meganium45
Active Member
'pop and others.
I think where Steve P and others have issues with "mentioning the take-back" option is that when it comes out of the mouth of a judge, it really becomes a suggestion. No matter the tone given.
A player, especially a younger player, may feel "respect your elders" pressure to give the take-back, event if it was not suggested in so many words. Just the suggestion may be too much pressure.
Would it be also proper for the judge, after a match is reported to inform the player that they can concede to their opponent, even if the subject was never broached by either player? How different is that? I know I am really playing devil's advocate here, but how different are the two situations?
Is it then the responsibility of the coach or parent then to make sure the younger players know that they do not have to give the take-back, and in most every circumstance should not do so? We are now giving the advantage to the better supported players?
Not allowing a take-back is NOT against the spirit of the game, unless your opponent has already allowed you a take back, or if you deny one, and then ask for one later in the game. If you get a take-back, you should give one (not required, but SOTG).
More for discussion.
Vince
I think where Steve P and others have issues with "mentioning the take-back" option is that when it comes out of the mouth of a judge, it really becomes a suggestion. No matter the tone given.
A player, especially a younger player, may feel "respect your elders" pressure to give the take-back, event if it was not suggested in so many words. Just the suggestion may be too much pressure.
Would it be also proper for the judge, after a match is reported to inform the player that they can concede to their opponent, even if the subject was never broached by either player? How different is that? I know I am really playing devil's advocate here, but how different are the two situations?
Is it then the responsibility of the coach or parent then to make sure the younger players know that they do not have to give the take-back, and in most every circumstance should not do so? We are now giving the advantage to the better supported players?
Not allowing a take-back is NOT against the spirit of the game, unless your opponent has already allowed you a take back, or if you deny one, and then ask for one later in the game. If you get a take-back, you should give one (not required, but SOTG).
More for discussion.
Vince
Last edited: