Harcourt injuries.

[conal]

Wasn't there and it was a good event by all accounts.

However... under what rule-set do we hit people in the back of the head with long swords?

This is a request for comment, not an accusation,

conal.

[NewAlexander]

Accidents happen. We are playing with swords after all

[pmel018]

Thats a piss-poor excuse
Phil

[conal]

Seems as though nothing happened then...

Call me "an old fashioned Inquisitor" if you like but when I hear silence, I see a conspiracy.

Okay... seeing as we don't want to talk about the blow to the back of the head that knocked someone unconscious.

How about we have a chat about the dislocated shoulder from the arm bar and drop?

Or how about the Marshall of the combat in question grow a set and front up here with the incident report?

[Chantelle]

right

i didn't want to post this too soon - as i was hoping to hear back from some of the people i had sent it to that i had been discussing this with - like angel etc, but for obious reasons she and a few others have been a little busier than usual....

i have been trying to complie and keep track of all the sca in chch etc and for want of a better word run comms with angela communicating and distrubuting on the lists etc so i was a little side tracked yesterday ....on that note if you are worried about your friends down there - a new revised list of who we have not had confirmed as being ok, is up on my facebook page x

so i will post the document conal and you and others can respond (i hope) and things may get underway, however the bad timing with the events of the last two days

xx chantelle

[conal]

Cool ta.

Please pardon my Bugbear impersonation.

[Chantelle]

hehe xxx you were concerned - that is fine xx and if you checked your inbox you would see i sent it to you to read ....hehe xxx

hopefully nothing but good will come of all of this

[Robbo]

Blow to the back of the head that dropped Seamus:

He was called twice, yup twice, for turning the back of his scone into the blow and was advised that if he did so a third time he would be disqualified as per the rules. The rest is fairly obvious.

Arm bar/throw on Thorsson. Mike, his opponent, was struck cleanly by Jeremy. The call of break went out but due to the nature of in his padding lid, marshal calls were hard to hear. Mike managed to miss all three shouts of break as well as those of the crowd. Adrenalin, it does funny things to a guy.

Marshal's and respective sets. Colin wanted to call it quits after Seamus injury, but was convinced by the other competitors that they could keep fighting to a safe standard. Thus fighting continued. Colin and his fighters are used to fighting to "stop", whilst we're more used to a very loud "break". Could Colin have marshaled the fights a little better? Hell, every marshal think they could do better at the end of the day, especially when an injury occurs on their watch, and I know every fighter felt responsible.

How's that Conal? want more? pm me

[Ribauld]

I have to say that Robbo's description of the events leading upto the two injuries is correct.

I saw both events and the aftermath.

While I have strong opinions on what happened I don't blame the organisers or the format.

Regards

Uncle Phil

[Colin]

Apparently I'm conspiring to do something that I'm unaware of. I wish someone will tell me the secret of what I'm being secretive about.

Firstly Conal, I am not a re-enactor and as such I am not beholden to the 're-enactment' community.

Secondly, did it ever occur to you I might be busy?

Thirdly, I don't bother to visit GD all that often. The vocal protagonists here, for example, don't like me posting, and since I'm not a re-enactor and I'm generally rather busy I have better things to do.

In future I will not allow complete strangers to me to compete in any tournament I run.

There needs to be some sort of regular vetting process.

Two things spring immediately to mind:

1. Those that flinch from attacks (i.e. turn their head or back from blows) will not be allowed in. Anyone who does this during a match is automatically disqualified.

While it is a natural response (the flight part of the fight-flight response) it is unacceptable in combat.

Firstly if a defence could be achieved, the time is used up in the turn and therefore no defence is possible.

Secondly it breaks the skeletal structure (which is optimised when the head is aligned with the tail-bone in a straight-ish configuration). This means that what might have been a 'light blow' is exasperated due to a lack of skeletal strength.

Thirdly there are more vulnerable points when the head is turned. No amount of armour is going to stop the concussive force delivered at these points of the head. No helmet, for example, would stop the 'rabbit punch' delivered to Sean at Harcourt. However there are more vulnerable points than the occipital ridge. The ear, the jaw and the temple are more exposed when the head is turned. A blow to any of these, or the concussive wave driven through a helmet, will cause damage with concussion being at the low end of the scale. These potential severe injuries are compounded by the lack of skeletal strength mentioned in point two above. Death, BTW, is quite possible.

This is why head turns were banned at Harcourt Park. Unfortunately disqualification was only after three violations.

In future I intend to throw blows at people's heads and see how they react. No one will get through if he turns his head from the blow. (Whether I do this myself or have a 'pre-game' warm-ups I haven't yet decided).

2. Breakfalls will need to be tested. While it is debatable whether Jeremy would have walked away scot-free with a proper breakfall, I do feel it would have improved his chances (and I emphasise the word 'feel'). Nothing in the rules had anything about the need to do breakfalls. In any future tournament I run hopeful competitors will need to prove their competence in this regard. Hopefully then when throws occur any damage incurred will be minimised or removed altogether.

To repeat: it might not have stopped Jeremy's injury, but on the other hand it might have. It certainly does not hurt to learn, train and master breakfalls (and they're good life skills).

And not concerned with the injuries, but relevant anyway:

3. The test of the suicide attack. Quite frankly had the tournament at Harcourt park been done with sharps all competitors would be dead from every single match they were in. No if, buts or maybes in that regard. Those that I have personally trained were just as guilty as those that didn't. One must secure his own defence first and foremost before counter-attack. Those that are unable to defend themselves will not be admitted.

Basically all those that competed only saw 'openings, openings, openings' and left their own targets wide open. No thought was put into one's own defence. It's pretty sad when you have to rely on the other guy not to injure you.

You can tank up on all the armour you want. It isn't going to do you any good in the long run. It is entirely possible to have an one on one fight with sharps with both people walking away un-injured: people did so in the past. Some fencing masters of old only allowed their students to practice with sharps (Viaggani being the obvious one) for example. I'm not expecting the 'sharps', but quite frankly until people are prepared to defend themselves, no fighting rules are ever going to be safe. Think about your own safety first and foremost then think about hitting the other guy.

To quote an English translation of Capo Ferro: "Never attack without a defence, never defend without an attack" (Jared Kirby). It's a statement that should drilled into everyone until they are bored with it and then it should be drilled into them even more.

One thing Harcourt Park has taught me: I need to go back to the drawing board in how I teach people. The concept of making sure you are safe first is not getting through into fighting.

[Callum]

I too have been busy tidying up after the weekend and I have not had the time to reflect on the injuries that were incurred at my event. So no conspiracy here, sorry Conal.

I will not add to the comments above by those who were actually there as they have all been reported accurately.

I've taken on-board all the comments here and agree with most of them. The next event that I run will take them on-board and hopefully we will see the risk of injuries reduced.

Anybody who has any problems with me, the people who I delegated to run this part of the event, or the way that we ran it are welcome to PM me. As the overall event organiser, I take full responsibility for what occurred.

[conal]

I am not a re-enactor and as such I am not beholden to the 're-enactment' community. -Colin

Nor would I expect you to be Colin.

In terms of safety though, we owe it to the sport to look at these things in the clear light of day, in a public forum. Back to my point regarding peer review.

In response to Robbo's comments;- I'd only ask if it was the same guy twice who failed to hear the "halt'?

...and would a stick painted white not provide the necessary visual cue for the cessation of combat?

no conspiracy here, sorry Conal. -Callum
Colour me disappointed, I'll put the tongs away. >:-]

I take full responsibility for what occurred - Callum
No need for the blame game Callum, (Great kiwi tradition that it is.)

The responsibility for the injury is the easiest part to calculate in a re-enactment combat.

The chap with the offending weapon in his hand is 51% responsible.

After that we can look at particulars and identify opportunities for improvement.

Don't get me wrong I like hitting Shaemus as much as the rest of you. But it's not much fun when his back is turned.

How's our discipline out there instructors?

How actively are we teaching our combatants to "pull the shot"?

How much focused target, pell work and safe take downs are we doing at training? (Colin, yeah we do break-falls too.)

I don't blame the organisers or the format - Phil.

Yes (a) and No (b) Phil.

(a) See blame-game comment above.

(b) I've had a suspicion for a bit... that unless we call a halt after each conclusive engagement, competition combat quickly degenerates into a slap-fest.

Basically all those that competed only saw 'openings, openings, openings' and left their own targets wide open. No thought was put into one's own defence. It's pretty sad when you have to rely on the other guy not to injure you.

I'm thinking that part of what Colin is alluding to here is the "lack of art" that seems to evolve from current tourney technique.

Returning to...
It's pretty sad when you have to rely on the other guy not to injure you. - Colin

I'm not relying on the other guy. I'm relying on the discipline of his Dojo to enforce the distinction between Kata and Budo.

Just thoughts, ta,

conal.[/i]

[Colin]

[Callum]

[Colin]

Both fencing masks and boxing masks have a hole for the hearing part of the ear. Perhaps have an opening like either of those aforementioned should be part of the requirements?

I know it doesn't appear to be historical, but given it is used today, presumably for similar reasons, it may have to be a compromise.

If recollection serves me right, the opening is part of pretty much in every sport padding for the helmet.

Either that or use trumpets, whistles or other instruments along those lines.