hit scored with conductive jacket which is defective

[Mr. Howard]

Dear friends,
I got a question when judging a foil bout. Let me set up the situation first.
Before the bout start, two fencers' equipments have been checked, and no fault is found.
During the bout, fencer A makes a hit on the bib of the mask of fencer B, and a 'non-valid' hit (white lamp) is registered by the apparatus. The referee (that is me) did see fencer A make a hit on the bib of the mask of fencer B. Should the referee give a point to fencer A (fencer A scords) , or annul the point and make fencer B change his mask?

According to
t.51. Only the indications of the recording apparatus can be taken into consideration for
judging the materiality of hits. The Referee cannot declare a competitor to be hit
unless the hit has been properly registered by the apparatus (except as provided for in
Article t.49.1, or when a penalty hit has been awarded).


However, t.45.2
2. When during a bout an irregularity is found in the equipment which could be
caused by conditions during the bout:
Examples:
— conductive jacket with holes in which hits are registered as non-valid,
— weapon or bodywire no longer functioning,
— pressure of the spring in the point too weak,
— the travel in the point no longer regulation,
the Referee will apply neither warning nor penalty and any hit scored with the
equipment which has become defective will be awarded.


My question is that if the mask of fencer B is okay before the start of the bout (checked by the referee); however it becomes defective during the bout, acording to t.45.2, should the referee give the point to fencer A.
But according to t.51, it seems that the referee cannot give the point to fencer A. Because that The Referee cannot declare a competitor to be hit unless the hit has been properly registered by the apparatus.

Can anyone give me some suggestions?

[KD5MDK]

I presume that when you refer to the bib you are referring to the conductive portion of the bib. Your title refers to the jacket, but the principles are all the same.

t.45.2 does not apply because the hit was not scored with the mask, it was scored with the weapon of fencer A.

t.51 is directly applicable as says that you do not award a touch that does not register valid, unless it is a penalty hit or if t.49.1 applies.
It is not a penalty hit.

Extension of the valid target
1. However, hits which arrive off the target are counted as valid whenever, by reason of an abnormal position, the fencer has substituted this non-valid target for the valid target.

The fencer has not substituted non-valid target by reason of an abnormal position.

The exception therefor does not apply and so t.51 is the rule.

The touch is not annulled, it remains non-valid and Fencer B must obtain conforming equipment if his equipment turns out to be non-conforming.

[KD5MDK]

I'd like to address a few things for this thread:

1) We are using the FIE rulebook, since Mr. Howard is from outside the USA.

2) The rule is the same for all portions of a fencer's target area here, whether we are talking about the mask bib or lame jacket or a failure in their mask cord or body cord is irrelevant to the outcome.

3) This question is about a perceived valid touch registering as non-valid. The only way to award a point for a touch that registers as non-valid is according to t.49.1.

[BOliver]

I'd like to address a few things for this thread:

1) We are using the FIE rulebook, since Mr. Howard is from outside the USA.

2) The rule is the same for all portions of a fencer's target area here, whether we are talking about the mask bib or lame jacket or a failure in their mask cord or body cord is irrelevant to the outcome.

3) This question is about a perceived valid touch registering as non-valid. The only way to award a point for a touch that registers as non-valid is according to t.49.1.

(Or according to t.22.2b -- which is not the case here.)

There is no provision in the rules for a point to be awarded in the case where a conductive surface is found to be non-conductive.