Registered: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 2

A free guard zone situation came up in league play (USA). The yellow team threw a high center guard. Red team tried to draw around but came up short of the rings (still FGZ). Yellow attempted to come around the other side. The delivered yellow stone hit the yellow guard, pushed it into the red guard and removed the red stone from play (hit the board). The red team claimed this was a FGZ violation and the displaced stones be returned to play. The yellow team contended that the delivered stone did not make contact with the red stone, so it was a valid play.

USA FGZ Rule R6. b) If, prior to the delivery of the fifth stone of an end, a delivered stone causes, either directly or indirectly, an opposition stone to be moved from the FGZ to an out-of-play position, then the delivered stone is removed from play, and any displaced stones are replaced, by the non-offending team, to their positions prior to the violation taking place.

My thought is that no matter how you define 'direct' or 'indirect', there is no situation where you can remove an opponents' FGZ guard out of play before the fifth stone.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2015
Location:
Posts: 27

All of the stones would go back, and the shooter would be removed. The red guard cannot be removed from play!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

Put it back, by definition the FGZ rock cannot be removed by the opposition no matter which teams stone is raised to remove it.

__________________
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire"-Winston Churchill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

The others are 100% correct on this. But since you asked this question, I am guessing that you or the people playing are new-ish to curling to FGZ stuff has not come up that much. So a couple of other random FGZ stuff rarities that might come up, just to make sure you know the rule application.

In your scenario, the Red team skip could have swept their red rock after it was bumped to help it get out of play. This is a completely legal and logical strategy that your teams skip should no about.

And one other random one. Let say Yellow's first rock is a very long guard, maybe 1mm over the hogline so it stays and has FGZ protection. Red's first rock tries to draw around the long yellow center guard, but is thrown way too light, and actually freezes to that yellow stone, making the red rock not cross the hog line. Well, the red rock is not removed from play, it stays in play because it touched a rock that was considered in play (the first yellow one). Also, that red rock short of the hog line gets FGZ protection. And to go even further and say Yellow ROck #2 tries to draw around both long guards but again is light and freezes to the red rock #1. well short of the hog line. Yellow #2 stays in play, and gets FGZ protection

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2013
Location: Halifax
Posts: 59

The other somewhat unusual situation (but still does occur from time to time) is that it is legal to remove your own stone during the free guard zone period. Thus for example, yellow lead tries to draw in, comes up light, skip wants no guards, so yellow peals their own stone out on the second shot.

Oh, also note that while opposition stones cannot be removed from play during FGZ but they can be moved (into the house, elsewhere in FGZ, anywhere where they're still in play).

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2013
Location:
Posts: 559

quote:

---

Originally posted by jzwanzig
Oh, also note that while opposition stones cannot be removed from play during FGZ but they can be moved (into the house, elsewhere in FGZ, anywhere where they're still in play).

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1418

What if the first stone of the end is an accidental guard, the opposition removes it accidentally. Does it have to go back, or can the non offending team leave as is?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2009
Location:
Posts: 338

quote:

---

Originally posted by guido
What if the first stone of the end is an accidental guard, the opposition removes it accidentally. Does it have to go back, or can the non offending team leave as is?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1418

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nine Ender


Intent doesn't matter, and you can always choose to let a shot stand as the non offending team.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 272

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nine Ender


Intent doesn't matter, and you can always choose to let a shot stand as the non offending team.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608

... And if Yellow throws a high guard, red follows with a guard 3 feet in front of the House, then yellow hits their own high guard (yellow), which then hits the red guard, taking them BOTH out of play - so that the only rock remaining is the yellow shooter (in the free guard zone).
In that scenario, we've established that the red guard goes back to where it was (a few feet in front of the House), and the shooter (yellow) is removed... but does the high yellow guard also go back? In this case, the high yellow guard was taken out by a yellow stone, which is legal... but it also removed a red stone...

So what's the call in this scenario? Does the original high yellow guard go back, as well, even though it was removed by a yellow rock?

__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2015
Location:
Posts: 27

Yes, all of those rocks return. If a FGZ stone is illegally removed, all stones are returned to their original position.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2009
Location:
Posts: 338

quote:

---

Originally posted by ngm


This is not correct.

The delivered stone is removed from play and any other stone that was moved is put back to where it was. No discretion.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2013
Location:
Posts: 123

quote:

---

Originally posted by ngm


This is not correct.

The delivered stone is removed from play and any other stone that was moved is put back to where it was. No discretion.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1418

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oly M. Pics


I believe you are mistaken. Non-offending team has the option.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 140

It appears guido pulled his reference from http://glennpaulley.ca/curling/2011...ard-zone-rule/, which isn't current.

From Curling Canada, http://www.curling.ca/about-the-spo...-general-play/, Rule 12(2):

Any stationary stone(s) belonging to the opposition located in the FGZ shall not be removed from play by the delivering team prior to the delivery of the 5th stone of the end. When an opposition�s stone(s) that is removed from play from the FGZ prior to the 5th stone of the end, directly or indirectly, without exception, the delivered stone must be removed from play and any other displaced stones replaced as close as possible to its original position. Any stone previously in the FGZ, but now located in the rings, biting the tee-_line, or behind the tee-line, may be removed at any time without penalty.

From World Curling Federation, http://www.worldcurling.org/rules-a...ions-downloads, R6(b):

If, prior to the delivery of the fifth stone of an end, a delivered stone causes, either directly or indirectly, an opposition stone to be moved from the FGZ to an out-of-play position, then the delivered stone is removed from play, and any displaced stones are replaced, by the non-offending team, to their positions prior to the violation taking place.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1418

The curling Canada rules state that the rocks be replaced. No option. So I may have been mistaken. It happened once before I think.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2005
Location: Elmira
Posts: 179

quote:

---

Originally posted by jzwanzig
The other somewhat unusual situation (but still does occur from time to time) is that it is legal to remove your own stone during the free guard zone period. Thus for example, yellow lead tries to draw in, comes up light, skip wants no guards, so yellow peals their own stone out on the second shot.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2009
Location:
Posts: 338

quote:

---

Originally posted by guido
The curling Canada rules state that the rocks be replaced. No option. So I may have been mistaken. It happened once before I think.

---

Last edited by Nine Ender on 02-01-17 at 01:34PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2012
Location: BC, Ontario (and a few other places too...)
Posts: 268

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nine Ender


I hope that these silly yellow WCF brooms get a complete rethink again. They basically just found the worst performing fabric they could find and everyone's trying to sell this "solution". People seem afraid to voice a dissenting opinion; I hate to be negative on this but someone has to say something.

Surely there is a broom material that is less aggressive then before, but far more durable then the yellow WCF crap and doesn't kill sweeping effectiveness for club players. And could we not kill the anti-Hardline biases because the studies didn't find the inserts were the main culprit afaik. Basically every organizer in amateur events is creating their own adhoc rules on what's legal and fair, but some of it is just guessing. And most club curlers don't want to use the yellow heads at all, they only buy them and use them if they are required to. And sometimes that means not going in the events and avoiding this altogether.

$34 at Goldline to buy a WCF head, Balance Plus makes one that I hear seems cheap and spongy. Crazy expensive for really bad material. They should be $10 each in packs of 5 or 10.

I guess what I am saying is the CCA/WCF botched this whole process, and it may be negatively impacting the local events like TCA and OCA zones ( "regionals" ) that are suffering significantly declining numbers this season. It's a farce pulling out 3 or 4 different materials and asking organizers what they will allow. TCA changed the communicated rules the week of the event. 90% of the teams chose not to use the WCF heads.

I understand something had to be done for the pros, and they had limited time, I just hope they realize another adjustment has to be considered and the current yellow brooms are not a good long term solution. And if they try to force all of us decent but clearly amateur players to use these brooms, there will be some backlash at the grassroots.

Sorry to get wordy but I'm tired of the broom nonsense. Maybe I'm the minority, but I suspect not. I'm no expert on sweeping and organizers are trying their best to accommodate club curlers. But ...

---

__________________
Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.
- Calvin (Calvin & Hobbs)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 272

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nine Ender
I'm pretty certain the rules changed over time and it's apparent that rule changes aren't well communicated to members.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2023
Location:
Posts: 5

Despite the fact that Canada is still a dominant power in the world of curling eggy car, it must continue to improve its tactics and training regimens in order to keep up with rival nations.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2022
Location:
Posts: 3

very good and meaningful article, i have learned a few more things. Also, if you have time, please stop by stumble guys and stumble guys online for relaxing moments

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged