Let's Develop Standards

[Blitz.]

Now im just putting in my two cents about issues; take it or leave it, just what popped into my head as i was reading.

Weapon Checking - An Easy way to Cert someone for checking weapons is to have them shadow at an event, and then have some weapons you know for sure fail, some that failed for smaller things (core felt in the pommel) and some passing weapons, and have them test them, and see how they do, have the weapons stated above come from a broad spetrum. Just an idea. Shows how well they look for things ya know?

On Field - A Quick ABCD Checklist kinda thing with BoW Questions and seniero(SP?) questions like what would you do in this situation, and make them no brainer, like "if you got 3 vaild complaints about a weapon what would you do?"(and by vaild i dont mean "he swings too fast") Kinda to just show that they have the BoW smarts, and Common sense to be on the field.

I think, personally, that all heralds NEED to be adept at checking weapons on the fly.

Any herald in my opinion should be able to pick up a weapon and check it from pommel to tip. Weather it be a Glaive to a dagger (size difference along with Courtsy Foam) And know if it fails, and if it did for why, without having to be like "uh im not sure why but heres my idea".

Sorry if i rambled i tried not too..

[Beren Fellspear]

Blitz, I think these are skills that all heralds/weapon checkers should develop. What Brutus is saying is that he wants to develop a set of rigorous, agreed-upon standards that certify our game's officials. To that end, I really applaud these efforts. Standardized heralds' exams/certification has been something that was discussed long before the Belegarth split, and it's high time that something happened along these lines.

In my new realm, one of the biggest problems is that I'm the only experienced herald -- and my experience is very limited on a large national field. My big problem is passing on my heralding experience to my four most eager guys who want to learn to herald.

It would be much easier if I had a pdf or some sort of heralding rule book that annotated each of the rules from the BoW with a herald's considerations. A herald can't learn the rules by *just* reading the BoW; the herald has to consider the nuances and particulars of how a rule plays on the field. Here's an example of how the annotations to a single rule might read in the BoW:

Grappling:

3.6.3. No throws, unarmed strikes, or joint/nerve holds.

Angmarth has always described grappling as 'controlled high school wrestling,' and this definition serves well to outline the type of contact we allow. Grappling is not wild or uncontrolled force, it's a thoughtful application of your mass to bring your opponent to the ground.



If thoughtful, experienced heralds amend most/all of the BoW this way, then we've got a solid guide that a new herald can pick up and understand the practical applications of the very dry rules that are in the BoW. Indeed, a lot of this writing is already done in the wiki, but now needs to be reformatted in a non-hyperlinked way that someone can print, read, study, and bring with them to practices/events.

This is my two cents about a critical component to the certified herald project. I'll offer to collaborate with Brutus or another experienced herald to make this "Herald's Version of the BoW" happen this summer, if people like this idea.

Anyway, keep up the fight for high standards Brutus! Higher levels of standardization and professionalization will only grow our sport.

-jeff

[Sir Anastasia]

An annotated BOW is a very good idea. I think people get caught up in the literal and forget what the rule "means." This was true in a recent debate about blade trapping. The rule forbidding grabbing your opponent's weapon is there to prevent cheese and damage to the foam/core, which is why it is never ok to trap or grab any part of the "striking surface" including flats, which do not strike.

[Blitz.]

Beren - My ideas were mostly to gauge how to test someones abilities, see if they notice the small things, like semi harder to notice rigidness in the pommels, stuff like that. Also to see if they had common sense during situations that could arise on the field, not an "I'd let a more experienced herald handle it" kinda attitude.. I didn't think my ideas woulda been taken seriously, but i figured it wouldn't hurt to post them.

I do like the idea about having several people; trusted and respected people in belegarth, kinda sit down and discuss an annotated BoW.

[Reverend]

An annotated BOW is a very good idea. I think people get caught up in the literal and forget what the rule "means." This was true in a recent debate about blade trapping. The rule forbidding grabbing your opponent's weapon is there to prevent cheese and damage to the foam/core, which is why it is never ok to trap or grab any part of the "striking surface" including flats, which do not strike.

Elwrath, Sphinx and I came up with an "BoW translation for Heralds" on our 24 hour drive to WPO a few years back. It too, is in storage with all my heralding info. I'll try and find it when I'm up there.

[Boss Kaptin Miikie]

I agree with the idea of some sort of certification on this if nothing else its an easy identify for those people who want to learn these skills to benefit there realm or learn to do the job even check a weapon before an event to see if it pass. For example War of The Reckoning was a small event in its 2nd or 3rd year held by a newer realm down in southern Utah a few of us with the experience volunteered our services to help out as well as teach newer people in the sport. we shared our knowledge on weapons check and trained the realm people basic skills as what as what we have learned form our experience karion alone gave a very precise and in depth class on arrow check. They had a less then basic concept of weapons check as well as field safety being a new realm and they greatly benefited as well as were extremely appreciative of the knowledge. We can't forget that the skills we have acquired thru administration of the safety aspect of the sport can help in more places then just on the field. There's some of us out west that has put in allot of time heralding my rev and karion spend most of our week doing it because we enjoy it as well as it helps the event staff out and takes allot of pressure off the people running it. Chaos aside its a large event with many event staff personal but look at the smaller single realm events allot of time a small council or even one maybe two people doing everything I always try to volunteer my time as a herald because that helps the even staff they know the field is taken care of so they can concentrate on other event duties. The bad side of this is that some times some one who inst qualified could step of for numerous reasons may it be to help a friend win a tourney etc. I agree with the idea of a heralds guild but I do think that it should be about sharing our experience and teaching as well as doing the job. I don't think were should fix the system but more develop a system that allows us to spreed the system like classes for weapons check and field experience at events for example as well as getting out there and helping the event.

[Bægsecg]

Some sort of certification for the heralds/marshals/weapon checkers should be in place. I am interested in starting a unit in my town. When I go to the office of parks and recreation and ask them to let me use their fields, and advertise to their public, they are going to want proof that our sport has safety checks in place, more than just honor. I mean would it not be awesome if say a high school started on official medieval combat team, like a fencing team but less exclusive. It would do wonders for our sport, and the only way they will do it is if there are certifications in place. Bureaucracy sucks, but is an essential aspect of any official sport.

[Bægsecg]

Also it will save the sport from a lot of legal issues down the road. Waivers are not bulletproof and certifications will help settle liability issue that can arise. If anyone is attending a well accredited university they should just go ask a law professor their opinion. Unless people want to get sued because they run an event and let some one volunteer who does not have enough experience which then leads to a participant getting hurt in a way that renders the waiver void. It can happen. It is called gross negligence.

I know it is wikipedia so it should be taken with a grain of salt but... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assumption_of_risk Assumption of risk is a defense in the law of torts, which bars a plaintiff from recovery against a negligent tortfeasor if the defendant can demonstrate that the plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risks at issue inherent to the dangerous activity in which he was participating at the time of his injury.

What is usually meant by assumption of risk is more precisely termed primary assumption of risk. It occurs when the plaintiff has either expressly or impliedly relieved the defendant of the duty to mitigate or relieve the risk causing the injury from which the cause of action arises. It operates as a complete bar to liability on the theory that upon assumption of the risk, there is no longer a duty of care running from the defendant to the plaintiff; without a duty owed by the defendant, there can be no negligence on his part.[1] However, primary assumption of risk is not a blanket exemption from liability for the operators of a dangerous activity. The specific risk causing the injury must have been known to, and appreciated by, the plaintiff in order for primary assumption of risk to apply. Also, assumption of risk does not absolve a defendant of liability for reckless conduct.[2]

This defense is commonly used in cases of injuries occurring during risky recreational activities, such as skiing, paragliding, and scuba diving.

Secondary assumption of risk is a rather different doctrine akin in some respects to comparative negligence. The difference was explained by the Supreme Court of California as follows:
“ In cases involving ‘primary assumption of risk’—where, by virtue of the nature of the activity and the parties' relationship to the activity, the defendant owes no legal duty to protect the plaintiff from the particular risk of harm that caused the injury—the doctrine continues to operate as a complete bar to the plaintiff's recovery. In cases involving ‘secondary assumption of risk’—where the defendant does owe a duty of care to the plaintiff, but the plaintiff proceeds to encounter a known risk imposed by the defendant's breach of duty—the doctrine is merged into the comparative fault scheme, and the trier of fact, in apportioning the loss resulting from the injury, may consider the relative responsibility of the parties.[3] I quoted this at 17:32 est friday may 27th *This page was last modified on 3 September 2010 at 19:25.*

[Brutus]

From a liability standpoint, does having "certified heralds" do anything to increase risk? Might not the case be made that since the organization is "certifying" that certain people are qualified to enforce the rules, if no certified heralds are present and an incident occurs, that organization is thus responsible? Or could a plaintiff claim that they felt it was safe to participate because certified heralds were present, but those certified heralds failed to prevent the unsafe incident from ocurring?

If a certified herald is goofing off and something happens, would they be liable? That also means a code of conduct should be a part of any certification process.

[Blackwolfe]

From a liability standpoint, does having "certified heralds" do anything to increase risk? Might not the case be made that since the organization is "certifying" that certain people are qualified to enforce the rules, if no certified heralds are present and an incident occurs, that organization is thus responsible?
If a certified herald is goofing off and something happens, would they be liable? That also means a code of conduct should be a part of any certification process.

It would be a matter of stated and or implied intent.

If Belegarth certifies designated Heralds at a national organization level, and states that they are qualified to enforce and or ensure the safety of the players then yes that would open the gate for liability in the case of injury, just as pools and beaches are sometimes sued when an on duty life guard fails to prevent an injury.

I would attempt to avoid this issue by publicly informing all players that Heralds on the field are there to enforce the rules of the sport, and are not a guarantee of personal safety of participants. A certification would only state that a Herald has been duly trained in the rules of the game as stated in the BoW, further a certification could be worded to state that Heralds are not responsible for the overall conduct of players. I do not believe an Umpire or Referee has ever been sued over an injury in any major sport.