Funny (?) rules Q

[ejemyr]

Admittedly, this can't happen very often. But just for fun, I wonder what the correct call should have been (and I actually saw it happen in a friendly bout yesterday);

Foil.

FOTL (a tall guy with long legs) is pressed backwards and retrieves so that only his toes remians on the strip. He leans backward (still toe on the strip) and FOTR (small guy) goes in for infighting so close that he actually goes out from the strip with both feet while FOTL still have that toe in. No CaC. No passing since shoulders never passed. In that position they actually manage to fence a few seconds before one or the other lands a hit.

What should have been the call?

[Scotsfencer]

Halt should be called as the feet pass I beleve, This is normally referees disgression but when you have two fencers angaged in that close quarters combat..... well Yeach. lol

[Purple Fencer]

Halt should be called as the feet pass I beleve, This is normally referees disgression but when you have two fencers angaged in that close quarters combat..... well Yeach. lol

Isn't passing defined as the shoulders crossing and not the feet? If so, the action continues until a hit is scored or the director loses the action....if FOTL was still on the strip....with him going OFF in the course of the action.....that's one I've never thought about, since it usually doesn't apply to that person.

[catwood1]

Crossing is NOT defined. Its up the the referee, and referees have different limits for what is or is not passing. Shoulders is common, but by no means a "rule" or even an official interpretation as far as I can tell.

Also, we went over this a few months ago...

[Purple Fencer]

Crossing is NOT defined. Its up the the referee, and referees have different limits for what is or is not passing. Shoulders is common, but by no means a "rule" or even an official interpretation as far as I can tell.

Also, we went over this a few months ago...

What thread? I probably didn't read it.

The situation with the attacking fencer going off the end and standing toe to tow with the other guy still ON the strip is an interesting situation.

[oiuyt]

The situation with the attacking fencer going off the end and standing toe to tow with the other guy still ON the strip is an interesting situation.

Heel to heel, actually... Or should that be heel to heal?

-B

[Purple Fencer]

Heel to heel, actually... Or should that be heel to heal?

-B

So what's the call here? Left isn't off the strip, so no point against. Right IS off the end...but I don't think there's a rule that covers his situation...

Halt and reset at proper distance with no change of placement for left?? I can't think of any penalty that could be applied.

[counterattack]

So what's the call here? Left isn't off the strip, so no point against. Right IS off the end...but I don't think there's a rule that covers his situation...

Halt and reset at proper distance with no change of placement for left?? I can't think of any penalty that could be applied.

Call is: Halt. Give up. How the hell isn't there an official definition of passing? Everyone stops the tourney, goes home, and wonders WTF? Is fencing a real sport? How could they leave undefined such a simple thing? I know in men's epee this is such a big call, how can you leave to "feel" when a pass has occurred?

-ph

[Inquartata]

FOR is off the strip. He's not ON it any more, so he must be off it, whether a rule specifies what happens at his opponent's end line or not...

[kalivor]

Important bits bolded:

Admittedly, this can't happen very often. But just for fun, I wonder what the correct call should have been (and I actually saw it happen in a friendly bout yesterday);

Foil.

FOTL (a tall guy with long legs) is pressed backwards and retrieves so that only his toes remians on the strip. He leans backward (still toe on the strip) and FOTR (small guy) goes in for infighting so close that he actually goes out from the strip with both feet while FOTL still have that toe in. No CaC. No passing since shoulders never passed. In that position they actually manage to fence a few seconds before one or the other lands a hit.

What should have been the call?

So they were still fencing. No halt. No reason to call halt -- in fact, the fencing continues after the only possible reason for a halt call for a couple of seconds.

While I have trouble imagining the situation in my head, based on the facts provided the hit should be awarded.

[Purple Fencer]

Important bits bolded:


So they were still fencing. No halt. No reason to call halt -- in fact, the fencing continues after the only possible reason for a halt call for a couple of seconds.

While I have trouble imagining the situation in my head, based on the facts provided the hit should be awarded.

But FoR is off the strip....and you can't score when off the strip.

The action should be halted for that (even if there's no passing)....but where do they get reset?

[kalivor]

But FoR is off the strip....and you can't score when off the strip.

The action should be halted for that (even if there's no passing)....but where do they get reset?

Ha! That's funny.

t.26.
1. When a competitor crosses one of the lateral boundaries of the
piste with one or both feet, the Referee must immediately call ‘Halt!’.
2. If the fencer goes off the piste with both feet, the Referee must
annul everything that has occurred after the boundary has been
crossed, except a hit received by the competitor who has crossed the
boundary even after he has crossed it, provided that this hit results
from a simple and immediate action.

So ... a halt is only for going over the lateral (or rear) limits. So no halt should be called. (1)

But the fencer off with both feet can now only be scored against, according to 2. (And 4, not quoted).

So the question becomes:
Is there an unwritten assumption that breaking that fourth plane (the forward piste boundary) should result in a halt? (either because it's off the piste, or because it's passing the opponent, who is *by definition* still on the piste).

Or, do t.26.2 and 4 both follow from t.26.1 -- that is, they function under the assumption that a fencer has crossed a lateral boundary of the piste?

I lean towards the second interpretation, myself.

[kalivor]

where do they get reset?

Missed this.

Obviously, FoL has a toe on the strip, and cannot be asked to retreat further. FoL stays where they are, and FoR backs off to the appropriate distance.

Assuming they aren't moving to the en garde lines.

[tdwg83]

Actually FOL gets to put his whole foot on strip to start. FOR at appropriate distance.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Actually FOL gets to put his whole foot on strip to start. FOR at appropriate distance.

Why??

[swordwench]

Indeed, why? From t.17:

The competitors may not be replaced on guard, at their correct distance, in such a way as to place behind the rear line of the strip a fencer who was in front of that line when the bout was halted.
If he already had one foot behind the rear line, he remains in that position.

My bold. I don't see anything about gaining an extra foot out of the deal here. You stay where you were, toesies only in.

[Peach]

Inappropriate contact with a co-worker. Call the harassment counselor.

[Thierry]

@Kalivor You just pointed out that going our of the lateral (side) boundaries of the piste with one or two legs is a halt. So clearly it was a halt. If you took lateral as the end of the piste, which it is not, then it would have been a halt anyway, as FOTL already had one leg off the rear of the piste.

Also, I believe the rule of halt after the fencers have 'crossed' is to be taken literally, when they have crossed. That's how they do it in Epee anyway. So long as the opponents are past each other. Backs to each other, it's a halt. Anything short of that, cannot be halt
under pretext that they have 'crossed' as they have obviously
not. If the fencer on the right is not behind the fencer on the left, how could he have crossed him?

In a nutshell it's a halt. The point is unclear, depending on the action of the fencer on the left, whether he did a simple, immediate action (parry reposte/ stop hit) or not. If he didn't, he would have gained a metre of piste as the fencer on the right stepped out of the piste.

[mrbiggs]

FOTL (a tall guy with long legs) is pressed backwards and retrieves so that only his toes remians on the strip. He leans backward (still toe on the strip) and FOTR (small guy) goes in for infighting so close that he actually goes out from the strip with both feet while FOTL still have that toe in. No CaC. No passing since shoulders never passed.

Sounds to me like they passed.

Basically I think you came up with a situation where your definition of passing doesn't make sense.

[Purple Fencer]

Sounds like my thought on the reset was more or less correct. I'd hate to be the guy with one toe on the line, tho...wouldn't take much to bring it back too far.