Should an arbiter intervene?
-
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
I am happy to accept that the matter falls within an arbiter’s discretion whilst having a definite (and perhaps wrong – hence my raising the point) view as to how I should normally be minded to exercise that discretion. Whilst Nick is of course correct in pointing out that our legal system relies on witnesses, those witnesses may have their credibility tested and even ridiculed in Court in a manner which would be unacceptable in the context of a chess event.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
.Roger Lancaster wrote:I am happy to accept that the matter falls within an arbiter’s discretion whilst having a definite (and perhaps wrong – hence my raising the point) view as to how I should normally be minded to exercise that discretion. Whilst Nick is of course correct in pointing out that our legal system relies on witnesses, those witnesses may have their credibility tested and even ridiculed in Court in a manner which would be unacceptable in the context of a chess event.
The general advice is to be very cautious about accepting third party evidence, even if seemingly independent.
In determining the validity of a 50 move claim, it's probably safe to rely on a score kept by a third party, as Nick suggested. If there is a dispute about whether a player touched a piece, it would be much less safe to rely on what was said by a single observer.
-
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
Very happy to accept David's view on the matter. Am I correct in assuming, as a corollary to this, that the arbiter should not actively seek ("Did anyone see what happened?") views from spectators, no matter how eminent they might be? I should perhaps stress that I ask this as a theoretical question and I have no specific event in mind.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
I wouldn't rule out asking that question to the crowd, but I can't recall ever having done so.Roger Lancaster wrote:Very happy to accept David's view on the matter. Am I correct in assuming, as a corollary to this, that the arbiter should not actively seek ("Did anyone see what happened?") views from spectators, no matter how eminent they might be? I should perhaps stress that I ask this as a theoretical question and I have no specific event in mind.
There was an incident at the Monarch Assurance Isle of Man International 2004 where the evidence of an "eminent" bystander was invaluable. However, on that occasion she approached an arbiter and told her what had happened.
-
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:37 pm
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
I hesitate to ask, because I'm pretty sure I'm not going to like the answer, but what should happen if the arbiter comes to the board and tells the players a possible breach of the rules has been reported. And white says that he did indeed notice that the rook could have moved legally but he'd decided he didn't want to waste his entry fee by winning games that way.
-
- Posts: 2069
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
- Location: Morecambe, Europe
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
This, I suspect, is the essence of Nick's concerns
-
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
- Location: Hertfordshire
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
I don't believe that the Arbiter would have any justification to intervene and disturb the game if he hasn't observed the alleged infraction and neither player had noticed nor stopped the clock.David Williams wrote:I hesitate to ask, because I'm pretty sure I'm not going to like the answer, but what should happen if the arbiter comes to the board and tells the players a possible breach of the rules has been reported. And white says that he did indeed notice that the rook could have moved legally but he'd decided he didn't want to waste his entry fee by winning games that way.
A spectator might be accused of giving outside assistance to one of the players in seeking to involve the Arbiter without a specific request from the players.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
Not necessarily, Michael.Michael Flatt wrote:I don't believe that the Arbiter would have any justification to intervene and disturb the game if he hasn't observed the alleged infraction and neither player had noticed nor stopped the clock.David Williams wrote:I hesitate to ask, because I'm pretty sure I'm not going to like the answer, but what should happen if the arbiter comes to the board and tells the players a possible breach of the rules has been reported. And white says that he did indeed notice that the rook could have moved legally but he'd decided he didn't want to waste his entry fee by winning games that way.
A spectator might be accused of giving outside assistance to one of the players in seeking to involve the Arbiter without a specific request from the players.
Suppose a spectator comes up to you and says that:
a) he saw a player take a move back while his opponent was away from the board; or
b) he saw a player adjust the clocks to give himself extra time while his opponent was away from the board.
-
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
- Location: Hertfordshire
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
David Williams wrote:I hesitate to ask, because I'm pretty sure I'm not going to like the answer, but what should happen if the arbiter comes to the board and tells the players a possible breach of the rules has been reported. And white says that he did indeed notice that the rook could have moved legally but he'd decided he didn't want to waste his entry fee by winning games that way.
In the scenario presented by David Williams in which both players are present at the board it would be unnecessary for a spectator to interfere by seeking to involve the Arbiter.David Sedgwick wrote: Not necessarily, Michael.
Suppose a spectator comes up to you and says that:
a) he saw a player take a move back while his opponent was away from the board; or
b) he saw a player adjust the clocks to give himself extra time while his opponent was away from the board.
In the two additional scenarios you present where a player is absent and a spectator claims to have observed something untoward it would alert the Arbiter to a potential dispute. In such situations one has to be remain sceptical since the spectator may have been mistaken in what he observed.
-
- Posts: 3562
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
Suppose the spectator is another player in the tournament who has an interest in the outcome of the game. Are you saying that players shouldn't report breaches of the rules to the arbiter in games other than their own?Michael Flatt wrote:In the scenario presented by David Williams in which both players are present at the board it would be unnecessary for a spectator to interfere by seeking to involve the Arbiter.David Williams wrote:I hesitate to ask, because I'm pretty sure I'm not going to like the answer, but what should happen if the arbiter comes to the board and tells the players a possible breach of the rules has been reported. And white says that he did indeed notice that the rook could have moved legally but he'd decided he didn't want to waste his entry fee by winning games that way.
-
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
- Location: Hertfordshire
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
A player or spectator should avoid attempting to influence the outcome of another game or putting undue pressure on the Arbiter .Ian Thompson wrote: Suppose the spectator is another player in the tournament who has an interest in the outcome of the game. Are you saying that players shouldn't report breaches of the rules to the arbiter in games other than their own?
Ultimately, after one or more warnings such tactics might result in your exclusion from the playing hall.
-
- Posts: 1420
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
Michael you might like to read and consider FIDE Law 12.7Michael Flatt wrote:A player or spectator should avoid attempting to influence the outcome of another game or putting undue pressure on the Arbiter .Ian Thompson wrote: Suppose the spectator is another player in the tournament who has an interest in the outcome of the game. Are you saying that players shouldn't report breaches of the rules to the arbiter in games other than their own?
Ultimately, after one or more warnings such tactics might result in your exclusion from the playing hall.
An arbiter who excludes a spectator for legitimately informing of an irregularity needs to reassess his suitability for the role.FIDE 12.7 wrote:If someone observes an irregularity, he may inform only the arbiter.....
-
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
- Location: Hertfordshire
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
Let's leave it to the Arbiter to decide what to do in a particular situation. Should a player (ejected or otherwise) have grounds to dispute an Arbiter's decision he is entitled, of course, to make use of the Appeal Procedure.E Michael White wrote: Michael you might like to read and consider FIDE Law 12.7
An arbiter who excludes a spectator for legitimately informing of an irregularity needs to reassess his suitability for the role.FIDE 12.7 wrote:If someone observes an irregularity, he may inform only the arbiter.....
For the sake of clarity, I reproduce para 12.7 in full. You might, in turn, like to note those parts that you excised from your extract.
[1] FIDE Laws of Chess: http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=articleFIDE Laws of Chess[1] wrote:12.7 If someone observes an irregularity, he may inform only the arbiter. Players in other games are not to speak about or otherwise interfere in a game. Spectators are not allowed to interfere in a game. The arbiter may expel offenders from the playing venue.
-
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
Have to say that the second and third sentences of FIDE 12.7 shouldn't be interpreted as overriding the first sentence because, if they did, the first sentence would become redundant. Or, put slightly differently, informing an arbiter does not automatically constitute interference in a game - although I suppose one could contrive circumstances where it might.
-
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:37 pm
Re: Should an arbiter intervene?
If I've understood all this correctly, in the situation originally described, the spectator should definitely tell the arbiter, who will then either intervene or not intervene, and may or may not warn the spectator that if he does it again he will be excluded.
I'm glad we got that sorted.
I'm glad we got that sorted.