The Olympic substitution rule sucks

[Army Fencer]

Among other reasons, here's mine:

My understanding is that primary purpose for rules is to keep athletes safe. If athletes are purposefully throwing themselves on the ground to create an opportunity for a substitution, it creates an unsafe environment. For that reason alone, we the IOC needs to kill this rule.

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by Army Fencer

Among other reasons, here's mine:

My understanding is that primary purpose for rules is to keep athletes safe.

no. not even close.

If athletes are purposefully throwing themselves on the ground to create an opportunity for a substitution, it creates an unsafe environment. For that reason alone, we the IOC needs to kill this rule.

For the record... if athletes are purposefully throwing themselves on the ground to create an opportunity for substitution, then they are guilty of cheating. So you argue that the IOC should kill this rule to avoid athletes hurting themselves while cheating... dumb dumb dumb.

[Jason]

It makes more sense to complain about the fact that medals aren't awarded to the alternate if he doesn't fence.

The "no substitutions except for an injury" rule isn't that bad.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by Army Fencer

Among other reasons, here's mine:

My understanding is that primary purpose for rules is to keep athletes safe. If athletes are purposefully throwing themselves on the ground to create an opportunity for a substitution, it creates an unsafe environment. For that reason alone, we the IOC needs to kill this rule.

Jon Moss is very clear. All rules are created to stop people from cheating, or to make it better for TV. Anything you thought was for safety is actually for TV.

[noahz]

Originally Posted by Jason

It makes more sense to complain about the fact that medals aren't awarded to the alternate if he doesn't fence.

The "no substitutions except for an injury" rule isn't that bad.

Agreed that not awarding a 4th medal is the core problem - except that sometimes, with a deep team (i.e. the 3rd and 4th fencer are equal in ability), you sub for tactical reasons. I.e. your 4th matches up better against their 3rd.

In previous Olympics that had the "replacement athlete" nonsense, they allowed this. No idea why they changed the rule. I can speculate it's because the IOC is twisting the FIE's arm and they have to agree to idiocy like this subbing rule to keep fencing in the Olympics).

[Mr Epee]

I suspect that this may have something to do with the brief era (2000?) where if your country didn't qualify a team, but did qualify two individual athletes, then they could use an athlete from one of the other events to enter a team.

To my knowledge, the only time this happened was when Hungary Men's Epee squad shockingly failed to make the top-8 at World Championships... and therefore failed to qualify for the Olympics. Both Kovacs and Fekete qualified as individuals, and they entered a team comprised of Kovacs, Fekete, Marsi (foilist) with 1996 bronze medalist Imre as the alternate. Had the rules allowed, I'm sure a plan would have been in place for Marsi to get 'injured' and enter the actual epee squad.

[misha]

FYI: current rules allow tactical substitutions BEFORE any team match starts,
but not during a match. So you do not have to "dive" if you want to sub your N3 with N4 for the rest of an event.

Linky:
http://www.fie.ch/download/homepage/...0pekin-ANG.pdf

[jkdjeff]

Originally Posted by Jason

It makes more sense to complain about the fact that medals aren't awarded to the alternate if he doesn't fence.

The "no substitutions except for an injury" rule isn't that bad.

This.