Some players certainly like to get in the last word, even figuratively.
At the World Open yesterday, one of the player’s didn’t like the ruling made by a TD, and to emphasize the point, he spat on the TD (it wasn’t me). A poll was taken of all the TDs, and the player was “voted off the tournament.” However, he is still permitted to enter the side tournaments, so everyone needs to keep their wet suits ready.
In contrast, what would happen to a hotel guest, who spat on one of the maids? What would the customer likely expect to happen, after spitting on the waiter?
“Food” for thought, next time time it’s time to act out at the chessboard…
Always on the lookout for the new and exotic chess tournament story angle, the next Chess Life Online feature could be what it’s like to have a player spit on you.
The standard entry forms for a tournament run by the New Mexico Chess Organization have the following brief statement:“By signing below, Player agrees to abide by all rules of the USCF for chess and conduct.”
Spitting on someone, player, TD or even a spectator is not orderly and and violates a player’s responsibilities “To conduct themselves in an orderly fashion” and “To compete in a spirit of good sportmanship” as stated on page 231 of the 5th Edition Rule Book. If this were a tournament I was running I would have disqualified the player on the spot without consulting any other TD present, asking him to leave the playing venue at once. (Let him appeal the decision if he so chose - I am certain he would lose.)
Art Byers, NMCO Tournament Organizer and Local TD.
In many jurisdictions, because of the possibility of being infected with the AIDS virus, spitting on another person can be treated as a felonious assault. I would be willing to bet that the Philadelphia police would take such an incident seriously and would arrest the alleged assailant. The TD involve might have good grounds for a civil lawsuit as well because of the threat to his well being. There may also be liability and insurance issues for the organizer for allowing the player to remain.
Is the TD going to file an ethics complaint over this incident? There should be enough grounds IMO to revoke the membership and ban from future play. This should be done in an expeditious manner. No TD or player should have to be subjected to this type of behavior.
I have to agree with everything said here. Based upon the offender’s age, a long-term penalty should be applied. This incident is an assault and cannot be tolerated at USCF events. If this person is an adult, banning for life is not unreasonable. If he was a minor, perhaps 5 or 10 years would be appropriate. It is a serious happening. Organizations must police the conduct of their membership, for their own sake as well as that of the other members. Who would want to be subjected to the conduct of such a person?
I think he should have been asked to leave the premises and certainly not let him play in the side events. That type of behavior is just totally unacceptable.
It is my understanding that the TD in question did inquire of the local police, and was told that such an incident would not be classified as assault. (Incidentally, as the World Open was held in King of Prussia, the Philadelphia PD would not be the department to handle this.)
It is my further understanding that an ethics complaint is being filed against the offending player.
In fact, it was not only an assault; there was a battery too.
Supplied by The Free Dictionary:
"At common law, an intentional unpermitted act causing harmful or offensive contact with the “person” of another.
Battery is concerned with the right to have one’s body left alone by others.
Battery is both a tort and a crime. Its essential element, harmful or offensive contact, is the same in both areas of the law. The main distinction between the two categories lies in the penalty imposed. A defendant sued for a tort is civilly liable to the plaintiff for damages. The punishment for criminal battery is a fine, imprisonment, or both. Usually battery is prosecuted as a crime only in cases involving serious harm to the victim."
This incident would not usually result in a criminal arrest or citation in that area. (I lived 50 years there.) There is a civil law implication here. However, since no real physical harm seemed to have been done, a severe organizational penalty should be imposed. Conduct, like this, should be checked (pun intended) before it escalates at future events by this person.
In contrast, what would happen to a hotel guest, who spat on one of the maids? What would the customer likely expect to happen, after spitting on the waiter?
enough thoughts about the bad guy in this example. I would like to commend the TD that was spit on for his actions, staying calm, level headed, honorable and outstanding, showing good behavior and being an example of a great TD. Keeping chess a non-contact game. Think of all the people this could have involved/affected had this turned into an all out fight. Chess could have made front page news in a bad way, had this TD not responded in an outstanding way. I believe this TD should be congratulated, this is the kind of TD I want at all tournaments. Sometimes you have to deal with unreasonable people. Thanks also too all the TDs that deal with bad behavior in such a calm/reasonable manner. I am proud to be a chess player and a USCF member. Lee
