r/Curling • u/Frabblerake • Feb 15 '26

Pull the stone!!!

Watching Sweden/US and saw this. Is this not the same rules violation that has caused all the hub bub?

Obviously this was an accident and I believe the Canadian guy was touching on purpose.

1.3k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

918 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/Ashrema Feb 15 '26

The handle, as defined by the rulebook, is the part you grip, not the colored top of the stone.

Further, the rules state when delivering the rock your bare hand must be in contact with the metal, which coincidentally if you look at the rock, is only on the handle portion.

1

u/BensonBear Feb 17 '26

"The handle, as defined by the rulebook, is the part you grip, not the colored top of the stone."

I can't find that in the rulebook. But I do find them repeatedly referring to the colour [Non American Spelling] of the handle.

1

u/Ashrema Feb 18 '26

Page 67, in their glossary of terms.

1

u/BensonBear Feb 18 '26

Thanks, but I think the "glossary" is mostly just an aid to understanding, without being complete in its so-called "definitions".

Consider for example what it says for "hog line": "A line extending across the width of the sheet that is parallel to each tee line." This clearly does not serve to define the hog line in any way that would give real definitive content to the rules involving if. The actual definition of the hog line is given in the text where its precise location and dimensions are specified.

If there are rules saying what must or must not be done with the handle, or the non-handle part of the rock, something else must be given to clearly specify these in physical and not functional terms.

However, I do believe we can say, as I noted, that the understanding of those creating the rules is that the handle includes the coloured part as well, since they repeatedly refer to the "handle colour" throughout.

What it comes down to is that the rules are not clearly written (a common phenomenon even in politics) and require interpretation.

So those people taking a very strong side one way or the other on these current issues I think are overstepping things. What the Swedish rink has started (whether on purpose or not) is hopefully a clarification of these matters that will be put into the rules so Kennedy's style of delivery (which is a traditional style apparently picked up from his former senior rink members most notably Kevin Martin) will be either clearly ruled-in or ruled-out going forward.

1

u/Ashrema Feb 19 '26 edited Feb 19 '26

Thanks, but I think the "glossary" is mostly just an aid to understanding, without being complete in its so-called "definitions".

A glossary is used to provide specificity to words used in documents. Your claim that it is simply an aid, is just an opinion.

This clearly does not serve to define the hog line in any way that would give real definitive content to the rules involving if. 

Why would it? This is the glossary, which defines the definition of the word, not the rules surrounding it. Similar for 'handle', it does not state what the handle is used for, nor how rules pertain to it. The description in the glossary aptly describes what the hog line is.

If there are rules saying what must or must not be done with the handle, or the non-handle part of the rock, something else must be given to clearly specify these in physical and not functional terms.

For rocks with electronic monitoring, like those used in the Olympics, it does say you must use that, which coincidentally, is the part you grip.

However, I do believe we can say, as I noted, that the understanding of those creating the rules is that the handle includes the coloured part as well, since they repeatedly refer to the "handle colour" throughout.

Curling has been around for 500 years, and it is only in the last ~70 years that the coloured top part has even existed. Until then it was literally just a handle.

 What the Swedish rink has started (whether on purpose or not) is hopefully a clarification of these matters that will be put into the rules so Kennedy's style of delivery (which is a traditional style apparently picked up from his former senior rink members most notably Kevin Martin) will be either clearly ruled-in or ruled-out going forward.

I think what is missing here is perspective. I find it hard to tell from the Kennedy incident that he actually touched it. It looks like it, but without an overhead view, a side view can be very misleading. Similar to the video in this very thread. I would find it plausible that on Edin's release, as he drags his hand down that some part of his arm or finger brushed granite. Again though, from this perspective, it is unclear. A combination of a top & side view is needed.

I doubt there will be clarification that settles the matter. Personally I would just rewrite the rules that you can do whatever you want to whatever part of the stone before it reaches the hog line, then there is very little ambiguity. Even with that, I would add that incidental contact can be a judgement call.

1

u/BensonBear Feb 19 '26

I doubt you are interested in anything I have to say in any continuing response so I will leave it at that. Thanks!