PDA

View Full Version : Group three yellow cards



jtraenkner
-10th February 2006, 09:15
With the 2003(?) rule-changes, "non-presentation after being called by the ref" has been moved to the third group.

So what happens if I recieve a yellow card for this and then commit a Group one offence? Since I have neither commited a Group one offence before nor have I recieved a red card, should I be shown another yellow card?

Or the other way around:
As I understand, the first offence of non-combativity is penalised by a yellow card. Is this true even after having recieved a yellow card (G1) previously?

Sorry for my broken English.

Australian
-10th February 2006, 11:43
you will recieve a red card in both circumstances.

gbm
-10th February 2006, 11:50
Originally posted by jtraenkner
Or the other way around:
As I understand, the first offence of non-combativity is penalised by a yellow card. Is this true even after having recieved a yellow card (G1) previously?


Originally posted by Australian
you will recieve a red card in both circumstances.

Are you sure about that Australian? I have heard that since it's in a different section of t.120 to all the other ones, it doesn't count as a yellow card.
Although I now find Chubbyhubby didn't say who told him (he posted it first)...

pinkelephant
-10th February 2006, 12:15
Originally posted by jtraenkner
With the 2003(?) rule-changes, "non-presentation after being called by the ref" has been moved to the third group.

So what happens if I recieve a yellow card for this and then commit a Group one offence? Since I have neither commited a Group one offence before nor have I recieved a red card, should I be shown another yellow card?

Or the other way around:
As I understand, the first offence of non-combativity is penalised by a yellow card. Is this true even after having recieved a yellow card (G1) previously?

Sorry for my broken English.

There are no Group 3 yellow cards. Group 3 starts at red. Yellow only appears in Group 1, where their effect is additive (i.e. a second one gets you a red card) or UNGROUPED, where their effect is solely for that "offence".

jtraenkner
-10th February 2006, 12:20
It would seem logic that a yellow card is followed by a red one, but I couldn't find anything in the rules to back this up.

In t.116 it only says that you recieve a red card for a group one offence after having recieved a yellow card for an offence of the SAME group or a RED CARD for an offence of of the second or third group.

(Similar to not recieving a black card for a group 3 offence after recieving red for group one or two.)

jtraenkner
-10th February 2006, 12:30
There are no Group 3 yellow cards. Group 3 starts at red. Yellow only appears in Group 1, where their effect is additive (i.e. a second one gets you a red card) or UNGROUPED, where their effect is solely for that "offence".

Sorry, my mistake, I took them as belonging to the third group rather than ungrouped.

3 Card Trick
-10th February 2006, 12:33
The ungtrouped warning (yellow Card) for non combativity is not cumulative as it is by definition not in Group One.

A Red Card for non combativity is a penalty hit.

Therefore if you already have a Yellow card (Group One) or a Red Card, you do not lose a hit when you receive a Yellow Card (Warning) for non combativity. Capice. :)

Australian
-10th February 2006, 21:10
Originally posted by 3 Card Trick
Therefore if you already have a Yellow card (Group One) or a Red Card, you do not lose a hit when you receive a Yellow Card (Warning) for non combativity. Capice. :)

not disagreeing with you, but i don't like that at all....

jtraenkner
-10th February 2006, 21:24
Thank you for explaining.


Originally posted by 3 Card Trick
Therefore if you already have a Yellow card (Group One) or a Red Card, you do not lose a hit when you receive a Yellow Card (Warning) for non combativity. Capice. :)

But shouldn't it be the same the other way around then, too?
Recieving yellow for non combativity and then yellow again for lets say "Refusal to obey the ref".

Or in other words: do cumulative cards only cumulate with other cumulative cards (of the same group), or with any card that has been recieved before?

If the latter is true, can anyone tell me where I can find this in the rules.
Thanks again for your help.

3 Card Trick
-10th February 2006, 22:57
t114. Note this only refers to the grouped offences.

Non combativity is ungrouped and so cumulation does not apply.

In other words if it isn't part of the cumulative system then it isn't cumulative.

pinkelephant
-11th February 2006, 06:58
It's theoretically possible to get 3 yellow cards in the same fight without conceding a hit; first non-presentation at the start, then a group 1 yellow and non-combativity (the latter two in either order). Don't you just love rules!

jtraenkner
-11th February 2006, 09:59
But (if you grant me one last(?) question on this subject) isn't the annotation below the penalty chart
"If a fencer commits an offence in the First Group after having been penalised with a Red Card, for whatever reason, he receives a further Red Card."
wrong, then, and should rather read
"[...] a Red Card (2nd and 3rd group) [...]"
(as stated in t.116) since ungrouped red cards wouldn't be cumulative, either.

Ok, I lied, here's another question:

If t.114 is for grouped offences only, how do we know that a red card for non presentation will lead to a penalty hit? Except for the annotation to the penalty chart, all penalty hits are mentioned in combination with t.114, a group, leaving the rear end of the piste or non combativity.

Sorry for riding about the rules so much, I just want to know. Blame it on my German heritage.

3 Card Trick
-12th February 2006, 18:57
SWimple, because a Red Card always equals a penalty hit.

jtraenkner
-7th April 2006, 09:46
I just talked to a referee (who was refereeing in Leipzig 2005) the other day, and he said that the FIE specifically made clear that there are no ungrouped offences. The handout penalty sheet listed all those offences as group 3.

Note that "Any person not on the piste who disturbs the order..." is in t.118 and therefore group 3.

He also said that t.114 "They are cumulative..." is for all offences and that after recieving a yellow card for "non-combativity" or "non presentation", the first offence of the first grouped will be sanctioned with a red card (same vice-versa).

That's why below the penalty sheet there's an annotation that a fencer only recieves a black card in the third group after having commited an offence in the third group previously.

3 Card Trick
-7th April 2006, 10:13
The latest version of the rules post-dates Leipzig.

jtraenkner
-7th April 2006, 10:28
February 2006, I think.
And I was wondering why, if it really was all group 3, they hadn't included it.

But these offences were seperated from group 3 in t.120 (i.e. a different table cell) even before Leipzig. Would they have changed it for the World Championship and then change it back?

And there is still the problem about t.118 and "disturbing the order by any person not on the piste" being part of group 3 (even in the newest rules) and being listed among the "ungrouped" offences.

It could be interpreted as he (the referee I talked to) said even with the rules of february 2006 (forgetting the table cells for a moment).

3 Card Trick
-7th April 2006, 10:34
It is MOST DEFINITELY NOT part of Group 3, how can you have a NON FENCER as a grouped offence. There is a line after Group 3. It is below that line and before Group 4 which is immediate exclusion. The french order is simply one that follows the order of severity of the penalties.

gbm
-7th April 2006, 10:39
In the words of Paul McCartney, 'Listen To What The Man Said'.

3 Card Trick is rarely (never?) wrong on such things.