Matthew Jones, on Mar 11 2010, 01:07 PM, said:
I don't know why anyone would ever try a leg attack even in a sequence when it can cause you to immediately lose...
They should make the penalty for an inappropriate leg attack (ie not in a sequence) a shido, why so harsh, especially if you still "allow" the technique? It's just silly.
I won't comment on the merit of the rules change, but in thinking about your point, my theory would be that if they had just made it a shido, many would still use the techniques, and just take the shido. Morote gari for example, if done right, is probably going to be an ippon. So a shido wouldn't matter would it? I'm not clear on all the rules, but a shido wouldn't 'lower' the ippon score would it? If not, then it would be worth getting the shido. Hansoku make would seem to be an attempt to completely abolish the technique's use, not just discourage it.
edit: I searched the IJF site to find their reasoning, but I wasn't able to find anything super specific, other than this quote from one of their
docs on the rules changes (as to why):
"The IJF’s wish is to defend fundamental judo values.
Within this scope IJF particularly devotes itself to preserve and develop education, physic and mental trumps of Judo.
« Judo is a physic and mental education system »."
Not exactly super clear, but that's the best I could find. I would interpret that as they felt that certain techniques were distorting judo competition, so they got rid of them.
That's just my interpretation and theory. I suppose there could have been other factors, but you'd have to be privy to their meetings and personal discussions to truly know.
This post has been edited by bythesea: 11 March 2010 - 09:34 PM
Kuchiwaza -- my tokuiwaza.