Rule(s) against arbiter being a player?

[strangerep]

I've just now re-scanned the 2018 FIDE rules, but failed to find any clause stating that an arbiter for a tournament or match must not be a player in said tournament or match. Did I miss something?

[Andrew Hardegen]

I've just now re-scanned the 2018 FIDE rules, but failed to find any clause stating that an arbiter for a tournament or match must not be a player in said tournament or match. Did I miss something?

There is no such rule. As far as FIDE is concerned, the arbiters may play. Of course an arbiter should not rule on any matter in which (s)he has an interest.

An arbiter, irrespective of whether (s)he is playing or not, may appoint playing and non-playing assistants.

However, some clubs / tournaments may have their own rules. My club's policy is to have non-playing CA for FIDE-rated events.

For title tournaments (i.e. tournaments in which norms are available), an arbiter cannot play in any round, even as a `filler'.

[Afitz]

It's not ideal to have a playing arbiter for multiple reasons, however there are circumstances that sometimes dictate that it is necessary to have a playing arbiter.

[Shaun94]

Some examples of playing arbiters being necessary are club nights, regional tournaments (no arbiters in the area) to avoid an odd number etc. I think if there is a playing arbiter for whatever reason in one of those few situations it needs to be communicated to the players clearly.

[Bill Gletsos]

As Andrew noted an arbiter cannot be a player in a FIDE title (norm) tournament. This is stated in the FIDE title regulations.

FIDE rating regulations do not preclude an arbiter from being a player.

[Kevin Bonham]

Also the FIDE Arbiters Commission ruled in 2012 that an arbiter cannot use a tournament for an arbiter title norm if they were a player in the tournament.

[Patrick Byrom]

... However, some clubs / tournaments may have their own rules. My club's policy is to have non-playing CA for FIDE-rated events. ...

There would be state rules as well. For example, in Qld:

• For South East Queensland ACF rated events, a minimum of 1 non-playing arbiter per 50 players is required, with a preferred ratio of 1 non-playing arbiter per 40 players.
• For South East Queensland FIDE rated events, a minimum of 1 non-playing arbiter per 40 players is required, with a preferred ratio of 1 non-playing arbiter per 30 players.
• Regional Event organizers are reminded that there should be a non-playing arbiter too, unless as an absolute last resort and then only with approval by the CAQ Council.

[ER]

There would be state rules as well. For example, in Qld:

• For South East Queensland ACF rated events, a minimum of 1 non-playing arbiter per 50 players is required, with a preferred ratio of 1 non-playing arbiter per 40 players.
• For South East Queensland FIDE rated events, a minimum of 1 non-playing arbiter per 40 players is required, with a preferred ratio of 1 non-playing arbiter per 30 players.
• Regional Event organizers are reminded that there should be a non-playing arbiter too, unless as an absolute last resort and then only with approval by the CAQ Council.

As opposed to what? South West Queensland? North Queensland? North West Queensland ? North East (careful the reef) Queensland?

what a laughable load of rubbish! One set of rules should apply for all tournaments!

[Shaun94]

As opposed to what? South West Queensland? North Queensland? North West Queensland ? North East (careful the reef) Queensland?

what a laughable load of rubbish! One set of rules should apply for all tournaments!

The reason for the defining of reasons is the access to arbiters and resources in SEQ. This would be similar to city v country situations I imagine.

SEQ has 3x IAs and 5 or so FAs (could be wrong) while there are 0 outside of Brisbane/ Gold Coast that I am aware of. This is due to population and the size of Queensland as a state being so vast.

[Afitz]

There is 1 NA outside of SEQ - based in Bundaberg. The cost for these small events to have an independent arbiter is definitely higher due to travel (remember QLD is a HUGE state!) and if you take into account cost of an arbiter, flights, etc then it can quite literally break a tournament, even with the generous subsidies in place from CAQ.

[MichaelBaron]

It's not ideal to have a playing arbiter for multiple reasons, however there are circumstances that sometimes dictate that it is necessary to have a playing arbiter.

Well, in small-scale club events - it is a common practice and not a bad one at all.

[MichaelBaron]

As opposed to what? South West Queensland? North Queensland? North West Queensland ? North East (careful the reef) Queensland?

what a laughable load of rubbish! One set of rules should apply for all tournaments!

And I really like the ''unless it is the last resort'' passage....how would one define the ''last resort'' in this case .

[Patrick Byrom]

Well, in small-scale club events - it is a common practice and not a bad one at all.

I don't think it's ever a good idea for the arbiter to be playing as well. However in a small club event it's not a major problem.

[Patrick Byrom]

And I really like the ''unless it is the last resort'' passage....how would one define the ''last resort'' in this case .

When the only alternative is cancellation.

[Shaun94]

And I really like the ''unless it is the last resort'' passage....how would one define the ''last resort'' in this case .

If there is no alternative? Eg. an arbiter who has agree to be the official becomes unwell the morning of a tournament etc. could be examples of the need for a player to take on the role of arbiter as well.

Some remote areas may not be able to attract an arbiter to run an event for a local club.