Lets re-visit this falling thing

[Kodiak Kid]

Just got my club packet from USFA. Included is a page titled 2002-2003 rule changes.
#3. Falling is no longer an offense and is consequently no longer penalized. (It is understood that an offensive action that is launched in such a way that the fencer is not in control, and thereby falls, is disorderly fencing and does require a warning and the annuling of any touch scored).

So I read this to say it is the director's judgement whether or not the fencer is in control of his fall or not, on an offensive action. Apparently it doesn't matter if he falls during a defensive action? what if he scores while falling uncontrollably during his defensive action?

How is this being adjudicated in the real world?
Thanks for your helpful comments.

[DJ Apostrophe]

falling was an automatic card... falling is (usually) an invoulantary action... is there anything else cardable that is unintentional? (other than coming to the strip with a non-conforming weapon) also... for those who wish to add reality to the game (not a priority for me) if you were in an 'honorable' deul, there would be no honor in running your opponent through while he was on the ground... you would offer him your hand, help him up... then continue the deul...

[Chris Umbs]

Originally posted by DJ Apostrophe
for those who wish to add reality to the game (not a priority for me) if you were in an 'honorable' deul, there would be no honor in running your opponent through while he was on the ground... you would offer him your hand, help him up... then continue the deul...

You should read some descriptions of duels before you go saying that... many of them ended up on the ground with both duelists trying to bite various parts off of the other. What was considered honorable depends greatly on the time and place. Besides, you never trust your life to somebody else's honor.

Chris

[mfp]

Originally posted by Kodiak Kid
Apparently it doesn't matter if he falls during a defensive action? what if he scores while falling uncontrollably during his defensive action?

If he scored, then that wouldn't be during a defensive action, now would it?

See sections "t.7"" and "t.9" of the rules on the USFA website. The only defensive actions listed are parries.

[Purple Fencer]

Originally posted by mfp
If he scored, then that wouldn't be during a defensive action, now would it?

See sections "t.7"" and "t.9" of the rules on the USFA website. The only defensive actions listed are parries.

Well...if I were directing, Fencer A starts a bad fleche and Fencer B frantically sticks his arm out (probably wio=th his eyes closed, too!) and manages to tag A so far in advance of A landing the point that the box locks A's signal...I'd say that was scoring on a defensive action!

For myself...I was directing this past weekend. A attacked (advance-lunge) and B retreated, then tripped and fell on his tush. Maybe I was wrong, but I did not card B for falling...I WOULD have last season.

[Kodiak Kid]

O.K. I can go by the letter of the law as much as the next guy. But as far as the falling thing goes, is the "control" issue to be decided exclusively by the Director? We kicked this around in class last night and I demonstrated a couple of "controlled falls during an offensive action". Everybody laughed to see the old guy lying flat on his stomach but my colored light was the only one shining.
Just wondered if this was a revelation or just cleaning up the language of the rule. Eric?

[135711]

Dear Six Fingered Man: my solicited comment:
Falling is not longer considered an offence. Perhaps they simply developed a little more empathy for the sportsman in this case. The fencer is not always 'trying' to fall for effect, sometimes the fencer falls. As Freud once said:
"sometimes a cigar is just a cigar"

Originally posted by Kodiak Kid
Just got my club packet from USFA. Included is a page titled 2002-2003 rule changes.
#3. Falling is no longer an offense and is consequently no longer penalized. (It is understood that an offensive action that is launched in such a way that the fencer is not in control, and thereby falls, is disorderly fencing and does require a warning and the annuling of any touch scored).

So I read this to say it is the director's judgement whether or not the fencer is in control of his fall or not, on an offensive action. Apparently it doesn't matter if he falls during a defensive action? what if he scores while falling uncontrollably during his defensive action?

How is this being adjudicated in the real world?
Thanks for your helpful comments.

[MikeHarm]

This seems like one of those card at the directors discretion rules. I've had some bad experiences with those sorts of rules where I wouldn't get carded for something till I was in a close DE against someone from a director's club.

I think I'm just going to make sure to practice my footwork trying to be as balanced and controlled in my movements as possible so that I avoid falling altogether to be on the safe side.

[135711]

once again, the director is correct. people get into hassles with the directors based upon their mannerisms during the bout. at one time i felt that certain people favored me while i fenced [this is a while back], and i didn't think it was quite fair, so i paid no attention to it, knowing it would wear off. now i find the reverse is happening which is great, because it caused me to fence more strongly. looking forward to fencing again in a few weeks, see you all again.

[Kodiak Kid]

Thanks for the responses that at least made an attempt to stay on topic.

[135711]

speaking of targets, your baby picture is very cute.

[achilleus]

Originally posted by Kodiak Kid
Just got my club packet from USFA. Included is a page titled 2002-2003 rule changes.
#3. Falling is no longer an offense and is consequently no longer penalized. (It is understood that an offensive action that is launched in such a way that the fencer is not in control, and thereby falls, is disorderly fencing and does require a warning and the annuling of any touch scored).

So I read this to say it is the director's judgement whether or not the fencer is in control of his fall or not, on an offensive action. Apparently it doesn't matter if he falls during a defensive action? what if he scores while falling uncontrollably during his defensive action?

How is this being adjudicated in the real world?
Thanks for your helpful comments.

At the FIE events, refs weren't giving cards for falling for the past couple of years anyways. The new FIE rule is more of a change to bring the rule in line with current interpretation.

In other words, rather than try to enforce the rule, the FIE changed the rule to what refs were calling.

As to how refs interpret it now? Same as before at the World Cups, so far. In the US, we'll see how they adjust.

[Kodiak Kid]

achilleus, Thanks! That's kinda what I was looking for when I started this post. Appreciate the informed response. It still looks like you could score on a fall as long as the director decides you were in control? Not that it happens much but I was just curious about the interpretation of the change.

135711- As I don't do epee, you would be (once again) way off target.