Unsportsmanlike Behavior

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

I'd like to turn that statement around and ask:

What would this sport be like if we DIDNT card people for every "stupid" rule infraction?

I put stupid in quotes because I'm not sure if it's supposed to be the rules that are stupid, or the fencer, or the infraction. And, who decides which rule/fencer/infraction is stupid. Maybe someone can enlighten me on this.

.

Its a case by case basis.

I've had times in my growth where my uniform didn't fit as well as it should and I didn't pass the jacket-knickers overlap. Theres no way I could afford a new set of whites, the director knew this, he didnt card me. Its sport beneficial.

I can think of more reasons why its beneficial to be mindful of how and when you enforce the rules.

[pinkelephant]

Its a case by case basis.

I've had times in my growth where my uniform didn't fit as well as it should and I didn't pass the jacket-knickers overlap. Theres no way I could afford a new set of whites, the director knew this, he didnt card me. Its sport beneficial.

No it isn't. Suppose a blade had broken and disappeared up inside your jacket, injuring you or worse? This is a SAFETY issue. I have refused to fence people in club when they had insufficient overlap, and I have failed a jacket very recently which didn't overlap the breeches at all. The fencer refused to try to borrow one, and withdrew from the competition. I have also failed two white jackets with holes in the front sleeve where they had rubbed against foil lames; in both cases the fencer was trying to argue the toss, and in both cases a parent was horrified at what might have happened to their precious offspring and has borrowed or bought a new jacket - and thanked me.

[Joe biebel]

Let me guess... Guantanamo Fencers Club?

.

The GFC has yet to produce any "world class" fencers or coaches, but by golly they are well behaved.

[Joe biebel]

I agree with pinkelephant's post. I will admit to feeling guilty for not enforcing a rule on overlap, etc. in the past. I have yet to feel bad or guilty about enforcing rules. Hmmm, makes me think I should maybe just enforce the rules. I have always felt that if you can't afford to fence safely, don't fence. I think D+F+P=Hadouken!'s example was a particularly bad one if trying to elicit agreement.

[bigdawg2121]

Not that I'm in support of not following the rules but I think there are good examples of a "stupid card". I particularly enjoyed this weekend, while watching a friend fence JWS, seeing the ref stop several bouts and award cards for hair barely touching the lame. Is it an infraction? Sure is. Dumb to card for in these instances? Probably. The hair was still mostly up and no more likely to catch a blade than it would have been otherwise nor likley to prevent any touches outside of those that occur in a bizarro world which exists only within the boundaries of philosophical fencing rules thought experiment. What it did do was interrupt the flow of several 5 touch bouts and give a free time out to both fencers and occasionally time for a word of advice or encouragement. Saber bouts move way too quickly for the infraction to occur again (really doesn't put anyone in danger of losing a touch b/c the hair won't mocve again in 2 or 3 actions) and relatively few infractions occur in saber bouts after the bout has begun...all the fencers and coaches seemed annoyed by these delays. The ref was correct but damn if anyone really would have blamed him for letting the bouts finish and maybe walking up to the girls and saying "hey, I'm going to card if I think you're hair is looking at the lame a little funny so watch it".

[OROD]

Not I'm in support of not following the rules but I think there are good examples of a "stupid card"...

Yes, but there's a big difference here. The example you site is of a ref anally enforcing the letter of the rules while ignoring the spirit of the rules. Carding someone for clear unsportsmanlike behavior is exactly what the rule against unsportsmanlike behavior is meant for.

.

[bunbury]

No it isn't. Suppose a blade had broken and disappeared up inside your jacket, injuring you or worse? This is a SAFETY issue. I have refused to fence people in club when they had insufficient overlap, and I have failed a jacket very recently which didn't overlap the breeches at all. The fencer refused to try to borrow one, and withdrew from the competition. I have also failed two white jackets with holes in the front sleeve where they had rubbed against foil lames; in both cases the fencer was trying to argue the toss, and in both cases a parent was horrified at what might have happened to their precious offspring and has borrowed or bought a new jacket - and thanked me.

In America, we have this (some say illusion) called "freedom of choice." I understand that England is a bit of a nannystate, but they chose the unsafe route; let 'em deal with the consequences.

bigdawg2121 mentions hair on lame... no one seemed to care about the hair all over the girls in the Div1 WS finals

[bigdawg2121]

Yes, but there's a big difference here. The example you site is of a ref anally enforcing the letter of the rules while ignoring the spirit of the rules. Carding someone for clear unsportsmanlike behavior is exactly what the rule against unsportsmanlike behavior is meant for.

.

I'd argue that this conversation, at least on the level of this thread, has moved away from accepting the spirit of the rules as being worth preserving and toward enforcing the letter the rules....really, if we accept that the goal is to enforce the spirit of the rules, then we accept that the referee has the discretion to determine this spirit. If that's the case then this thread is far, far beyond it's usefulness or purpose, especially for everyone that didn't see the incident in question (arguably for everyone that didn't see it and isn't also a higher ranking referee).

[OROD]

I'd argue that this conversation, at least on the level of this thread, has moved away from accepting the spirit of the rules as being worth preserving and toward enforcing the letter the rules....really, if we accept that the goal is to enforce the spirit of the rules, then we accept that the referee has the discretion to determine this spirit. If that's the case then this thread is far, far beyond it's usefulness or purpose, especially for everyone that didn't see the incident in question (arguably for everyone that didn't see it and isn't also a higher ranking referee).

Well this may be true, but I think the point is that the directors are just not enforcing these ruels as much as they should. I know that on the strip next to mine during pools in Atlanta, there was a fencer who yelled (sometimes twice) really loudly after every touch. If it was annoying to me, how must it been for the poor fencers who had to deal with it while fencing him? I'd imagine one good Red card for disturbing order would have quickly solved that problem, but that never happened.

.

[mrbiggs]

Yes, but there's a big difference here. The example you site is of a ref anally enforcing the letter of the rules while ignoring the spirit of the rules. Carding someone for clear unsportsmanlike behavior is exactly what the rule against unsportsmanlike behavior is meant for.

.

The spirit of the rule was not, in my opinion, meant to stop people from getting too engrossed in the bout, from celebrating after touches, or even becoming intense to the point that some would view it as aggressive. There's a line, the ref made a judgement call that the fencer had not crossed the line, that's that.

Would a group three red have been out of place? I don't know, I didn't see it. From the description it sounds like it would have been at least somewhat justified.

But which would diffuse the situation more, pulling out the red card, or verbally warning the fencer that his action was borderline cardable? The rule was created to diffuse situations, and I think that the ref followed the spirit of the rule exactly in that sense.

[mrbiggs]

Well this may be true, but I think the point is that the directors are just not enforcing these ruels as much as they should. I know that on the strip next to mine during pools in Atlanta, there was a fencer who yelled (sometimes twice) really loudly after every touch. If it was annoying to me, how must it been for the poor fencers who had to deal with it while fencing him? I'd imagine one good Red card for disturbing order would have quickly solved that problem, but that never happened.

.

Yelling on the strip at yourself and not another fencer is not a card, and you're suggesting a misapplication of the rule. If we start that we'll have fencers being carded for speaking during a bout.

[OROD]

Yelling on the strip at yourself and not another fencer is not a card, and you're suggesting a misapplication of the rule. If we start that we'll have fencers being carded for speaking during a bout.

No, I'm not suggesting a misapplication of the rule. I'm suggesting that yelling repeatedly after each tough is unsportsmanlike and does not preserve order on the strip.

.

[mrbiggs]

No, I'm not suggesting a misapplication of the rule. I'm suggesting that yelling repeatedly after each tough is unsportsmanlike and does not preserve order on the strip.

.

In addition to being against the majority of fencers as well as current interpretations of the rules, that idea could lead to a fencer being carded for saying anything at all on the strip.

We've had a ton of yelling threads. It's not against the rules, and won't be.

[downunder]

In America, we have this (some say illusion) called "freedom of choice." I understand that England is a bit of a nannystate, but they chose the unsafe route; let 'em deal with the consequences.

I would have thought with the sue-happy culture in the US such blatant negligence by the referee would be more frowned upon.

No, I'm not suggesting a misapplication of the rule. I'm suggesting that yelling repeatedly after each tough is unsportsmanlike and does not preserve order on the strip.

.

There is no problems with yelling after each touch. Yelling at the opponent is a different matter.

[NotIndPk]

....to me, that a fencer:

- wins a bout against tough, tough opponent;
- turns around and yells/roars;
- turns BACK towards his opponent, gets within inches of him and yells/roars again;

....and the responses on this thread include (paraphrasing):
- it's okay;
- the referee did the right thing;
- keep the bigger picture in mind;
- a group III red MIGHT have been justified;
- what would have the card accomplished?;
- so %$#$%^ what?;

Ladies and Gentlemen (or lack thereof): this country is going to hell in a handbasket...... get me a blade (pun intended) so that I can cut a hole and get out of the handbasket!!!!!!!!

[Gav]

So everyone needs to shut up, because we're essentially talking about a fencer and a referee. Nothing is going to come from this except bad feelings.

I believe that this may already have happened.

I think people should stop. Take stock and consider carefully what they may want to write. We only really have one side of the story here. We don't even know what happened afterwards... so it's fair to say that people discussing the merits of a particular rule application are not discussing it from a full a account of the story.

To me this looks like a thread that's played out and is passed any useful discussion.

[jBirch]

Would a group three red have been out of place? I don't know, I didn't see it. From the description it sounds like it would have been at least somewhat justified.

But which would diffuse the situation more, pulling out the red card, or verbally warning the fencer that his action was borderline cardable? The rule was created to diffuse situations, and I think that the ref followed the spirit of the rule exactly in that sense.

A better question (that was already asked by Peet eons ago in this thread) is what exactly does a GIII Red to the winner after the final touch DO?

James.

[Mo]

bigdawg2121 mentions hair on lame... no one seemed to care about the hair all over the girls in the Div1 WS finals

There was some hair but not all that much. Who had the hair issue going?
The momster

[Goldgar]

A better question (that was already asked by Peet eons ago in this thread) is what exactly does a GIII Red to the winner after the final touch DO?

It occurs to me that, after the bout is over, the fencer could be considered a spectator, so the card could be a G3 Yellow, which *would* have ongoing ramifications. It's stretching a point, but if one is looking for a meaningful punishment short of expulsion ...

[KD5MDK]

Fencers are fencers until the competition is over (medals awarded).