Screaming: Jesus, Mariel. Really?

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by Piste Off

PR is about controlling your agenda, not giving potential fodder for an article that will paint the sport in a bad light (e.g. Olympic Champion’s Revels Technique for Biasing Judges). It is not about lying, it is about avoiding baited questions and responding in a way that is favorable to your cause.

Thank you to Rick and FG for hitting the nail on the head.

With Rick's comments in mind consider the following.

Originally Posted by fencerX's bad example

Reporter/Parent: Is fencing safe?

Athlete/Club Owner: Well honestly, there was a guy once who got a broken foil stuck through his mask and eye socket and into his brain. It was as really, really terrible as you can so vividly imagine, right?

Compare with...

Reporter/Parent: Is fencing safe?

MrE's Prepared Response that he uses regularly: Well, as I'm sure you're aware, with any physical activity there is always a chance of injury. We are sensitive to this issue, and continually work to minimize the risk of injury to our fencers.

We do this by helping students develop healthy training habits, by selecting ability appropriate training exercises, and by ensuring that equipment is in good condition and used properly by the students under our supervision.

Historically, fencing has a low rate of injury, and is classified as a "low-risk" sport by the National Athletic Trainers Association. As such, it is in the same category as tennis, golf, swimming, and cross-country.

So, the short answer to your question is - with proper training, supervision, and equipment - yes... fencing is a safe sport.

-----------------
See... the difference? Both are honest responses. One places the sport in a postive light. One begs for unnecessary negative consideration.

This is exactly the sort of question that should be classified as easily forseable. A quality PR plan (yes, that's a real thing) would make sure that all individuals likely to come in contact with the press would be able to answer this question, and likely follow-ups, in a clear, consistant and positive manner.

[jkdjeff]

I'm not sure that giving such a heavily rehearsed answer is such a great idea, either.

Is a mild gaffe like this really worth turning our Olympic fencers (who have a real chance to increase the visibility of our sport) into machines that spew carefully crafted sound bites designed to be as bland as possible?

And what's to stop the reporter who gets that answer from yawning and going to interview someone from a different sport who will give them better content?

[Fencergrl]

Even my husband (who will very likely never be interviewed by the media) has had media training in his position in the government. It's not something an athlete thinks about (until it happens) but it is something sporting organizations need to think about and plan for.

Edit: jkdjeff
Again... the big picture. It's not important how minor a mistake it is for one fencer to not choose her words carefully. The damage is in a number of athletes making poorly worded comments that can shape how our sport is viewed.

As for the reporter looking for better content... again this is a friendly interview. They're not looking for controversy but information to present to the public on the sport. In this case you want a clear consistent message.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

Was she supposed to flat out lie?

How about taking the Fifth? Incriminating yourself is not usually a wise course.

She DID say that she had been in bouts where it became a competition to influence the referee. A plain admission of violating a rule. Cheating, in other words.

Yeah, nice to see a gold medalist confessing to cheating. In "important" sports, that's likely to start an investigation which may lead to having your medal taken away.

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

Actions that are clearly outside the spirit of the rules, especially those to influence or trick the referees, are common in almost all high level sports.

Uh...you're suggesting that that makes it OK? Really?

Don't make me go to the fallacy list.

Originally Posted by jkdjeff

So, how would you have had her answer the question?

How about something general and noncommittal, like "It might"?

Originally Posted by ViewtifulMisho

In sabre, there's no practical reason that a cut being executed with the arm bent at a 135-degree angle is any more threatening than one with the arm bent at 95-degree angle. The definition is completely arbitrary. Anything that is arbitrary and doesn't feel natural to the fencers and refs is going to cause dispute.

The 135 degree thing applies only to the feint, not the cut. That's the only place in the rules that it's mentioned.

Wierd, I know. But there it is.

Originally Posted by piste off

Guys, this is not about Mariel's comment or the purpose of screaming.

It's not?!

Absolutely, it is.

It was a bald admission of attempted cheating. That's no smarter than "lying". Both should be avoided whenever possible.

It is not about lying, it is about avoiding baited questions and responding in a way that is favorable to your cause.

It's about both, and in all candour, the integrity angle is really more important than the PR one. If the latter is actually deemed more important these days, then we live in truly decadent times...

[Mo]

I still don't think that the majority of fencers who scream, do so to influence a referee.
There are some fencers that will do anything to influence a ref.
The refs know who the honest fencers are. They really do. You can tell when watching their bouts how they treat the fencers.
You may think that screaming to influence a referee works, in real life it just annoys them. My kid whom I think is a legit fencer was starting a bout with another fencer in the World Championships. The ref was admonishing her opponent not to pull her usual theatrics, no ripping off the mask, no stomping up and down the strip etc. When my kid started listening too, he waved her off and said "not you."
They know.
The Momster

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

How about taking the Fifth? Incriminating yourself is not usually a wise course.

She DID say that she had been in bouts where it became a competition to influence the referee. A plain admission of violating a rule. Cheating, in other words.

Yeah, nice to see a gold medalist confessing to cheating. In "important" sports, that's likely to start an investigation which may lead to having your medal taken away.






Uh...you're suggesting that that makes it OK? Really?

Don't make me go to the fallacy list.

This is an interview, not a court appearance or a political argument. That's where you're all going wrong here...

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Mo

I still don't think that the majority of fencers who scream, do so to influence a referee.

God, I hope you're right...

Not that the egoistic motive is much better, but at least it isn't proscribed by a rule.

You may think that screaming to influence a referee works, in real life it just annoys them.

Possibly at the level to which you are accustomed. lower down the chain, though, I see it all the time.

At least, I can't think it's always no more than coincidence that touches disproportionately often go to the fencer who goes "Ha HA!" after a phrase, as opposed to the one who doesn't...

My kid whom I think is a legit fencer was starting a bout with another fencer in the World Championships. The ref was admonishing her opponent not to pull her usual theatrics, no ripping off the mask, no stomping up and down the strip etc.

Wouldn't be a Russian, by any chance?

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

This is an interview, not a court appearance or a political argument. That's where you're all going wrong here...

Uh...you're arguing that fallacious arguments are actually acceptable in some places?

A pig is a pig, whether encountered in a sty or in Parliament.

NB I was referring to your argument as fallacious, not her interview.

[Grimaldi]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

At least, I can't think it's always no more than coincidence that touches disproportionately often go to the fencer who goes "Ha HA!" after a phrase, as opposed to the one who doesn't...

Not that I see much screaming, but it seems most people who do yell do so when they think they've scored against an opponent, so this would seem likely. I mean, unless it's out of frustration, you don't see many people scream after THEY'VE been touched. Granted, you're specifically thinking of close calls in (primarily, I assume) sabre bouts, but I'd imagine your views overall will be skewed subconsciously by the above.

[Inquartata]

Well, yes, of course that's what it means. Of course they think they got the touch. We all think that, at least 80% of the time...

The problem is when the referee also thinks they got the touch, because they demonstrated that they thought they got the touch...vociferously.

Personally, I think this is the root cause of half the screaming in sabre: Fencers notice this skew toward awarding the touch to the one who makes the celebratory yell and/or pantomime. And they start doing it just to level the playing field, so that once again the ref has to make his own decision, not be subconsciously swayed by the histrionics of "confidence"...

[kuroutesshin]

Maybe it has to do with sabre as a weapon being the most confusing and unusual of the three- with the least resemblance to an actual combat weapon, the janky electric apparatus, and the seemingly nebulous nature of RoW, it's easier to just scream when two lights come on and hope the referee assumes it's your touch.

You're right though, Inq, that the further up the FOC foodchain you move the less problematic this becomes. Instead of screaming, I'd much like to see a Mangiarotti-esque "I'm fencing quite badly enough on my own, thank you" quip from one of the fencers!

[BrodeurNJD30]

Isnt the point of Sport is that you play to win the game?
If the referee is Influenced by you doing anything is that cheating or is that you just adapting to what they are seeing?

This occurs in majority of sports:
In Baseball a catcher moves his glove back towards the plate to make a close call a strike. Or a Batter on a close call with 3 balls will start walking down the first baseline.

In Hockey and Basketball the players continually talk to the refs to try and get them to call a penalty on the other team, if they feel something is being missed they are going to speak up on it. Perfect example is Sidney Crosby, who is called a whiner by other teams but he gets the job done.

In football they try and influence the referee by telling them what happened before they make a call, if there is a questionable catch the opposing player can be swinging his arms no, or in a fumble both teams will start point towards their endzone signifying they have the ball, it worked for Vinny and the Jets a few years ago in a playoff game.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by BrodeurNJD30

Isnt the point of Sport is that you play to win the game?
If the referee is Influenced by you doing anything is that cheating or is that you just adapting to what they are seeing?

It's cheating when there's a specific rule saying that you cannot do X, and then you do X anyway, deliberately, with intent.

That we are allowed to get away with it is not relevant in that respect.

[BrodeurNJD30]

Since when is yelling illegal? If it influences the referee, I think it is more of the refs fault. Also its not listed in the penalty chart as one.

If you are referring to t.82
"at no time is one allowed to criticize the officials or their decisions, to insult them or to attempt to influence them in anyway." "The referee must stop immediately any activity which disturbs the smooth running of the bout he is refereeing."

If the ref is being influenced by a yell maybe they shouldn't be reffing. And if they are being influenced and they don't put a stop to it then they definitely shouldn't be reffing.

So now you would have to decide as ref is this person yelling cause they or trying to influence me or another reason. And if yelling isn't allowed because of influence neither should be a fist pump, an acknowledgment, and negative body language cause all those too can be see as influencing the referee

I think this argument is similar to the on in foil regarding chest plates. Its not illegal but does it provide an advantage? Yes. And any fencer can wear one. If it gives you an advantage use it, don't complain about it.

Also I don't think the main problem is that this happens, but that she said it? Don't you want your athletes to be honest and open about their sport, not just quoting lines from Crash Davis? If you want this sport to grow in the public it needs to be colorful, we need to show personality. If every article written said "I took it one touch at a time" people wont read it. Why do reporters go to Billy Wagner, Sean Avery, Jeremy Roenick, Bret Hull, Bobby Holik, Pedro Martinez for quotes? Cause they say things that are meaningful, they give their honest opinions. If people didn't like that they would buy the newspaper everyday and we wouldn't have TV and radio stations dedicated to sport.

[kuroutesshin]

There was a day when one could be punished for ANY vocalizations on the strip- one was expected to be silent. It's usually a 3rd-group red card under "fencer disturbing order on the strip" or "dishonest fencing," depending on yours interpretations on t.82.

Your reading of that passage neglects t.83: The Referee and/or the Technical Directory, on their own
authority or at the request of an official delegate of the FIE or
of the Organizing Committee, can decide to expel from the
competition venue, with or without a warning, any person who
by his gestures, attitude or language disturbs the good order or
smooth running of the event.

There's also t.87, which penalizes dishonest fencing and requires all bouts be a "frank and courteous encounter." Screaming to influence the decision of a judge is prohibited in t.87 by the passage "...to this end, they must remain still while the referee is making his decision..."

But the single most important prohibition is in t.83, which says: "At no time is one allowed to criticize the Officials or thier descisions, to insult them or to attempt to influence them in any way."

I hate the screaming. I discourage my squad from talking for any reason. It's disruptive, it's unsportsmanlike, and it reduces a complex and elegant weapon to mere bullying, and I will card a fencer in any bout I direct that does it.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by BrodeurNJD30

Since when is yelling illegal? If it influences the referee, I think it is more of the refs fault. Also its not listed in the penalty chart as one.

If you are referring to t.82
"at no time is one allowed to criticize the officials or their decisions, to insult them or to attempt to influence them in anyway."

You answered your own question.

If the ref is being influenced by a yell maybe they shouldn't be reffing. And if they are being influenced and they don't put a stop to it then they definitely shouldn't be reffing.

You're assuming that (a) they realize they're being influenced, and (b) their egos even permit them to consider the possibility that they are being influenced.

How far do you want to carry this rationale, that anything you can get away with doing is OK until you get caught? That the rules are only there to be broken in the name of winning at all costs? Can we falsify inspection marks and sleep well at night so long as the ref doesn't notice? Put switches in our weapons?

Aside from the rules themselves, there is such a thing as personal integrity. If I'm checking the sheet after a pool and I notice that a bout I won 5-4 has been recorded as 5-1, or even if a bout I lost is recorded as a win for me, and the other guy doesn't notice---I should just be smug and keep my mouth shut?

In a sport, IMO, you should win on your skill in that sport---not on duplicity.

So now you would have to decide as ref is this person yelling cause they or trying to influence me or another reason.

This is why it isn't penalized: Because it's almost impossible to judge intent to influence, for most refs.

But when a fencer admits to doing it...

And if yelling isn't allowed because of influence neither should be a fist pump, an acknowledgment, and negative body language cause all those too can be see as influencing the referee

Agreed.

Also I don't think the main problem is that this happens, but that she said it? Don't you want your athletes to be honest and open about their sport, not just quoting lines from Crash Davis?

I want them not to cheat. Is that asking so much?

If you want this sport to grow in the public it needs to be colorful, we need to show personality.

Thesis not proven. Assertion is not evidence.

[KD5MDK]

I hate the screaming. I discourage my squad from talking for any reason. It's disruptive, it's unsportsmanlike, and it reduces a complex and elegant weapon to mere bullying, and I will card a fencer in any bout I direct that does it.

You will have a short refereeing career outside of the local level, I believe. One of the important things in a referee is to follow the accepted standards and practices along with the other referees so that fencers can receive a consistent experience as much as possible. Carding fencers for screaming or talking unless it is excessive is not in line with the standard practices.

[Craig]

Inq. Where does your "attempt to influence the referee" end/begin?

If I take it to the nth, then starting to walk back to my en guard line when it's a close call that I think I should have is an attempt. So is staying still when I think the call should be simul, or my attack off target.

Heck, even leaving the line out after my opponent runs into it could be "an attempt to influence" the referee.

Where does it end?

IMO that rule is too subjective to be enforced. What constitutes and attempt to influence? I don't think that yelling passes that test because you can't know the intent 100%.