Answered: Clarification on "Egregious (Match Affecting)"

A number of rules use the phrase “Egregious (match affecting) offenses will result in a Disqualification.”

and several others.

What exactly constitutes “match affecting”?

Let us assume that red gained a small advantage (say scoring 2 points) by breaking one of these rules, but the final score resulted in red winning by 15 points.

One line of reasoning is that red should be disqualified because their offense altered the final* score*, therefore the match was affected.

A second line of reasoning is that red should not be disqualified because even if they had not scored those extra points illegally, they still would have won so the outcome of the match was not affected.

Are either of these correct?

Does this change if red did not actually score points directly as a result of the offending act, but rather gained an advantage in field position that may have given them a better opportunity to score points later in the game, whether or not they actually did?
In other words, is a change in field position enough to constitute “match affecting”?

Thanks for your guidance.

In general, the second interpretation is correct.

Absolutely. Many game actions lead directly to points, but do change the match enough by creating/eliminating scoring opportunities.

The intent behind using the wording "egregious’ and “match affecting” is to give referees the latitude to warn teams for minor offenses, saving the drastic disqualification for major offenses. Referees should always keep this in mind.

Thanks very much Karthik, this has been bothering me and a number of people I know for a while :slight_smile:

You’re welcome, glad we could clarify things for you.

1 Like