| User | Post |
|
8:45 pm
January 2, 2009
|
Kim Seng
| | |
| Moderator
| posts 50 |
|
|
The WTF has proposed a series of changes and amendments to the taekwondo competition rules. These had been proposed following a review by the Joint Technical Committee in November 2008. They have been approved by the WTF Executive Committee and is now presented to the WTF Member National Associations for their vote by the end of January 2009. A series of courses and refreshers will be conducted during 2009 to deploy the changes and with the 1st implementation possibly from the 2009 World Cup (June 2009 in Azerbaijan). It is expetced that they will be deployed across the world including Australia during the later half of 2009.
Here is a summary of the changes and amendment proposals:
- Competition area is reduced to 8m by 8m.
…. there are 26 in the original blog post (31 if you include video replay system).
<edit> …. and a more recent article about the WTF Competition Rules changes for 2009
|
|
|
8:53 pm
January 2, 2009
|
Roy Khoh
| | Canning Vale, Western Australia | |
| Admin
| posts 152 |
|
|
In point 13. “Combinations of kyong-go and gamjeom will be given as additional points to the opposing player and not deducted from the offending player.”
Before, there use to be 4 full point deductions would disqualify a player – is this now (sorry, soon to be) not implemented?
|
|
|
12:30 am
January 3, 2009
|
Kim Seng
| | |
| Moderator
| posts 50 |
|
|
Under the proposed changes, a player penalised by 8 kyong-gos or 4 gam-jeoms is declared the loser by the referee. Not sure if this meant a combination of kyong-go and gam-jeom that added up to minus 4 points under the current ruling or a limit of 8 kyong-go or 4 gamjeom treated separately.
|
|
|
5:14 am
January 4, 2009
|
Roy Khoh
| | Canning Vale, Western Australia | |
| Admin
| posts 152 |
|
|
Okay okay, I get it.
Sounds like it's still the same as what is currently used.
Except instead of subtracting the offending player's score by 1 point – it rewards the other player with 1 point. The kyongo and gumjeon symbols/lights would still show up on the monitor so that everyone can see how many penalties have been accumulated.
I was confused before 'cos I thought they were just going to get rid of those lights/symbols.
|
|
|
8:14 am
January 10, 2009
|
Kim Seng
| | |
| Moderator
| posts 50 |
|
|
The proposed rule changes will be good for the sport, in particular following the Beijing Olympics where controversy were once again the topic for discussions over officiating (as for other sports as well), "boring matches" and the competition rules.
Some changes are proposed to make the sport faster paced, safer and more exciting.
|
|
|
9:41 am
January 12, 2009
|
koryo 1
| | |
| Member | posts 5 |
|
|
Seems like a lot of changes to the rules, but it can solve some of the problems taekwondo experienced at the Beijing Olympics, like the Sarah Stevenson fight and the Steven Lopez knee penalty.
The video replay system will be good, but it can prolong the matches, and the decision of the referee jury must be final and accepted. Can the coach still lodge a protest if the decision is unfavourable?.
The 5 second inactive time grace may be good and would quicken the pace a bit, and it would change tactics used by the players from now on.
The 3 point head kicks will be good and will encourage more high kicking use which is the trademark of taekwondo. This will be similar to the basketball 3 point shot, eg 1 head kick will be worth 3 body kicks.
|
|
|
6:19 pm
January 12, 2009
|
Roy Khoh
| | Canning Vale, Western Australia | |
| Admin
| posts 152 |
|
|
I thought that when they introduced the 4th corner judge (over just the three) that there would be more head kicks….'cos they'd be easier to score and identify. Though I don't think it really changed the number of head kicks much. So hopefully, this 3 pointer would encourage it more.
Also the additional point for “turning” kicks would put a bit more “spectacular” back into the sport. Too often it's just simple roundhouse kicks – and not many of them either. Although I fear that the “money” shots will still be the simple roundhouse that lands after waiting for an attempted “turning” kick. That would lead back to not trying them and back to the same ol' same old.
The 5 second rule – yeah!!!  hahahaha, I'd like to see this one enforced. Not to bag the referees or anything, but I hardly saw too many matches last year that had the 10 second rule enforced. Yes, there were some – and not many, though. The ones I refereed, I chose particular matches to really kick in that 10 second penalty – based on my perception of player's ability and fitness. I was quite proud of those matches, 'cos to me, it felt exciting to watch – even if they didn't score too much. I remember clearly for one of Amy Fortescue's earlier matches (2008 Australian Nationals) and I was quick to penalise both players for not fighting, and even clenching – not attempting to fight – alot. I even told them straight out, first to four full point deductions was going to lose the match. Guess what happened after that? They still liked their rest periods, but when they saw the "fight" gesture, they engaged!!! When they clenched, they tried to immediately fight their way out of it. It was exciting, even for the corner judges.
Maybe the video replay can be like the 3rd umpire in cricket. Really give the decision to the “umpire”/centre-referee and if that person is in doubt, he/she can call on the video replay?
|
|
|
8:25 am
January 15, 2009
|
koryo 1
| | |
| Member | posts 5 |
|
|
Yeah, I too like to quicken the pace and try to enforce the non fighting rule. My instructor encourages me to be a fair referee and to liven up each match otherwise it becomes boring to watch and to referee.
With regards the video replay system, point 27, I wonder if the new rule allows the coach to make an appeal to point scores either scored or not scored by the electronic body protectors?. This will be interesting, ie a challenge against the electronic scoring system. If allowed, does this mean the Review Jury can over-rule the electronic scoring system?. If the coach is not happy with the Review Jury's decision, can he then lodge a protest after the match?. If not allowed, then the coach can only appeal against the non electronic scoring points, which is the head kick points.
|
|
|
10:23 am
January 29, 2009
|
Mojtaba Nazmdeh
| | |
| New Member | posts 1 |
|
|
WTF is going to amend some articles to the Competition Rules. I have a long term involvement in the training, instructions, education and coaching in Taekwondo, and with the extensive and accumulated experience, I present some ideas to this topic. I hope that they will be effective contributions of my thoughts to the new amendments.
Regarding the contest area 8 by 8 m, this will provide more clinching strategy and we know it is not good for the spectators.
As for 3 points for attacks to the head, yes it will create more excitement and better techniques in competition and less ap dollyo chagi (roundhouse kick) will be seen.
Receiving additional point by the Referee is good also, but turning kicks should be modified as back turning kick, back spinning kick and 360 front turning kick.
As the 7 point gap and 12 point ceiling has given more challenge to better qualified competitors as well as more excitement to the spectators, I disagree with the removal of these two items.
Yes of course adding the plus (+) point to the opponent, instead of deduction point for the competitor will give positive image to the competition. And it has the same result as it is now, but no deduction point is better.
We have experienced competitions where contestants, in setting up, checking the opponent’s situation, deciding the next movement or technique, deciding about the moment of attack would require more than 5 seconds time. Declaring penalties will damage the spirit of the match, also in this case the limit of minus 4 points (-4) should be revised to 6 or deleted from the competition rules, otherwise we believe that many contests will be concluded early and contestants declared as loser, or the technical level will go down.
Also physiological condition of the human body is not enough to hold such strong challenges for 2 minutes as well as 3 rounds and for maximum 6 fights in a day. And of course we don't want any contestant lose his/her own life as sportive sudden death during training or competitions. What will the people think of taekwondo on this case?
Besides I believe that, amending the other items to the competition rules will change the image TKD competitions so as everybody will enjoy the competition.
I recommend that there should be a limit of time of maximum 30 minutes for the CSB to announce the result of a protest.
“The CSB can overturn a match result if it determines there is a clear error in judging the facts.”
This is a dangerous part in the amendments. Where there is a Review Jury, it can receive appeals during the match. How the CSB (competition supervisory board) can change “Errors in Judging the facts” after a match? The Coaches and Competitors will make their strategy of contest based on the existing results in live competition and besides it is against Sport Common Rule in most sports that “The result cannot be changed after the conclusion of the match”. Have you ever heard that a Goal has been added or deducted after a football match has finished? It is horrible. And security of the contest will be lowered. If there is an error in judging the facts, how and who can ensure that no errors will happen when the CSB changes the result.????
Procedure for appeals during the contest seems to be good and effective to ensure fair judgment and give a chance to clear possible mistakes. But there should be a time limit for that. The time limit should be decided so as the competition don't loose the time and the contestant do not cool down in body, mind, and spirit. If you have seen the volleyball matches, the coaches ask for “Break Time” when the other team is going ahead with continuous points. So, in this case, there should be a penalty for the contestant or the coach, when the appeal has not been successful. There may be amount of 100 USD$ per appeal, which will be endorsed when the appeal has been successful or some penalties such as additional point for the opponent. What do you think of it????
We all know and believe that in modern Taekwondo contests there are some dirty moves and unfair match managements which the coaches and contestants create from time to time, so it's better to look over each amendment in every possible angle.
Finally if there should be any amendments the competition rules, there must be logical time for contestants to adapt to them and the World Cup in Baku is too early to implement it. By the way we are heading towards 2011, when there will be Olympic selection tournaments, yet if there is no Electronic Protectors in the 2009 World Championships it may be late, because the sports and hosting cities for the Olympic Games for 2016 will be selected soon
|
|
|
3:56 am
June 6, 2009
|
hvtkd
| | |
| New Member | posts 2 |
|
|
hi all when are other countries implementing these changes. it can only make competitions better. i hope.
|
|
|
11:24 pm
June 27, 2009
|
Kim Seng
| | |
| Moderator
| posts 50 |
|
|
Canada has already implemented the new rules successfully from April, but without the video replay system. Singapore is implementing theirs minus some rule changes that they consider still to be finalised.
Australia will be teaching the new rules from July (starting with Perth, Western Australia; Bunbury, WA and then Sydney, NSW). The intent is to implement them at the WA State championships and NSW state championships in August. The WA State championships intend to implement all changes and a modified replay format.
|
|
|
12:13 pm
July 17, 2009
|
Kim Seng
| | |
| Moderator
| posts 50 |
|
|
Bingo. There is no need to build the 3 button format for scoring the points for the 1, 2 and 3 pointers. The existing 2 button system can be utilised with some nifty software modifications to open up multi scoring windows and milli second separation of scoring button presses.
The software designer in Australia has re-designed the scoring windows and time separations. This beta version has been loaded in the electronic scoring systems and tested extensively. It works. It will be implemented in Western Australia at its State championships and selections in early August.
In summary,
1. the head kick button is now programmed to register 3 points, from the original 2 points.
2. the 1 point button continues to be used the same way for all the frontal attacking type kicks that score. As before the judge will press the button once.
3. for the body turning type kicks such as back kick or spinning around (on or off the floor as long as the kick is continuous) type kicks, the corner judge will now be able to press the 1 pointer scoring button twice immediately, ie one after the other. The system will recognize this as 2 separate scoring instances and open up the scoring window for each press. When 2 other judges (all up at least 3 judges) do the same within the 1 second scoring window, 2 points will register ie it will show 1 point and immediately show another point making it 2 points for the body kick scoring shot.
4. There is no need for the referee to call shigan and check with the corner judges and then to go through the motions to award the additional point. There is no time lost or time delay or any break in time to award the additional point.
5. The scoring will be instant and the change can be implemented without any unneccessary changes and the new practice will transition seamlessly.
6. there is no need to change the scoring unit (hardware) by adding an additional scoring button. It is much easier and user friendly to have as few scoring buttons to use as possible.
|
|
|
12:15 pm
July 17, 2009
|
Kim Seng
| | |
| Moderator
| posts 50 |
|
|
Some countries are still struggling and still thinking about how to implement the video replay format, especially when considering the additional resources and additional costs to purchase and then to operate the video systems for each operating court.
The easiest way of course is not to implement the video replay format. Some countries have done just that.
In those sports that have a wide television audience such as tennis, rugby and cricket, at the international level, they do use the video replay format. They can do it because they have the finance and personnel resource. Taekwondo is similar as implemented at the 2009 World Cup held in Azerbaijan recently.
However, those sports such as tennis, rugby and cricket do not use video reply format at their state and regional or club competitions or even at their nationals events. Taekwondo is the same. At the Australian Nationals, we operate six courts and it would add extra costs to conduct tournaments when having to purchase and to have a video replay systems installed and operated by experienced video personnel.
I have devised a modified format without the use of the video systems. It will be utilising the Review Jury and if available a member of the Competition Supervisory Board. When an appeal from the coach is lodged, the Review Jury will be requested to conduct a “jury review” (for a better legal wording other than “video replay”) of the appeal instance and make a decision based on facts before him. He may need to confirm instances if required to enable him to make the correct decision. His decision will be final. This is similar to some sports where they have a match referee that makes that final decision.
The appeal process will still be the same, ie there is a limit of only one unsuccessful appeal from the coach per match per player or maximum 3 unsuccessful appeals for the competition per player.
This is much better than not having any appeal process, if there is no video replay systems available. At least this way any coach can have an appeal rather than no appeal at all during the “live” match situation. Of course there is still the protest process, but that is limited in the criteria for a protest and it costs to lodge a protest, when it is “free” to lodge an appeal.
One must note that the appeal process during a “live match” situation is only on factual judgment situations and includes such as appeals on points being scored or not scored and also on penalty infringements (kyong-go or gam-jeom) given or not given.
|
|
|
12:36 pm
September 19, 2009
|
Basili Orlof
| | |
| Guest
| |
|
|
Well,to be completely sincere,I agree with most changes,especially with the 5 second rule,as it will make the matches more fast paced and exciting for the spectators.At least as long as it is enforced(when the 10 second rule was applied I had seen many atheletes hardly attempting to kick their rival for over 30 seconds!).However,I have to express my disapproval with high kicks scoring 3 points instead of the usual 2.Although it will encourage the utilisation of high kicks which will allow exhibition of skills,it will underestimate the use of usual,strong kicks.Imagine the following case:
Two athletes compete in a fight.The first one relies on keeping his defenses up while finding an opening to score a powerful kick.The second one relies on high. and spinning spectacular kicks.
With the old set of rules,they would have a fairly balanced fight(assuming equal skill and speed for both).In the current situation however,I guess the 2nd contestant would have an advantage since one high kick that may barely hit the opponent(enough for the kick to score a point though) would require the other contestants to score three kicks to even the score(in an equal fight it will be quite impossible for someone to score 3 kicks without the rival counterattacking successfully).
I guess I should rather see the rules in "action" before expressing a valid opinion about them.
|
|
Login 
Register 
Search 
Forum
Reply to Post
Quote and Reply 
Print this Post 
Topic RSS 
