PDA

View Full Version : Vanni was DEFINITELY robbed



reposte
-9th October 2003, 00:39
This time I'm confident enough to say that at least three touches ought to have gone to Vanni but I counted one for Joppich
(Vanni ripostes to prime) and two were oddly enough declared simultaneous.

PM1
-9th October 2003, 01:00
....couldn't tell you , but I thought it was good viewing, apart from the lousy lighting.

Wouldn't it be a nice idea to be able to have a football type discussion after each fight, going thru the hits one by one on slow mo ??? Pipe dream/pointless to suggest......

Sophie
-9th October 2003, 11:04
I thought the Chinese girl in the Sabre was robbed on the last hit too......

veeco
-9th October 2003, 15:05
While I don't think Covaliu suffered from bad refereeing, I do think that Vanni and Tan got simultaneous touches that should have gone their way.

reposte
-10th October 2003, 21:33
Well, I'm a penitent tonight:
I've replayed the final, and save one which I think ought to have gone to Vanni, the ref was a very sharp eyed one, and consistent.
Given that it went to 15:14, naturally this is meaningful.
However, seeing as even the disputed one is well within reason for the ref to call under a strict yet different allowance for timing
then mine, I retract my early premise that Vanni was robbed. He was not.
However it was clear that he DID see things differently then the ref as far as riposte tempo is concerned and was rendered I suspect desperate by the contrast between his view and the ref's
that it probably contributed a great deal to his loosing lucidity going on to, say, the last five touches.
A good lesson to us all to accept with resignation anything the empire throws on you.
I suspect my emotional response to his loss was the fact hat I feel very much the same as far as riposte tempo's concerned.

Prongs
-21st October 2003, 15:28
Ok, don't jump down my throat as I don't know much about fencing yet, but can't they use electric scoring? Is the wire really limiting or something?

rory
-21st October 2003, 15:44
There *is* electric scoring, and it's always used. However, the electric apparatus can only tell hen a hit occurred, it can't judge (if both fencers hit simultaneously) wh ought to be awarded the point.

Prongs
-23rd October 2003, 04:35
I thought they had different colored lights that lit up depending on who hit? Maybe I misunderstood something I read...

reposte
-23rd October 2003, 07:42
They do, but more often then not both fencers hit each other, either simultaneously or at a defined time lapse,
in which case the referee is called upon to decide which fencer had right of way if at all.

Prongs
-23rd October 2003, 15:33
Well, I understand the right of way thing, but I guess I always assumed the electrical scoring "equipment" had something that told you which hit was first.

rory
-23rd October 2003, 16:37
The electrical equipment will indeed tell you which hit is "first" in a time-on-the-clock sense.

However, the "right-of-way thing", as you put it, isn't affected by time. RoW is determined by the sequence of actions performed by the fencers up until the time that the lights appear on the box, and since the box isn't "watching" the fencers and can't tell what movements they perform and whether the parries etc are correct, it can't judge the hit.

Just getting your light on first isn't sufficient, except for epee - you have to do it within the framework of RoW.

Prongs
-24th October 2003, 17:01
Right, ok, I get it. Thanks! :transport