PDA

View Full Version : Team event: Fencers in wrong order



Baldric
-13th March 2005, 18:37
Sorry if this has been discussed before, a quick search didn't find it.

In a team event, when the format is on victories (not relay) what is the penalty for a team putting fencers on in the wrong order?

I have seen it twice recently, at the Cadet Winton and at a regional team event.

The rule book apparently only refers to relay comps, which confused the ref/DT on both occasions.

Rdb811
-13th March 2005, 18:48
I suppose in theory it should be the same (i.e. black card) although it doesn't have anything like the same impact (other than having one fencer more tired and another less tired when they fence).

Since it's usually caused by mis-understanding, I'd ignore it if it were a genuine mistake.

nirvana
-13th March 2005, 18:58
Its a black card.

Australian
-13th March 2005, 19:14
Originally posted by nirvana
Its a black card.

no, it's not.

Its loss of match, which is completely different to a black card.

And since there is no provision for victories index matches in the FIE rulebook, there is no official rules on it. It is up to the tournament officials to work it out. Since there is no harm done in a victories team match by fencing one bout out of order, it is often let continue

Baldric
-13th March 2005, 19:39
Originally posted by Australian
no, it's not.

Its loss of match, which is completely different to a black card.



At what score??

At the Cadet Winton, one of the teams could have won the event if they had insisted on the (offered by the DT) 9-0 win resulting from the opposition putting up fencers in the wrong order.

If the decision had been that all unfought bouts were forfeit, the team would have tied for 1st place.

As it was, the decision was made that the only individual bout was forfeit, resulting in a 7-2 win, which made the "not at fault" team second overall by a single indicator point.

If the 9-0 result had been allowed, it seems odd to me that a team not involved could have lost first place as a result.

Rdb811
-13th March 2005, 19:44
Hence it ould be best to ignore the error - "losing" the bouts in error strikes me as being the most sensible of the three options.

Australian
-14th March 2005, 01:32
Originally posted by Baldric
At what score??

At the Cadet Winton, one of the teams could have won the event if they had insisted on the (offered by the DT) 9-0 win resulting from the opposition putting up fencers in the wrong order.

If the decision had been that all unfought bouts were forfeit, the team would have tied for 1st place.

As it was, the decision was made that the only individual bout was forfeit, resulting in a 7-2 win, which made the "not at fault" team second overall by a single indicator point.

If the 9-0 result had been allowed, it seems odd to me that a team not involved could have lost first place as a result.

again, this is not in the FIE rules, but how i've seen it interpreted:

At whatever score it is... this means you can have a 4V 2D, or 2V D1, or even more bizarrely, 0V 4D...

Saxon
-14th March 2005, 07:56
I suppose the score is up to the DT, but since fencing in the wrong order might have gained some advantage in matches already fought for the team at fault, you could argue that the match should be scored at 9-0 or 45-0.

Generally in competitions like the Excalibur and the Wintons, rules affecting whole teams are interpreted with the benefit of the doubt going to the offending team. This results in the less extreme of the possible outcomes, and a generally friendlier competition.

It can also extend to interpretations of individual rules, which are occasionally "glossed over" depending who is involved. But then I'm biased. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Bonehead
-16th March 2005, 18:54
If the decision had been that all unfought bouts were forfeit, the team would have tied for 1st place.

I think that in the event of a tie it would have been decided on the result from the match between the two sides who drew....Presumably the team you were involved with won?

Foilling Around
-17th March 2005, 11:37
Originally posted by Saxon
It can also extend to interpretations of individual rules, which are occasionally "glossed over" depending who is involved. But then I'm biased. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Oh Saxon that hurts we didn't "gloss over" we had to interpret a situation, which was far from clear, in the spirit of the weekend.

Tubby
-18th March 2005, 11:42
Like me forgetting to call the doctor to have an injury to a NW fencer verified to allow a substitution of a foilist for an epeeist, in the spirit of the weekend kind of way..... :grin:

Farrago
-19th March 2005, 15:24
I'm a little (well, completely) confused by the rules for substitution in team matches. Does there need to be a reason for substitution or is it up to the opposing team to allow/disallow?

Baldric
-19th March 2005, 20:28
Originally posted by Baldric
Sorry if this has been discussed before, a quick search didn't find it.

In a team event, when the format is on victories (not relay) what is the penalty for a team putting fencers on in the wrong order?



Ok - I was at a reffing course today and had a chance to ask this question of the trainer.

He tells me that the answer is that the "correct" penalty was for the offending team to forfeit 9-0, but that this would often not be enforced in lower level competitions.

Sounds fair enough to me.

Tubby
-20th March 2005, 22:40
Originally posted by Farrago
I'm a little (well, completely) confused by the rules for substitution in team matches. Does there need to be a reason for substitution or is it up to the opposing team to allow/disallow? At the Cadet Winton there was a tournament rule regarding subs - I think it was so that teams had to bring a full complement of fencers and not have fencers double up their internationals especially near the end when match the situation would be tight (though I could have got the wrong end of the stick).

Tubby
-20th March 2005, 22:47
Originally posted by Baldric
Ok - I was at a reffing course today and had a chance to ask this question of the trainer. :dizzy: Long long long day. At venue with kids at 8:45 am - in car park loading up at 7:10pm, carrying sleeping kids into the house at 11:10 pm. In between had a FIE ref and his class of refs at the end of the piste watching and discussing my ropey hand signals and phrasing :confused: no pressure at all :dizzy:

stevejackson
-21st March 2005, 07:16
Originally posted by Farrago
I'm a little (well, completely) confused by the rules for substitution in team matches. Does there need to be a reason for substitution or is it up to the opposing team to allow/disallow?

The rules are in the book O44 10 (qv) but in summary the team captain can substitute any fencer at any point during the match provided they do so at the end of a bout and allow one bout before the sub has to fence. The sub must be named before the match. Once substituted the replaced fencer can take no further part in the match even to replace an injured fencer.

Some competitions certainly Excalibur and perhaps Cadet Winton, as I recall, have a local rule that fencers can only fence one weapon, this is to avoid delays to the competition as the better fencers try to fence in 2 matches concurrently.

Farrago
-21st March 2005, 18:03
Originally posted by stevejackson
The rules are in the book O44 10 (qv) but in summary the team captain can substitute any fencer at any point during the match provided they do so at the end of a bout and allow one bout before the sub has to fence. The sub must be named before the match. Once substituted the replaced fencer can take no further part in the match even to replace an injured fencer.

Some competitions certainly Excalibur and perhaps Cadet Winton, as I recall, have a local rule that fencers can only fence one weapon, this is to avoid delays to the competition as the better fencers try to fence in 2 matches concurrently.

Thankyou. I've only really been in inter-uni matches where it's not much of an issue. We've only ever had 3 of us on our team (not on purpose) so don't have options of subs. Or of only fighting our favourite weapons. Seems to work out ok usually though:)

telkanuru
-23rd March 2005, 06:16
t.86 of the FIE rulebook is the relevant section for any interested...