Post by schlager7 on Jun 5, 2007 7:42:03 GMT -6
(With thanks to kd5mdk for bringing our attention to these points on Fencing Net.)
The President of the FIE Medical Commission has made the following proposal to the FIE:
===========================================
Proposal to modify FIE Rule t.33
Introduction:
A recent high-profile incident at the Asian Games, during which a fencer experienced severe incapacitating muscle cramp causing disruption of the bout, brought to light a deficiency in FIE Rule t.33 which only deals with injuries, and makes no reference to the handling of acute nontraumatic medical conditions (ref. report on Asian Games by Dr Ezequiel Rodriguez).
The Executive Committee of the FIE has given the Medical Commission the task of drafting a proposition for the Congress which will:
- provide a clear definition of cramp and
- modify art. t.33 so as to permit the medical delegate to intervene at any time when he notices that because of a physical problem (not necessarily an injury) a fencer is no longer able to fence.
Historical Background:
Although muscle cramp is not mentioned by name in the rules, it has become synonymous with the one condition for which “time” may not be given. Cramp is not caused by direct physical trauma and therefore cannot qualify as an “injury” under the present rule t.33.
In the past, probably because cramp was less well understood than today, it was regarded by many as a “deficiency”, a “weakness”, or “lack of fitness” which was the fencer’s fault. For this reason, and because fencers at times feigned muscle cramp in order to obtain a few minutes of unjustified rest in the middle of a bout, cramp was intentionally excluded as a condition for which “time” could be given.
Rationale for modification of t.33:
Proposals for the 2007 Congress Modifications to the Rules
Cramp is a very real physical condition.
It is clearly defined (see definition) .
It is possible to tell clinically if severe cramp is real or feigned.
If cramp is left untreated, the problem may be compounded, causing real injury to the affected muscle(s).
The public spectacle of a fencer incapacitated by cramp, in agony, who is offered no assistance “because rule t.33 does not allow intervention”:
- is most embarrassing,
- amounts to medical neglect and is unethical, and
- is morally indefensible.
There is therefore no question that an athlete with incapacitating muscle cramp deserves to receive treatment, which is relatively quick and simple.
The only question is whether the fencer should be given the chance to receive treatment and resume the bout (i.e. the normal procedure as applied to an injury under t.33), or whether he or
should be excluded from the bout simply because he has cramp ?
It is felt that the time is ripe for the FIE to reappraise the situation and consider an appropriate modification to Rule t.33 for active intervention in a case of cramp.
The President of the FIE Medical Commission has made the following proposal to the FIE:
===========================================
Proposal to modify FIE Rule t.33
Introduction:
A recent high-profile incident at the Asian Games, during which a fencer experienced severe incapacitating muscle cramp causing disruption of the bout, brought to light a deficiency in FIE Rule t.33 which only deals with injuries, and makes no reference to the handling of acute nontraumatic medical conditions (ref. report on Asian Games by Dr Ezequiel Rodriguez).
The Executive Committee of the FIE has given the Medical Commission the task of drafting a proposition for the Congress which will:
- provide a clear definition of cramp and
- modify art. t.33 so as to permit the medical delegate to intervene at any time when he notices that because of a physical problem (not necessarily an injury) a fencer is no longer able to fence.
Historical Background:
Although muscle cramp is not mentioned by name in the rules, it has become synonymous with the one condition for which “time” may not be given. Cramp is not caused by direct physical trauma and therefore cannot qualify as an “injury” under the present rule t.33.
In the past, probably because cramp was less well understood than today, it was regarded by many as a “deficiency”, a “weakness”, or “lack of fitness” which was the fencer’s fault. For this reason, and because fencers at times feigned muscle cramp in order to obtain a few minutes of unjustified rest in the middle of a bout, cramp was intentionally excluded as a condition for which “time” could be given.
Rationale for modification of t.33:
Proposals for the 2007 Congress Modifications to the Rules
Cramp is a very real physical condition.
It is clearly defined (see definition) .
It is possible to tell clinically if severe cramp is real or feigned.
If cramp is left untreated, the problem may be compounded, causing real injury to the affected muscle(s).
The public spectacle of a fencer incapacitated by cramp, in agony, who is offered no assistance “because rule t.33 does not allow intervention”:
- is most embarrassing,
- amounts to medical neglect and is unethical, and
- is morally indefensible.
There is therefore no question that an athlete with incapacitating muscle cramp deserves to receive treatment, which is relatively quick and simple.
The only question is whether the fencer should be given the chance to receive treatment and resume the bout (i.e. the normal procedure as applied to an injury under t.33), or whether he or
should be excluded from the bout simply because he has cramp ?
It is felt that the time is ripe for the FIE to reappraise the situation and consider an appropriate modification to Rule t.33 for active intervention in a case of cramp.