Talk:Fantoni and Nunes cheating scandal

Status

This page is not currently referenced from anywhere, except from the talk: contract bridge page. At some point the plan is to transclude this page and replace data on the Fantoni, Nunes, and Cheating in Bridge pages.

Already done for the Cheating in bridge page. Newwhist (talk) 21:13, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Now linked from the F and N articles using the "main article" template. Narky Blert (talk) 19:51, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

It is linked, but not transcluded. We have 3 different articles - one on F page, one on N page, and one on this page. The cheating in bridge page does transclude this page, the other two do not. See the c-i-b page for how to transclude information. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 02:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Regarding background and procedures

Did the Monaco Bridge Federation hold any hearings or investigations regarding Fantoni and Nunes given their representation of that Principality?

No. Or at least if they did, there is nothing public; and if there was one it is not likely ever to become public.Nicolas.hammond (talk)

The background should include more about the role of other teammates, especially Zimmermann, and their reactions to events. Newwhist (talk) 18:13, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

There have been little public pronouncements from the Monaco team.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 18:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Any why did the FIGB have a hearing when, as I understand it, it was an EBL event which was the basis of the video evidence? Newwhist (talk) 18:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

That would be a question for the FIGB. I do not believe motives are known.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 20:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Title

Do we want to title this as "cheating scandal" not "cheating allegation"? There has now been a conviction. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 20:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Agree. The page should be moved in due course assuming no compelling objections and rationale are registered here. While there are not many editors currently active on the subject, I think we should give it a few days to ferment. Newwhist (talk) 21:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I'd say, leave the title as it is until all possibilities of appeal have been exhausted. Narky Blert (talk) 13:18, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

I tend to agree. It will mean more work later, but the correct approach IMHONicolas.hammond (talk) 02:11, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

The traditional title is "affair", as in e.g. Terence Reese#The Buenos Aires affair and Boris Schapiro#Buenos Aires affair. I'm not suggesting that that's best (IMO it is not), but IMO it's worth bearing in mind. Narky Blert (talk) 23:07, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Affair is two sided. For Reese, there was a dual finding of innocent and guilt. Hence "affair". There is an automatic ACBL appeal on all ethics violiations so it will not be until November that the ACBL ruling is final.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 06:02, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Appeals have run their course and the findings have been affirmed so IMHO it is time to consider the move of the page to "Fantoni and Nunes cheating scandal". Opinions? Newwhist (talk) 12:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

• Support doing so now. Newwhist (talk) 12:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support per Newwhist. Narky Blert (talk) 23:09, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Impact in France

I think there was some impact on the French Bridge league because Zimmerman's team was playing in that league. I don't have details.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 20:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I found nothing relevant on the FFB website. I googled "Fédération française de bridge" with "fantoni nunes" or "zimmermann":

- There was a brief early announcement in Le Bridgeur (between 14 and 23 September 2015) about the F-S and F-N affairs, also saying that a third pair was under suspicion. Jean-Charles Allavena said that F-N would not play for Monaco again. There's a statement at the end that Team Zimmermann would be playing as a foursome in the final of the French interclub championship.

- There were complaints on BW by French players that Monaco had not withdrawn from French competitions (22 September 2015).

- There was an FFB announcement (23 September 2015) saying that they had suspended F-N; later taken down, but not before LC had reported it on NC and made a copy.

That was all I found of any relevance, other than some more recent mentions of Team Zimmermann activity (without F-N). Narky Blert (talk) 15:40, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I have found nothing relevant on the Monegasque Bridge Federation website. Narky Blert (talk) 21:34, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Black-out deal

Does the addition of this section suggest that the article title be in the plural, i.e. '...allegations' and perhaps eventually '...scandals' ? Will more incidents come to light? Newwhist (talk) 14:21, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Only one possible scandal I think - the allegation on the black-out hand was dismissed for lack of proof. Matters are still developing, and I think the article title is OK for now. Narky Blert (talk) 13:35, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I think this section should be renamed "Previous allegations" or something similar. They were found not guilty. Right now it is confusing because it appears that this is linked with the main allegation.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 02:11, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Governing bodies procedures

It looks as if FIGB's disciplinary procedures are designed to fit in with what the Italian Olympic Committee (CONI) specifies. Google turned up references to the Giudice sportivo nazionale (National Sports Judge) for all sorts of sports (most of which require more exertion than moving boards and yelling at partner). I can't find a simple explanation anywhere; this link spells out the remarkably complicated details for FIGB; I do not recommend reading it. Narky Blert (talk) 19:43, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I think we need to separate the FIGB and EBL. Currently it is a little confusing. Perhaps we need something to explain why two different bodies have investigations. We have the same issue with FS.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 02:11, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

A little confusing? I say, a lot confusing! Nevertheless more generally, what are the formal agreements, if any, amongst the governing bodies about:

• mirroring suspensions elsewhere pending an investigation by one of them
• mirroring a suspension as a result of a hearing by one of them
• do these agreements differ if the governing bodies have a peer-to-peer-relationship as opposed to a parent-child relationship?

Does the WBF not have formal requirements as to how its zonal and NBO organizations must reciprocate on matters of allegations, hearings and findings?

I know nothing about these matters but it seems essential to writing about cheating in bridge for this part of the background to be presented, even if to say, there are no formal agreements or rules and hence why there is so much chaos. Newwhist (talk) 13:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

The WBF is in the process of trying to update its Articles. Let me find out more details this week in Washington on reciprocity of suspensions/pending appeals etc. I think I know the answers but want to get them confirmed. Not sure the best place to put the answers.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 00:05, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I separate the two hearings and provided a little more details.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 11:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I have a scrapbook of topics and material at User:Newwhist/sandbox/Project WPCB/Cheating in bridge (governing bodies). I also am not sure where any final product might be located. Newwhist (talk) 20:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

A useful scrapbook. After development, it might fit best as a section within Cheating in bridge, unless it gets big enough to split out - which it well might.

From what I've seen, there will be heavy lifting involved in writing up what the various NBO and ZBO procedures actually are. Some are well-documented, but nevertheless ambiguous or obscure.

if Cheating in bridge gets unwieldy, both Cases and Procedures could perhaps be split out into sub-articles, leaving the main article as a general introduction pointing to the detailed stuff elsewhere. Narky Blert (talk) 22:25, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Monegasque or Monaco ?

Which is (more) correct: Monegasque Bridge Federation or Monaco Bridge Federation? Newwhist (talk) 12:57, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I'll need to do some research in WP:MOS on this one. I remember seeing a discussion on "Slovene" vs. "Slovenian", a similar sort of issue, which I think reached a consensus. Narky Blert (talk) 23:11, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Monégasque Football Federation and Monaco Shooting Federation are the only two directly comparable articles I can find using Special:Allpages. I propose Monaco as being more familiar to English-speakers; and as not including an accented letter. (New Zealand is another example of a country name being both noun and adjective.) Narky Blert (talk) 22:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Agree, purely the logic presented. I have no horse in this race. Newwhist (talk) 23:10, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Voluntarily or reluctantly?

Did the Zimmermann team resist withdrawal of their team from the 2015 Bermuda; did they volunteer to withdraw? or did they simply acquiesce? Newwhist (talk) 13:07, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Court of Arbitration in Sport ruling

This article is in need of updating in the light of the recent CAS ruling: https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/cas-decision-on-fantoni-and-nunes/ JH (talk page) 08:21, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I've now updated it. However in the light of the CAS "not guilty" verdict, I wonder if it would be better if the article title did not incorporate the arguably perjorative term "scandal". Perhaps "allegation" would be better. (There seems to be a redirect from a variant of the title using "allegation" already in place.) JH (talk page) 21:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Transclusion not working correctly

I've updated this article to reflect the FIGB decision to abide by the CAS verdict. The changes include the section in the lead that is supposed to be transcluded into the Fantoni, Nunes and Cheating in bridge articles. However, the transclusion doesn't seem to be working correctly. It's not obvious to me why not. JH (talk page) 18:05, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

@Jhall1: I am not 100% sure about the processes that are supposed to operate on the various F&N cheating articles/sections in order for them to share the same content. I have created my own similar but simpler (to me) version of this at all the category pages for players of the different nationalities. See template:Bridge player nationalities which is then used within each of the category pages; for example see the code in Category:English contract bridge players. But I am not sure if the cheating related content was supposed to work in the same way. Clean up is definitely required on all the related F&N cheating articles/sections. Will give it a try in due course but busy with other stuff right now.

@Nicolas.hammond: Hi Nicolas. As someone previously involved in the F&N matter and the transclusion, can you give us some help/guidance?

Newwhist (talk) 20:12, 6 August 2018 (UTC)