How some foil referees break rules

Discussion in 'Rules and Referee Questions' started by Malicia, Mar 28, 2019.

  1. posineg

    posineg DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    35
    I wish I had time to pour through all the video to find what I am looking for... I will say this with all humor intended, a quick example would be most of what Malicia has posted.
    Funny. Seriously, we seem to have lost track somewhere. I have never denied the rules need interpretations. We cannot even govern without inter. to do the very basic. What I do argue is that some rules are very clear and should not be ignored.
     
    Michael Comte likes this.
  2. wwittman

    wwittman DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2019
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    43
    Just out of curiosity, let’s say we here all said ‘yes. You’re entirely right. Foil refs are breaking the rules’

    Then what?
    You go home happy?
    Because surely nothing else changes.
     
  3. jkormann

    jkormann Podium

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,240
    Likes Received:
    248
    My argument exactly. We, the posters of f.net, have no power.
     
  4. posineg

    posineg DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    35
    Misery love company? The voice of the masses can be heard. Lobby. Movements start with the smallest pebble.
     
  5. sdubinsky

    sdubinsky DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    326
    Likes Received:
    82
    what happens is another long rant and the thread continues anyway
     
    posineg and wwittman like this.
  6. Malicia

    Malicia Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2019
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    39
    Of course : after a parry, not for the attack!
    And that's very logical.

    It's an invented affirmation.
    It's embarassing for you, not for me.

    In fact, I think it's difficult for non-fencer.
    But you can explain it : the fencing phrase, the priority, and how it's logical (in a martial way...).

    But yes, foil and saber could vanish from olympic
    Oh, thank you for your honesty.
    It's the good way for mental health in the fencing world.
    So an another example, an another case....
     
    Michael Comte likes this.
  7. sdubinsky

    sdubinsky DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    326
    Likes Received:
    82
    Four questions for you:

    1) If a counterattack lands before the attack does, who gets the touch?
    2) Does it matter that when the attacker lands his hit, he has 10cm of blade in his belly?
    3) You translated some French earlier as saying that a single crossover step makes the action a preparation. Is that correct?
    4) When you fleche, do you cross your legs over?
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019
  8. ChrisL

    ChrisL DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2012
    Messages:
    142
    Likes Received:
    28
    • ChrisL said:

    • Can I ask a slight side question to the guys asking for this alternate approach to the rules (posineg, malicia, comte etc.), can you guys find a video example online of fencing being refereed the way you guys would like? Preferably at a world class level but beggars can't be choosers.

    I think you've misunderstood. I'm asking for a match that is refereed the way you want it to be.
    Those matches Malicia is posting are generally recent from world class events, they are refereed and all the fencers follow the rules you disagree with.

    I'm essentially asking, at what point was the fencing community fencing the way you wanted it to? I've got a fair few historical videos so I can maybe find video from a year if any of you give one. Or even better if you can provide some video
     
  9. jkormann

    jkormann Podium

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,240
    Likes Received:
    248
    Only if the people in power are listening.
     
    posineg likes this.
  10. Malicia

    Malicia Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2019
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    39
    Is it different from what I 've said : "Fencing is a simulation of sword fight"?
    Fencing a sport ? Of course! I pratice.
    Fencing a game? Of course,

    For example, Call of duty is a video GAME, a E-sport... and it's a simulation of weapon fight

    Read article t89-4-a : Only the fencer who is attacked is counted as hit If he makes a stop hit on his opponent’s simple attack;

    The real matter is priority. cf rules art t83-1

    Read French : Article t84-4 : "La passe-avant est une préparation et sur cette préparation toute attaque simple a la priorité."

    Yes.
     
    Michael Comte likes this.
  11. sdubinsky

    sdubinsky DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    326
    Likes Received:
    82
    --------
    ---------
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019
  12. Michael Comte

    Michael Comte DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2019
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    29
    Passe avant is a way to move forward crossing the legs.
    Fleche is a way to attack, once the crossing of the legs is done, your attack is over. You can go on running to get back your balance (or to avoid a riposte), but you don't have the priority anymore.

    This is why I tell you that in the last example, to left guy is not doing a fleche, he is running.
     
    posineg likes this.
  13. sdubinsky

    sdubinsky DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    326
    Likes Received:
    82
    That's not what a strict reading of the rules says. Blah, blah, you don't believe in a strict reading of the rules, just in the "spirit of foil", blah blah blah, but Mal does, which is why I"m talking to her, not to you.

    I swear, this is like playing whack-a-mole.
     
  14. Malicia

    Malicia Made the Cut

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2019
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    39
    In fact, the word "fleche" has two meanings.
    You can find this two meanings in the glossary on FIE's web site (page 4).
    * First meaning : "An offensive progression in which the fencer throws his/her body out of balance in a forward action preceded by a straightening of the arm and with an alternative power stroke of the legs."
    * Second meaning : "Passing forward in running"

    First meaning, the fleche is an attack because it incluse "straithening of the arm".
    Second meaning, the fleche is a move with legs.

    Read t83-2-a : "The simple attack, direct or indirect, is correctly executed when the straightening of the arm, the point threatening the valid target, precedes the initiation of the lunge or the flèche."
    That's the second meaning.
    Lunge is not attack : it's a move with legs.
    Flèche too.

    You can find the first meaning in rules at Art t25 or t26 with : "flèche attack"

    No, it's a fleche, with the second meaning: a move with legs.

    Every moves with legs (without straightening of the arm) are just preparation : steps (art t83-2-d), flèche (art t83-2-d), lunge (art t83-2-d), passe-avant (art t84-4)

    Flèche without straightening of the arm : NO priority
    Art t84-4 : "Continuous steps forward, with the legs crossing one another, constitute a preparation and on this preparation any simple attack has priority."
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019
  15. posineg

    posineg DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    35
    I think there needs to be a acknowledgement of t.83, specifically t.83.2.4.

    With the absence of blade actions until the fencer starts to extend their blade, everything is prep and does not establish a valid attack.

    It is hard for me to except DangerMouses premise that any position of the blade is threatening, which is the whole forming a compound attack with absence of blade. If your opponent can pull point in line before you start your attack, then it does not matter.
     
  16. DangerMouse

    DangerMouse Podium

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    3,295
    Likes Received:
    242
    That is not my premise. My premise is that the rules are non-specific to the point at which it becomes threatening, so any interpretation of that point could be argued as valid.
     
  17. Allen Evans

    Allen Evans Podium

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2003
    Messages:
    4,902
    Likes Received:
    974
    How much extension will be sufficient? It should be written into the rules if this is what we are defining as an attack. 1 cm? 10 cm? 20 cm? In what plane? I assume that it should be horizontal and deviations should not be allowed.

    And if we pick a number, and I argue with the referee that the opponent did not extend "enough", or their extension was not horizontal and mine was both sufficient and "more horizontal", who decides which extension is correct?

    "Fencing by protractor"
     
  18. posineg

    posineg DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    35
    We should be able to define extending without having to measure, it is a foundation to fencing after all. You are either extending or not. If the Director cannot discern the "Timing" of your extension compared to your opponent, then you are not making your action noticeable.
     
  19. Allen Evans

    Allen Evans Podium

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2003
    Messages:
    4,902
    Likes Received:
    974
    No. There have been many many posts on this thread about how referees are not following the rules. The counter-argument is that the rules are not clear and that many actions (such as "threatening") are not well defined and are open to broad interpretations. So a simple way to get the upper hand in this discussion is to simply illustrate a definition of an action (such as "threatening" or "extension") that are so clear that they would require the referees to follow the rule. Either you can define the action or you can't.

    Fall back arguments to "the foundation of fencing" or "everybody knows that..." are simply statements about preconceived assumptions about what fencing "should be", and are lazy arguments at best. As I have posted very early in this thread (and in other threads in this forum) one of the reasons that fencing has evolved is that people have challenged the underlying assumptions that use to govern fencing ("one must only parry the final attack" as an example) and so the sport has changed to accommodate those challenges, sometimes with unintended consequences.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019
    DangerMouse likes this.
  20. posineg

    posineg DE Bracket

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    35
    Understandable, If you as a fencer need to have the minutia in order to fence, that is what m. is for. Every word in the entire world has a definition, ad infinitum. For Extend:
    Verb (used with object)
    to stretch out; draw out to the full length: He extended the measuring tape as far as it would go.
    to stretch, draw, or arrange in a given direction, or so as to reach a particular point, as a cord, wall, or line of troops.
    to stretch forth or hold out, as the arm or hand: to extend one's hand in greeting.
    to place at full length, especially horizontally, as the body or limbs.
    SEE MORE
    Verb (used without object)
    to be or become extended; stretch out in length, duration, or in various or all directions.
    to reach, as to a particular point.

    None of the definitions above mention a minimum amount, the word is a verb and not a Noun. I don't think you can quantify a verb but only the result of the verb... but hey, I am no language major.
     

Share This Page