EGF Referee Workshop 2012

[virgo]

Good afternoon to every Go fan ... ^^

I missed Referee Workshop 2011 but I intend to come to Bonn for the 2012.

* Will it be organised ?
* Will it be (as usual) on the second Wednesday (01.08.2012) ?
* When can we apply ? On site I presumed. A few days before.

Thanks alot.

[RobertJasiek]

* Will it be organised ?

We (rules commission) have not decided yet whether there will be one this year.

[virgo]

Good afternoon,

Is there a decision about a Referee Workshop in Bonn ?

Thanks alot.

[RobertJasiek]

I will ask.

[RobertJasiek]

During this year's congress there will not be a workshop for creating new EGF Certified Referees. We are still considering though to possibly hold a short refreshment rules meeting for existing referees and anybody who wishes to listen; a date is not set yet.

[Javaness2]

Question for referees.

The tournament is played using an Ing Clock. Latest Model. Quite by accident, a player [A] presses the move button, he was fumbling for the look button. His opponent [B] now says "You have passed", and plays a stone, and presses his clock. [A] calls the referee in protest

What should happen.

1. B should be disqualified for cheating
2. Nothing
3. The referee should return the board position to how it was before [B] played a stone, and warn [A] to be more careful in future, and warn [B] to behave properly.

[RobertJasiek]

The facts are established easily: whose turn it actually was. The degree of penalty depends on the referee.

[Uberdude]

The facts are established easily: whose turn it actually was. The degree of penalty depends on the referee.

Was that an answer?

[RobertJasiek]

Yes. It is about as precise as one can be, except for pointing to the available penalties, see §8:

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/egfgtr.html

[Uberdude]

You aren't a very good referee if others can't understand your decisions. Which of Java's options (or another outcome?) was your decision?

I would suggest you can be more precise:

"Pressing the move button of the clock does not count as playing a move"
or
"Pressing the move button of the clock does count as playing a move"

[Javaness2]

My current understanding of the EGF's position, is that pressing the move button counts as a move, even if it is by accident.

You aren't a very good referee if others can't understand your decisions. Which of Java's options (or another outcome?) was your decision?

I would suggest you can be more precise:

"Pressing the move button of the clock does not count as playing a move"
or
"Pressing the move button of the clock does count as playing a move"

[ez4u]

My current understanding of the EGF's position, is that pressing the move button counts as a move, even if it is by accident.

You aren't a very good referee if others can't understand your decisions. Which of Java's options (or another outcome?) was your decision?

I would suggest you can be more precise:

"Pressing the move button of the clock does not count as playing a move"
or
"Pressing the move button of the clock does count as playing a move"

Personally I think the epitome of a good referee would be someone that knows the rules well, carefully establishes the facts through his/her own investigation, and does not allow pushy spectators to sway/fluster them.

[RobertJasiek]

You aren't a very good referee if others can't understand your decisions.

Others who do not read what I suggest them to read are responsible for their unwillingness to read.

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/egfgtr.html

After reading, one knows about §5.4:

"[...]
1. A player passes and completes the move by pressing the clock. It is possible for the player to lose on time if the clock is not pressed.
2. The opponent passes and completes the move by pressing the clock. Again it is possible for the opponent to lose on time if the clock is not pressed."

This answers your question because the rules clearly describes how a pass is performed on the clock: by pressing the clock. The rule does not distinguish between intentional and accidental pressing of the clock (by the player whose turn it is). Since the rule does not distinguish it, pressing the clock (i.e. one's own move button) indicates a pass.

Of Javaness2's options, none applies: 1. does not apply because he did not cheat. 2. does not apply because the referee is called and must make some statement. 3. does not apply because it has been B's next turn.

Nevertheless, there is potential for advice or penalty depending on the exact players' behaviour beyond the obvious facts above. E.g., commenting A's move by the statement "You have passed" can unlikely but possibly be considered as disturbing. So it is not out of the question that a referee might issue more than pure advice, e.g., he could issue warnings to A to know the clock's buttons and to B not to make disturbing remarks for the remainder of the game. The referee, however, is not required to issue any such penalties, so it does depend on the referee.

[Javaness2]

Unless I have misconstrued your statement here Robert, this is a monstrous position. It is particularly unsettling as it is the position of the EGF.

One could argue that the definition of pass simply needs to be altered. A verbal utterance "Pass" must be given, optionally followed by the exchange of a pass stone, then followed by the pressing of a clock. This is a perfectly reasonable formulation.
For example, in Chess one must verbally offer a draw, and in the ruleset Robert references "A player may resign the game by clearly saying "I resign"..."

Let us simply point out the following rule within the ruleset, which is obviously relevant:

4 Position disturbance

If the position is disturbed accidently, or if a position was recorded incorrectly during an adjournment, and the players cannot simply correct it, then the referee can apply the following procedures, in order:

correct the position.
continue with the position as is.
unwind the game to a previous agreed position.
award a loss to the player who disturbed the position.
cancel the game and start afresh with possibly reduced time limits.

Yet, should a player's hand accidentally depress a button or a lever, perhaps while reaching for a coffee, perhaps while stumbling after getting out of their chair, the official ruling is that they have passed. I find this completely inexplicable.

Could it be, that winning a game, using such technique, is more satisfying?

You aren't a very good referee if others can't understand your decisions.

Others who do not read what I suggest them to read are responsible for their unwillingness to read.

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/egfgtr.html

After reading, one knows about §5.4:

"[...]
1. A player passes and completes the move by pressing the clock. It is possible for the player to lose on time if the clock is not pressed.
2. The opponent passes and completes the move by pressing the clock. Again it is possible for the opponent to lose on time if the clock is not pressed."

This answers your question because the rules clearly describes how a pass is performed on the clock: by pressing the clock. The rule does not distinguish between intentional and accidental pressing of the clock (by the player whose turn it is). Since the rule does not distinguish it, pressing the clock (i.e. one's own move button) indicates a pass.

Of Javaness2's options, none applies: 1. does not apply because he did not cheat. 2. does not apply because the referee is called and must make some statement. 3. does not apply because it has been B's next turn.

Nevertheless, there is potential for advice or penalty depending on the exact players' behaviour beyond the obvious facts above. E.g., commenting A's move by the statement "You have passed" can unlikely but possibly be considered as disturbing. So it is not out of the question that a referee might issue more than pure advice, e.g., he could issue warnings to A to know the clock's buttons and to B not to make disturbing remarks for the remainder of the game. The referee, however, is not required to issue any such penalties, so it does depend on the referee.

[ez4u]

...

Others who do not read what I suggest them to read are responsible for their unwillingness to read.

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/egfgtr.html

After reading, one knows about §5.4:

"[...]
1. A player passes and completes the move by pressing the clock. It is possible for the player to lose on time if the clock is not pressed.
2. The opponent passes and completes the move by pressing the clock. Again it is possible for the opponent to lose on time if the clock is not pressed."

This answers your question because the rules clearly describes how a pass is performed on the clock: by pressing the clock. The rule does not distinguish between intentional and accidental pressing of the clock (by the player whose turn it is). Since the rule does not distinguish it, pressing the clock (i.e. one's own move button) indicates a pass.

...

Interesting... However, it would not seem on the face of it that the written statement is in line with the interpretation. Note the following:

First, under the section detailing how the game progresses there is a description of a play but no similar description of a pass. So the existing rules would seem to be ambiguous as to what constitutes a pass.

"2. GAME PROTOCOL

The following rules apply to the progress of the game:

1. Move

A move is either a play or a pass.

2. Making a move

A stone is played quickly as near as possible to its intended intersection. Once the stone touches the board, there should be minimal physical movement required to place the stone on its intended intersection, and then it should be released straightaway. Once the stone is played, any removal of the opponent's stones is carried out.

A move is completed by pressing the clock with the same hand that played the move. Once the clock is pressed, the hand used must promptly be removed from the clock.

3. Prisoners..."

Second, section 5.4 deals with Timing Rules not how moves are made.

Third, as correctly quoted by Robert, section 5.4 states "A player passes and completes the move by pressing the clock..." The crucial element to me is that there are two actions noted for the player:
1. passing, and
2. completing the move by pressing the clock.

To me this quite clearly would allow the referee to rule that accidentally pressing the clock (without the intent to pass) is not passing. What do I not understand here?