Mistakes Referees Make When

[Insipiens]

Ehhh. To tbhe best of my knowledge the center of the action determines the center for the next phrase. As much as I'd love for the guy that fleched at me to have to give distance while I just stand there, that's not really the correct way to do it. Likewise the meter penalty should be assessed after the center is reestablished, no?

My understanding is:
normal rule - both fencers give ground from the middle
if there was a fleche or corps a corps - guilty fencer gives ground, other fencer stays where he is
one fencer off the piste - fencer staying on the piste advances one metre from where he was when the other fencer went off.

Ground gained or lost
t.24. When the order ‘Halt!’ is given ground gained is held until a hit has
been given. When competitors are replaced on guard, each fencer should
retire an equal distance in order to keep fencing distance (cf. t.17.2/4).

t.25. However, if the bout has been stopped on account of corps à corps, the fencers are replaced on guard in such a position that the competitor who
has sustained the corps à corps is at the place which he previously occupied;
this also applies if his opponent has subjected him to a flèche
attack, even without corps à corps.


t.28. 1. A competitor who crosses one of the lateral boundaries of the piste
with one or both feet is penalised. When the competitors are replaced
on guard, the opponent of the competitor who has crossed the lateral
boundary will step forward one metre from the position he occupied
when his opponent left the piste; the competitor who is penalised
must retire in order to resume the correct fencing distance.

2. If the exercise of this penalty places a competitor with both feet
beyond the rear limit of the piste, that competitor is considered as
having been hit.

3. A competitor who crosses one of the lateral boundaries of the piste
with one or both feet — e.g. when making a flèche — to avoid being
hit will be penalised as specified in Articles t.114, t.116, t.120.

Question - if both fencers go off the piste do they both advance a metre and start behind each other?

[Purple Fencer]

Question - if both fencers go off the piste do they both advance a metre and start behind each other?

Now THAT'S one I hadn't considered.

[Mac A. Bee]

...a reasonable unnecessary and ostentatious show, instead of doing it all in your head and pointing out where you want the fencer gaining ground...

I don't understand reasonable unnecessary but as to a show, my practice is resultant of (mostly younger) fencers, upon my pointing and saying On Guard ask Huh? or Wha?, look puzzled and delay the bout. Demonstrating what is going on in my head facilitates bouts.

[catwood1]

I don't understand reasonable unnecessary but as to a show, my practice is resultant of (mostly younger) fencers, upon my pointing and saying On Guard ask Huh? or Wha?, look puzzled and delay the bout.

Reasonably unnecessary being the more polite version of "friggin pointless."

You can't just point to a spot on the strip and say "put your front foot here?"

Demonstrating what is going on in my head facilitates bouts.

I don't know what to say here...

[Mac A. Bee]

You can't just point to a spot on the strip and say "put your front foot here?"

As in my previous post, after pointing and saying On Guard younger fencers' responses are bout-delaying.

[dcrocket]

It is nice to have something to point to when they took too far. But yeah, I wouldn't count them most of the time. Of course, when someone is about to be pushed off strip it's good to be as accurate as reasonable without making a production of it. Telling someone "move back a spot" is better than wrongly awarding a touch. But I wouldn't expect to go up and say 1,2,3,4...

But it has been done....

[LordShout]

But it has been done....

Not only have I seen it done but at Midwest Fencing Conference Championships a few years ago I watched some poor mathematically challenged ref repeatedly lose count and start over again. The center of action was in between the guard lines, its not like it was going to change much of anything.

[parrythis]

I'll add a couple:

10) Refs that deny a fencer their 10 minute recovery time between bouts saying that, "they have to leave the tournament and be somewhere else", then hang around and are one of the last people to leave.

11) Refs that make disparaging remarks about fencers that are not members of their club.

Yes - I've seen both happen. Coincidentally, the same ref.

Forgot to mention. During a foil bout, I saw this same ref take a single on-target light (for the fencer NOT from her club) and call it "simultaneous attack, nothing done".

[gatsby]

Forgot to mention. During a foil bout, I saw this same ref take a single on-target light (for the fencer NOT from her club) and call it "simultaneous attack, nothing done".

I hope they stop that "ref" from ever directing again.

[remistress]

Forgot to mention. During a foil bout, I saw this same ref take a single on-target light (for the fencer NOT from her club) and call it "simultaneous attack, nothing done".

My personal favorite was a referee, upon seeing one light said, "I didn't see where it hit. No touch."

[Purple Fencer]

My personal favorite was a referee, upon seeing one light said, "I didn't see where it hit. No touch."

And the only proper reply to the last 2 idiots is "Bout committee...now."

[catwood1]

And the only proper reply to the last 2 idiots is "Bout committee...now."

I know you're just making a point, but in case anybody read that, they wouldn't realize thats actually not the best course of action. You need to get the referee to admit there was only 1 light on, who's side it was on, etc BEFORE calling the bout committee.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

I know you're just making a point, but in case anybody read that, they wouldn't realize thats actually not the best course of action. You need to get the referee to admit there was only 1 light on, who's side it was on, etc BEFORE calling the bout committee.

Yup...otherwise you're just getting yourself a yellow card on top of the lost touch.

[remistress]

And the only proper reply to the last 2 idiots is "Bout committee...now."

Oh, I completely agree. I, unfortunately, was refereeing and saw this on the adjacent strip. The ref. in question...would not erm care/take kindly to me pointing out that the call was highly against the rules.

[nahouw]

I know you're just making a point, but in case anybody read that, they wouldn't realize thats actually not the best course of action. You need to get the referee to admit there was only 1 light on, who's side it was on, etc BEFORE calling the bout committee.

True. The only reason that you can call the bout committee is for a mis-application of a rule. The question to the referee would be "but it was only one light" and then his response would be what would enable the fencer to call the bout committee, since a referee cannot not award a touch that was duly registered by the machine -- unless, of course, the opponent had asked for their weapon to be checked and there was then a reason to annul the touch in question.

[bigdawg2121]

Actually the ref that said, "I didn't see where it hit; no touch", has effectively admitted that there was a valid touch registered on the box.

[Mauler]

You guys are all going about it the wrong way. You're assuming that there is even a functional BC to begin with. Clearly a sign that you've all been exposed to sanity and competence.

[catwood1]

You guys are all going about it the wrong way. You're assuming that there is even a functional BC to begin with. Clearly a sign that you've all been exposed to sanity and competence.

Oh, I've seen both, but I tend to assume competence (probably a mistake).

1 Situation I have seen:

Referee is talking to spectator during the bout, effectively making fun of the fencer.

Unfortunate Fencer: "Sir, would you mind not making fun of me during the bout, I find it kind of disrespectful."
Referee "Blackcard!!!"
"Can I appeal this, this doesn't seem fair."
"Appeal it to who"
"The Bout comitee"
"I am the bout comitee"
"sigh..."

[KD5MDK]

Doesn't sound like much of a loss of a tournament. But I presume there was an entry fee involved.

[epeemike81]

Oh, I've seen both, but I tend to assume competence (probably a mistake).

1 Situation I have seen:

Referee is talking to spectator during the bout, effectively making fun of the fencer.

Unfortunate Fencer: "Sir, would you mind not making fun of me during the bout, I find it kind of disrespectful."
Referee "Blackcard!!!"
"Can I appeal this, this doesn't seem fair."
"Appeal it to who"
"The Bout comitee"
"I am the bout comitee"
"sigh..."

Where was this?

I'd like to never attend a tournament there.

-m