WTF Competition Rules changes – to be implemented from June 2009
.jpg "WTF competition rules International Referee Course - Suzhou, China April 2009")
The WTF competition rule changes will be implemented from June 2009 at the World Cup being held in Baku, Azerbaijan. Three senior International referees from Australia attended, including Kim Seng, ATA Master Instructor. The 63rd International Referee Refresher course was held in Suzhou, China during April, which covered the latest rules amendments and new changes to make taekwondo sport faster paced, fairer and more appealing to the spectators and audience.
You can refer to an earlier post which itemised the amendments and changes of the competition rules. Click here to view.
Amongst some of the more important changes or inclusions are:
- a smaller 8m by 8m contest area – this will reduce the competition area and the rationale is so that players will have to commit to more fighting rather than use space to move around,
- 3-points for a legal scoring head kick – this will encourage the use of more difficult kicks and more spectacular actions from the players to cahse the points and score more points, and enhancing spectator viewing and enjoyment value and at the same time also increasing taekwondo’s values by showcasing its spectacular techniques,
- 2-points for "body turning" kicks, eg back kicks, spinning roundhouse kicks, jumping back kicks – as above this will increase spectator viewing and enjoyment value and also increasing taekwondo skills presentation,
- penalizing the use of the leg to block an attacking kick by lifting the knee – this will reduce the incidence of injury and encourage fairer match play rather than impeding good attacking technique,
- abolishing the 7 point gap or 12 point ceiling for winning matches – there are views that support and also not support this. While it allows matches to continue irrespective of point scores, it does not give allowance to stop matches early for any mis-matches or if a player is being outclassed,
- introducing the 5 second rule to commence the count down clock before warning a player/s for not engaging in technical exchange – this will quicken the pace and ensures there is more constant fight engagement, and this will give more spectator value for viewing fighting action,
- the use of a video replay system to rule on a challenge to a point or points scored or not scored (just like hawkeye in tennis) or any rule infringement whether given or not given by the officiating referee or judges – this however will be limited to events that have the video capture or video reviews systems,
- the competition supervisory board can now over-rule the match decision if there are proven grounds of incorrect factual judgment.
The course attracted participants from mainly Asian region countries and included International Referees also from Australia, Mexico, Canada and United Kingdom.
The course lecturers and presenters were Mr Rene Bundelli (WTF Referee Chairman, Switzerland), Mr Leon Preston (Vice Chairman, USA), Mr Myung Ok Yu (Vice Chairman, Canada), Mr Chakir Chelbat (Vice Chairman, Sweden) and Mr Zhao Lei (Vice Chairman, China). Mr Dai Won Moon, (WTF Technical Director, Mexico) was there to oversee the course event.
I encourage you to make comments or raise questions in this post (click onto the comments below) or participate in our referee forum – click here for the forum.
%20-%204.jpg "Kim Seng with the 2008 -49 kgs Olympic female champion, Ms Wu Jing-yu from Suzhou, China")
%20translating%20the%20rules%20in%20Chinese%20language.jpg "Si Liang (IR, China) translates the rules in Chinese languaege"){kind=spacer}
Kim Seng says:
May 2nd, 2009 at 8:39 pm
The rules will be implemented from the June 2009 World Cup being held in Baku, Azerbaijan. A task team headed by the WTF Technical Director will be addressing any other issues being raised at this course and the previous course. Amongst some of them include:
1. possibility of introducing a 3-button electronic scoring system for the 1-point, 2-point and the 3-points scoring instances,
2. the process for annulling points, kyong-go, gam-jeom or any other rule infringements following a ruling from the review jury.
3. the process to use when electronic scoring systems are being used, eg how to differentiate or add the additional point for the “body turning kicks”, a video replay challenge to a point or non point being scored by the electronic body protector system,
4. the process to use for monitoring the number of unsuccessful challenges from the coach for video replay,
There are other process or procedural issues to be addressed and the WTF Technical committee would hopefully have these all clarified by the time of the rules implementation.
Kim Seng says:
May 10th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
Some countries are grappling with how to implement the video replay process, considering the costs involved for a number of video cameras and experienced and capable video camera operators per court, etc. Coupled with the need to have very senior and experienced referees as review jury per court, would certainly stretch referee resources.
Everybody would no doubt have some ideas of how to do it, So I encourage you to brainstorm your ideas here or in the forum.
hvtkd says:
May 12th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
hi all
what is the purpose of the kyong go etc being added to the other player. to me just means more work for computer programmers . weather you add or keep as is, the point difference remains the same. as for video refs, we struggle as is with officials and referees, let alone trying to find three or four more per ring is going to be very hard.
smaller ring, less time to do nothing and removing 12 point and margin are a great move .
cheers vj new zealand
Kim Seng says:
May 13th, 2009 at 11:29 pm
hvtkd from New Zealand raised a valid point. Adding points to the opposing player or deducting a player’s points for penalty infringements does not change the result – the point difference is still the same. The rationale, I think is to “encourage” positive rewarding ie by adding points rather than by “negative” means.
My observation is that the higher point scores does have a “positive” feel about it to the spectators as it encourages more cheering and creates a little bit more excitement. It does also portray a “positive” to the sport in that if the spectators cheer they are cheering for a point addition rather than cheering for a deduction of point.
I suppose it is like getting a free kick penalty plus point at the expense of the opposing player infringing on the rules.
Kim Seng says:
May 13th, 2009 at 11:39 pm
These comments are re-produced by permission from the Singapore Taekwondo Federation website:
Among other things, the course covered the latest changes in the competition rules. There were also agility and footwork training relevant to referee performance, scoring simulation and DVD review and analysis.
At the end of the course, the four international referees (from Singapore) discussed about the feasibility of implementing some of the new rules which could be further modified in the near future. After all, the course conductors were not too sure or had no answers to some of the questions raised by the participants.
It was generally felt that the WTF was rushing into implementing the new rules although they were not fully prepared to do so. A case in point is the new scoring criteria where 3 points are awarded for head kick, two for turning kick and one for direct kick or punch. There was no satisfactory answer as to how this could be implemented using the existing scoring system.
What’s more, the notes were not fully updated!
For a number of questions, the common answers were: “We are still considering it and will let you know by mail; we will discuss and let you know tomorrow (but tomorrow did not come) and we are suggesting to you to do this and that.” In short, there is no straight answer.
Nevertheless, it was decided by the STF Board of Referees to implement only those rules which had been assessed as ‘stable’.
Roy Khoh says:
May 14th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Regarding the kyongo points scenario:
Like it has been pointed out, there is no difference in the score.
However, I recall seeing fights where there may be a “dirty” fighter and the scoreboard shows up a negative score. Like 2 vs. -1. That is never a nice spectacle.
I guess from the fighter’s point of view, at least they can say “Well, I didn’t score a big fat zero!”
I am in favour of this, just to get rid of the negative value scores.
Kim Seng says:
May 15th, 2009 at 12:18 am
Alison, a referee from Canada presents her views below following her country’s implementation of the amended rules at their recent senior nationals last weekend and at their juniors next weekend, but without the video replay system.
These were the feedback from her experience:
. faster paced fighting now when using the 5 second rule to initiate fight engagement and the 10 second rule for kyong-go for inactive fight engagement. The athletes and coaches were responding well to this amendment.
. they used the existing 2 button system to score ie the 1-point button for body kicks and the 2-points button for head kicks; then the referee awarded the additional point for body turning kicks (making it 2-points) and the additional point for the head kicks (making it 3 points). (editor’s note: when the 3 button system comes in, it will be more distinct for each of the point scores and the referee need not have to award the additional point).
. athletes and coaches feedback was positive, and that they adapted well to the rule changes.
Roy Khoh says:
May 17th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
How did the additional points get added by the referee?
Is it the centre-referee? Because then they would have to stop the match to award the point. If so, it kind of goes against the whole fluidity and continuuity that is being promoted.
I guess it’s a means for the moment until technology is adapted to cater for the new rule change.
I can imagine head kicks are pretty obvious – there’s a kick to the head and 2 points come up, so a referee at the table can award that – thus play continues without disruption. Or the kick is so good it warrants a count, plus an additional point for the count still??? Making the head-kick worth 4 points?
Kim Seng says:
May 17th, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Here are some clarifications on Roy Khoh’s queries:
In the absence of the 3 button system, the additional point can only be awarded through the centre referee after confirmation that there is a body turning kick has been scored, making it 2-points.
Similarly, if the 3 points configuration has not been re-programmed in the scoring system for the head kicks or there is no 3 buttons used, then the centre referee has to award the additional point after confirmation that there is a head kick score.
The accepted process for awarding the additional point-s is the process that was used previously for the 8-count knock-down situation. In the new amended rules, there is no additional point to be awarded for an 8-count knock-down situation.
Kim Seng says:
July 17th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
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.
Kim Seng says:
July 17th, 2009 at 11:48 pm
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.
An Official’s Journey through the 2009 Nationals | Taekwondo: ATA Western Australia says:
November 1st, 2009 at 11:50 am
[...] the first Nationals with the recent WTF rule changes, we all had a briefing on these changes so we could start implementing them. It won’t be [...]
Kim Seng says:
November 1st, 2009 at 9:47 pm
The WTF have now implemented these amended rules from 2009 – World Cup held in Baku, Azerbaijan (June) and World Championships held in Copenhagen, Denmark (October).
Among the most significant implementations have been:
1. 3 points for the head kick
2. 2 points for the back kick or the continuous turning kick
3. video replay system and process
4. 8m by 8m contest area
5. use of electronic body protectors – ebp
6. 5 second “fight warning” call followed by kyong-go if there is continued non fight activity after 10 seconds.
Some countries have started to implement these amended rules, but with varying forms of video replay or review jury or even with the process for scoring the 3 points or 2 points.
Comments and feedback on the amended rules are welcome on this post. I have opened a new topic for this on the forum so you can feedback on your experiences or add comments or hold discussions post implementation of the WTF competition rules.
link to forum discussion here.
Kim Seng says:
January 19th, 2010 at 11:31 pm
I present here some background on how the +2 points and the +3 points were possibly amended in the amended WTF competition rules.
I met up with a respected International Referee from Yemen while I was in Copenhagen. He is also the current National Team Coach and Technical Director for Yemen. He explained to me his efforts in his suggestion to WTF to reward efforts of high technique and variety of techniques in scoring. His efforts possibly led to the amendments to the scoring of +2 points for turning kicks and +3 points for head kicks in the competitions.
Master Abdulrahim Salman Mohammed was kind enough to provide me with his article titled Aesthetic aspects of Taekwondo where he outlined the lead up to the +2 points and the +3 points scoring. The below is an extract from his article- and it is interesting reading:
(Aesthetic aspects of Taekwondo):
Taekwondo in fact belongs to the aesthetic sciences that use the human body as an instrument of artistic expression. Aesthetic, however, is a branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of beauty, taste as well as appreciation of art. And since taekwondo is an art represented by the last syllable (DO), it has had then an artistic expression that creates a direct relationship with the spectator through demonstrating different types of high quality techniques.
Those interesting techniques may strike and motivate the sense of beauty of the spectators, and make them feel the pleasure and ultimately taste the joy while watching taekwondo competitions.
To taste any art, however, two principle factors should be taken into consideration, creativity and diversity. In the case of taekwondo, creativity is represented by high quality of techniques, and diversity is represented by variety of techniques i.e. different type of kicks.
Unfortunately, in most of today’s taekwondo competitions we neither find high quality of techniques nor variety of kicks. What is happening in some matches is just holding, pushing, grabbing and sometimes wrestling like business.
The other problem is that the majority of contestants are fond of using only one type of kick which is Bandal-Chagi, (round-house kick), the very easiest frontal kick, the matter that makes taekwondo quite monotonous and boring.
Besides, it gives the impression to the spectators who are not familiar to taekwondo that taekwondo has only one kick! Taekwondo has never been like that, it is remarkable for its beautiful kicks and harmonious techniques. If we use a metaphor we can say that “Taekwondo is like a pearl covered by sand” and it is time now to shake off that sand and present it to the world in its glittering and splendor.
However, It is also true and fair to say that contestants and coaches have nothing to do with the aesthetic or the beauty of taekwondo, because their main goal is only how to win the match and get advanced medal. Therefore, they always seek for the easiest and the fastest way by which they can reach their opponents and gain points without spending much energy. For this reason, we notice that the majority of contestants try to use Bandal-Chagi all the time during the match, and if we visit any training place worldwide, we may see that 90% percent of the training session focuses on such kick, neglecting other kicks and techniques.
Although there have been many attempts made by taekwondo scholars to modify the competition rules in order to overcome such boredom and monotony of
taekwondo competitions, all their efforts were focused mainly on modification of competition rules only. Of course competition rules are so crucial factor that needs to be treated seriously.
But in my point of view it is just part of the problem and not the whole problem. We actually need to cover all the problem aspects and finally put the solutions altogether in one package.
To encourage high quality of techniques and variety of such techniques, two suggestions may be made in this regard:
1. we may follow the rule of (one-two-three) i.e. 1 point is awarded to the body middle part kicks, 2 points are awarded to front face kicks, and 3 points are awarded to any face kick that involves turning of the body like Spinning Whip Kick, for example. In this case the judges press the button of 2 points as usual, and the third point is added by the central referee regardless if the referee counts or not.
note: the competition rules for a head kick is now +3 points.
2. we may also follow the rule of (one-two-three) again i.e. , 1 point is awarded to Bandal- Chagi or any other middle part front kick, two points are awarded to any middle part body kicks that involve turning of the body, provided that such kicks are in line with taewondo basic techniques, and finally two points are awarded to any face kicks plus one point added by the central referee regardless if the referee counts or not. It is to say that the competition scoring system should give big advantage for contestants who have high capacity of performing different taekwondo techniques effectively.
note: turning kicks to the body is now +2 points.
The implementation of the +2 points and the +3 points have been very well accepted by players, coaches and referees. So we have to thank Master Abdulrahim Salman Mohammed for his efforts in suggesting this change. Master Abdulrahim received a citation from WTF Technical Director, Mr Dai Won Moon in recognition for his effective and useful contribution.
Well done Master Abdulrahim Salman Mohammed.
click below link to go to the forum for discussion – post 11:
http://www.ata-wa.org.au/forum/referee/amended-wtf-competition-rules-from-2009/page-1/#p331
or you can add your comments in this post.