, I shouldn't say "carded" in this paragraph. One isn't carded for leaving the strip on the fleche action, obviously. But there is a penalty, and I think the point is still valid.

[dberke]

Originally Posted by graymalkin

Ok, here's something that I don't understand: how can a card and a touch be awarded in the same stop of the action in a bout?

How does it make sense for the Director to award a touch and a yellow card for corps-a-corps (or any other offense) at the same time? Like, as soon as a cardable offense occurs on the strip, there should be a halt, and even if one fencer scores a touch just at the halt, the touch shouldn't be awarded, because in the Director's mind, the touch was after the halt, which was called for the foul.

Similarly, if a fencer scores a touch, there will always be a halt, and any foul that happens after the halt A) is even more likely to be accidental than a foul that occurs during the action, and B) doesn't affect the action anyway.

I'm going to get a head-start at defending this point right now and bring everyone's attention to the rules regarding the fleche. We all know that if one's fleche lands, one's leaving of the strip is not carded, but if it doesn't land (i.e. there's nothing to stop the action), one is carded for leaving the strip.

Basically what really bugs me is the idea that the two actions can be called simultaneously. Like, really, how do the two things happen at the exact same moment? I mean, certainly when they do happen at the same time, it should be called accordingly, but in much of the directing I've seen lately, there's been an overabundance of these types of calls, and in most cases, the call's been completely wrong. So many of the cases I'm referring to have had a clear pause between the foul and the touch, but these Directors insist on calling both, even though in many cases their original halt was obviously for one or the other.

Why is this?

The reason referees award touches even after a cardable offense is commited is because fencing actions are not insantaneous events like the cardable offence. They are not suggesting that the two things occurred simultaneously.

Instead, referees look at the time of initiation of the action compared to the time of the card. Any action that starts before the offense, so long as it is continuous and executes in one unit of fencing time, is allowed to complete.

The reason for this is simple fairness. Suppose that fencer X attacks fencer Y. Fencer Y parries the attack and makes an immediate riposte which lands valid on X. However, in the sliver of time between the start of Y's riposte and the landing of the touch, fencer X commits a cardable offense (such as turning the back, covering target, etc.) To deny Y the touch wouldn't be fair since their action started before X committed the cardable offense. Therefore, Y is awarded the touch and X is carded for the offense. The same rule applies for a fencer leaving the side of the strip as in your example.

One thing to note is that if the fencer scoring the touch is also the one commiting the offense, then technically the touch landed valid. However, all cardable offenses that can happen while fencing require the annullment of any touches made by the offending fencer, so the touch would be annulled when the card is given.

Hope that helps!
Dan

[keropie]

What he said.

[jeff]

nicely put

[KD5MDK]

Dan expressed the position very well. I'd like to make a pair of caveats.
1) The overriding principle is that no fencer should be advantaged by breaking the rules, nor another fencer disadvantaged by his opponent breaking them.

Originally Posted by dberke

One thing to note is that if the fencer scoring the touch is also the one commiting the offense, then technically the touch landed valid. However, all cardable offenses that can happen while fencing require the annullment of any touches made by the offending fencer, so the touch would be annulled when the card is given.

Hope that helps!
Dan

2)
This is a complicated situation, because at a halt there are several ways events could play out.
A) The halt is called, and then a fencer does something that would be a penalty during the action. For example, taking off his mask, tugging his body cord, or turning his back. Result? No penalty.
B) The halt is called, and then a fencer commits a safety or sportsmanship violation, such as cursing, jostling, or a violent hit. Result? Penalty.
C) Fencer registers a touch, and immediately makes an action which advantages him. For example, a foilist counterattacks and then covers target before the attack can arrive.
D) Fencer registers a touch, and then makes an action which does not actually advantage him. For example, a foilist makes an attack, lands valid, and then covers target. Result? No penalty, because the halt was for the touch with priority landing. Note of course that D does not overrule B.

I'm sure there's more cases than even that, but it's time for dinner.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by dberke

However, all cardable offenses that can happen while fencing require the annullment of any touches made by the offending fencer, so the touch would be annulled when the card is given.

Leaving the piste to avoid being hit?

[KD5MDK]

Did it affect or could have the outcome of the touch?

[downunder]

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

Did it affect or could have the outcome of the touch?

Sure, why not. I'm sure there are thousands of cases.

[Allen Evans]

Another principal to keep in mind in these cases is that an action that is started before the halt is allowed to finish (except in certain cases, such as the expiration of time). For instance: I start an attack and my opponent steps off the strip with one foot as it arrives. My touch is allowed to stand, even if the fencer leaving the strip occurs before the touch arrives (but AFTER my attack started).

Allen Evans