Search Forum Home   Discussions  Ask the Ref Doctor  Should a judge ...  Should a judge score all techniques?    6/14/2006 6:38:48 AM vincentlo 16 posts Should a judge score all techniques? All these discussions about whether judges should score a technique (double kick, punch, etc.) or not beg these following questions, which I remember caused a lot of disagreements even among IRs at a referee seminar of a national tournament a few years ago. Should judges score a technique that's outside the ring but before the referee calls Kal-yeo? How about a technique that follows an illegal technique like pushing, holding,grabbing, or yanking your opponent's hair from the back of the helmet (don't laugh--this actually happened when I was the center ref, and I didn't know till a judge told me afterwards), but the referee isn't calling the penalty? Thanks, Vincent Lo  6/14/2006 7:06:38 AM bckwh 104 posts Re: Should a judge score all techniques? Mr. Lo, thank you once again for an excellent question for this Forum. It is questions like these that help to make this Forum a success. Now, to answer your question... Scoring points for techniques out of bounds- Judges should, if possible, always focus their attention on whether an attack meets the criteria for a valid point (proper attacking implement, sufficient power, proper socring area). Many times, that is a full-time job. Sometimes it is easy for a Corner Judge to tell if a competitor is out of bounds, sometimes it is not so easy to determine, based the viewing angle. If a judge can clearly determine that a competitor is out of bounds when an otherwise valid point would be awarded, that judge should not score the point. Logically, a valid point can only be scored in the field of play. If there is any doubt about whether the competitor is in the field of play, the corner judge should award the point, given that the criteria for a valid point is met. If there is a dispute by the coach arising from the fact that a point did not get scored, each judge should speak to their field of view in relation to the valid point. Some may argue that all actions are valid unless and until the Referee declares Kalyeo. That is a wonderful assumption in a perfect and ideal world where all Referees are highly mobile, agile, and on top of every second of action. We know that this is not the case. So, as a part of a team effort, when a Judge has a clear view of a competitor scoring out of bounds, that Judge should not score the point. Even better, an alert Referee will monitor the scoreboard and, should a point be awarded while the competitor is out of bounds, the Referee will call Kalyeo, Shigan, confer with the Judges (informing them of the decision to annuul the point because of the out of bounds), Inform both coaches of the decision, Annul the point and continue the match. The TA may also assist in matters such as this by pointing out to the Referee that a point was scored while the competitor(s) was/were out of bounds. The consideration here is that a player should not be able to gain an unfair advantage in competition because of the ineptness or lack of skills by the Referee. I am sure that this will not stop the debates, but an exchange of ideas that incorporates logic and the best interests of fair play is a healthy thing. Regarding whether to score a technique that follows an illegal technique- As a Corner Judge, again, one is only concerned with determining whether an attack meets the criteria for awarding a valid point. Only the Referee can determine if an action is illegal. It is never the judge's responsibility (or expectation) to determine what is an illegal action, even if it is clear to them from their point of view. An action is not illegal until the Referee declares that action to be illegal. So, the brief answer is that the Judges should score every technique that meets the criteria (stated in the former paragraph) for a valid point; the Referee will determine illegality and will (should) penalize and annul points as needed. Let me add that, retroactively informing the Referee of an illegal action should not be the reason for awarding a penalty. The Referee must see the violation in order to penalize a competitor. A good TA will assist the Referee by informing the Referee that someillegal actions are taking place that are escaping the Referee's notice. This should have the effect of alerting the Referee to be more vigilant of the competitors' actions without telling or demanding that the Referee assess a penalty. ~BHarris  6/14/2006 7:22:42 PM vincentlo 16 posts Re: Should a judge score all techniques? Please allow me to ask for the precise definitions of "out of bound" in this context of scoring a technique or not. If the competitor delivering the technique is out of bound (one foot in and one foot out), but the one receiving the technique is not--this scenario happens all the time with someone kicking as she retreats out of bound, is this a point? Conversely, if the competitor delivering the technique is in but the person receiving the technique is out, is this a point? Thanks, Vincernt Lo  6/15/2006 8:23:56 AM bckwh 104 posts Re: Should a judge score all techniques? Mr. Lo, you are always welcome here in the Doc's Office, and your questions are always illuminating. Consider this as a working definition of out of bounds- when one foot of eiher competitor completely crosses the boundary line. Based on that definition, once a competitor's foot crosses the boundary line, an alert Referee will stop the action before a technique is executed. We know that this does not always happen. Therefore, should the competitor delivering the technique crosees the boundary line with one foot and succeeds in delivering a technique that might constitute a score, the following should happen: the judges should score the technique without consideration of whether the foot crossed the boundary line, especially if it was a speedy occurrence (since the judges focus should be on the technique, not the foot placement with regards to the boundary line); the Referee must address the foot crossing the boundary line by either giving a verbal warning (in which case, the point, if scored, remains valid), or assess a kyungo (in which case, the point, if scored, must be annulled). The case where the competitor delivering the technique is in bounds, and the person receiving the technique is out of bounds, again, the Referee is charged with being alert enough to intercede as soon as one foot crosses the boundary line. Again, two things should happen: the judges should score or not score a point depending on their field of view (again, the focus should be on the technique moreso than the foot position, unless it is clearly obvious); the Referee should either give a verbal warning (any point scored remains) or a kyungo (any point scored is annulled). Because of the four different fields of view for the Corner Judges, there may always be a variance in whether a Judge scores a point or not. If two Judges clearly see that a competitor is out of bounds, those two Judges should not score a technique that would have been a valid point if both feet were in bounds. If there is little time to determine whether a technique meets the criteria for a valid point, or if a foot has crossed the boundary line, the main focus of the Judge should be in determining whether a technique meets the criteria for a valid point first. It cannot be stressed strongly enough that a Referee has the responsibility of being agile enough to follow the action and to intervene whenever an infraction occurs (like crossing the boundary line). Therfore, anticipation is one of the skills that a Referee must practice and hone in the ring. Reacting to the action is not the best thing that a Referee can do; anticipating actions is a better skill to develop. ~BHarris  Page 1 of 1   Discussions  Ask the Ref Doctor  Should a judge ... Flat View Tree View Oldest To Newest Newest To Oldest