Fencing Draft notes:Introduction: Difference between revisions

From SCA Lochac
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(17 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Notes from Earl Marshal for next update==
==Notes of things to fix==
:Remove section 1.6 - this information should be included in the relevant section of the rules, and the Change log, as we run the risk of duplicating rules, and then not keeping the changes aligned.
==Change log==
 
;Rule number
==Changes for v 6.0==
:
===1.6.1===
;Was
;Was
:"During practices, for weapons drills with an opponent, you must wear eye protection. For drills with the spear, you must wear full face protection."
:What the text used to say
;Now
;Now
:"For drills against opponents with a spear, you must wear full face protection."
:What the proposed new text says
;Functional change
;Functional change
:Removes requirement for eye protection in drills, but keeps requirement for full face protection when drilling against spear. Updated to specify <b>against</b> spear, as the person using the spear is not at risk from the spear.
:What does this change actually do in terms of things we can now, or cannot now do?
;Reasoning:
;Reason
:The current rules do not improve safety, as spectacles and sunglasses are not personal protective equipment and cause an unacceptable level of risk-acceptance, as fencers can believe they are protected.
:Why are you making this change?
:The current rules are also not enforceable because there is no useful and consistent way to define "drill". Some marshals consider that demonstrating an action with a sword is a "drill" and thus requires eye protection (even if the person the sword is pointed at does not move and is in full gear) and others consider a "drill" anything up to full speed sparring. Defining "drill" as anything other than full sparring, the broadest possible capture definition, is not useful because "sparring" is also not simple to define and you end up in a situation where anyone picking up a sword needs eye wear which doesn't actually protect them.
;For notes
:From a risk perspective, the existing requirement does not meaningfully improve safety and is impractical. Fencers are able to take a risk-based approach to training depending on their own training and opponent, given there is no international case base to suggest lack of eye protection causes heightened risk, nor are these rules mirrored at Society level.
:Heading - date of change. What are you going to record about this change in the Notes for the page to explain to readers what happened to the rules. Particularly note if we are being more restrcitive than Society rules, or have a variance from Society rules.
:For spears, given the chance that an accident could cause a catastrophic injury, additional protection is warranted.

Latest revision as of 09:58, 23 December 2023

Notes of things to fix

Change log

Rule number
Was
What the text used to say
Now
What the proposed new text says
Functional change
What does this change actually do in terms of things we can now, or cannot now do?
Reason
Why are you making this change?
For notes
Heading - date of change. What are you going to record about this change in the Notes for the page to explain to readers what happened to the rules. Particularly note if we are being more restrcitive than Society rules, or have a variance from Society rules.
Retrieved from ‘https://sca.org.nz/wiki/index.php?title=Fencing_Draft_notes:Introduction&oldid=7083’