Default Rules

Venues, fixtures, teams and related matters.
Ian Thompson
Posts: 3543
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: Default Rules

Post by Ian Thompson » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:52 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
Ian Thompson wrote: About 18 months ago I played in a tournament where the mobile phone of the player sitting next to me rang while the arbiter was out of the room. Someone, not the player's opponent, told the arbiter. The arbiter asked the player if his phone had rung. The player said no. The arbiter took the player out of the room to discuss the matter. A few minutes later they returned and the game continued.
Is it not possible that the player in question thought someone else's mobile phone had rung?
Who knows, other than the player himself? The answer to that question doesn't affect the point I was making - the player didn't lose on the spot because the arbiter wasn't satisfied the infringement had occurred even though it definitely had.

Phil Makepeace
Posts: 336
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Default Rules

Post by Phil Makepeace » Wed Feb 19, 2014 12:15 am

Ian Thompson wrote:About 18 months ago I played in a tournament where the mobile phone of the player sitting next to me rang while the arbiter was out of the room. Someone, not the player's opponent, told the arbiter. The arbiter asked the player if his phone had rung. The player said no. The arbiter took the player out of the room to discuss the matter. A few minutes later they returned and the game continued.
Last night I was captaining a league match where one of my players' phone sounded. The league in question hasn't revised the FIDE rule and so I would have had no sympathy or argument if the opposing player and/or captain had claimed the point. As it was, they didn't.

What wasn't needed was a different opposition player coming over and waving his hands like a footballer demanding a yellow card. As Steve Boniface once said to an exuberant and youthful upstart version of me, "One game, two players". Perhaps we can add "one arbiter" to that.

Graham Borrowdale

Re: Default Rules

Post by Graham Borrowdale » Wed Feb 19, 2014 12:04 pm

Phil Makepeace wrote: Last night I was captaining a league match where one of my players' phone sounded. The league in question hasn't revised the FIDE rule and so I would have had no sympathy or argument if the opposing player and/or captain had claimed the point. As it was, they didn't.
Agreed, but my point is that the offending player should 'walk' (where the rule is in force), much as I understand cricketers (sometimes) do, and footballers never do, and it should not be left to the offended player, or their match captain, to have to 'claim', a practice which many players feel uneasy about.
Phil Makepeace wrote: What wasn't needed was a different opposition player coming over and waving his hands like a footballer demanding a yellow card. As Steve Boniface once said to an exuberant and youthful upstart version of me, "One game, two players". Perhaps we can add "one arbiter" to that.
Completely agree. No class.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Default Rules

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Feb 19, 2014 12:25 pm

Graham Borrowdale wrote: Agreed, but my point is that the offending player should 'walk' (where the rule is in force), much as I understand cricketers (sometimes) do, and footballers never do, and it should not be left to the offended player, or their match captain, to have to 'claim', a practice which many players feel uneasy about.
Something which is as clear as mud in the new Laws of Chess that FIDE are introducing from 1st July 2014 is whether you can be penalised for even having a mobile phone, or computer in your possession whilst playing. By, in your possession, I mean among your belongings or on your person, but totally switched off and remaining so for the entire game. Arbiters will have future power to impose lesser penalties, but does that include no penalty?

I think it goes without saying that a complete ban on possession would make it impossible or extremely inconvenient for many players to participate in League or Congress chess.

For evening League play anyway, except for captains at the start of the match trying to trace errant players, the logical rule is that the phone should be switched off for the entire duration of play, but the penalty if you do get a notification or a call is that you don't answer it and switch the phone to its "Off means Off and not standby" setting.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Default Rules

Post by Alan Walton » Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:13 pm

Phil Makepeace wrote:What wasn't needed was a different opposition player coming over and waving his hands like a footballer demanding a yellow card. As Steve Boniface once said to an exuberant and youthful upstart version of me, "One game, two players". Perhaps we can add "one arbiter" to that.
This happen to 3Cs in the 4NCL a couple of years ago

Our player (Alex Longson) had his opponent mobile phone go off, between them they discussed and Alex decided he would rather play on (we had already been relegated, so it didn't bother us), though the arbiter made the decision and Alex won immediately

But as our result mattered to the other teams within the league, they (Slough Sharks & White Rose) afterwards told us that they would have complain if the game was instantly awarded

Phil Makepeace
Posts: 336
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:46 pm

Re: Default Rules

Post by Phil Makepeace » Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:22 pm

Graham Borrowdale wrote:
Phil Makepeace wrote: Last night I was captaining a league match where one of my players' phone sounded. The league in question hasn't revised the FIDE rule and so I would have had no sympathy or argument if the opposing player and/or captain had claimed the point. As it was, they didn't.
Agreed, but my point is that the offending player should 'walk' (where the rule is in force), much as I understand cricketers (sometimes) do, and footballers never do, and it should not be left to the offended player, or their match captain, to have to 'claim', a practice which many players feel uneasy about.
The thing is, match captains act as de facto arbiters in local leagues. There are often many different responsibilities at play. In no particular order of priority, they are:

1. The success of the team.
1a. The success of the captain's own game.
2. Providing a competitive yet safe and friendly atmosphere and environment.
3. Adhering to the laws of chess.

They can all get in the way of each other, particularly when it comes to mobile phones. My particular view in this particular league is that if one of the captains or one of the two relevant players wants the game to end when a phone rings, that's fine. But I wouldn't enforce it.

I'm deliberately using the word 'enforce' because that's precisely the difference between local leagues and events where qualified and impartial arbiters are present. Vested interests mean that there probably should be a discussion in local leagues; different captains would do different things, even as supposed arbiters.

Perhaps occasionally throwing the rulebook in the fire so that sixteen people can enjoy a full game and have a pleasant evening detracts from my integrity as a match captain. But we all know that the rule's completely borked.

For what it's worth, I do always ensure my players' phones are off before a game. And such an announcement was made prior to Monday's incident. My Board 3 had indeed turned his personal mobile off. But he'd forgotten about his 'doctor on call' device, which was what made the noise.

Local league chess is different. It is completely aligned with real life. You're expected to play with the rubble of a stressful day at work, or otherwise, still heavy on your mind. I think the circumstances of Monday's incident demonstrate this perfectly. There have to be altered expectations.

Andrew Bak
Posts: 835
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
Location: Bradford
Contact:

Re: Default Rules

Post by Andrew Bak » Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:47 pm

Alan Walton wrote: Our player (Alex Longson) had his opponent mobile phone go off, between them they discussed and Alex decided he would rather play on (we had already been relegated, so it didn't bother us), though the arbiter made the decision and Alex won immediately
d
As I understand the rule, the arbiter has no choice in the matter - if a player's phone goes off, then the game is automatically awarded to his opponent, no matter how much they might want to continue the game.

Post Reply