Billaut World Champion

John · Post by **John** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:19 pm

Julliet Billaut has been awarded a gold medal for the World Championships.

It's now Cipressi and Billaut joint World Champions with Campbell still in third.
See Eaux Vives.

Vicky · Post by **Vicky** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:16 pm

How was this decided? - (ive fogotten the exact story here)

Dutch Geezer · Post by **Dutch Geezer** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:00 pm

If this is correct then I am not sure how this works.

I was under the impression that the judges decision was final and once the results were posted, that was it.

I think we all agree that the video evidence showed that Campbell was robbed of a gold medal due to some dodgy judging decisions.

I know Anne said that the debate went on for quite some time before the results were confirmed, but they were confirmed and the guy was crowned world champion.

Now the ICF appear to have changed their minds and called it a draw, which means that both paddlers run times must have been identical in time and penalties. What was used as evidence for this decision, I can only assume that they must have used video evidence as the basis for this decision.

It appears to make a mockery of the sport. Does this now make a case for the BCU Slalom exec to appeal as well and get Campbell a gold medal.

I think one word sums it up FARCE.

So where does this leave us now. A paddler gets a fifty given to him, the judge is adamant he got the fifty and has written something down. His parent/coach/friend or someone has a video clearly showing that he did not get a fifty and the video has a time and date on it which corresponds with the run in question. Are we going to allow the video to be considered before the final decision is made.

The ICF appear to have shown us the way forward.

Maybe this is something which could be debated through the year and voted on at the AGM.

John · Post by **John** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:23 pm

It's a UK rule that the jury's decision is final.
The ICF also has rules 37 and 38 allowing appeals to the Competition Committee and the Board of Directors of the ICF.

Dutch Geezer · Post by **Dutch Geezer** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:10 am

At the moment video evidence is not admissable in UK slalom, whilst the ICF obviously allow it.

With the amount of video's on the bank these days and the quality available, is there not a case for video being allowed, especially at the higher divisions.

What do other people think, maybe it would be a good discussion point for the slalom conference in Febuary.

Dave Royle · Post by **Dave Royle** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:35 pm

I don't think the ICF have particularly taken into account the video evidence. I think the ICF may have waivered under extreme legal pressure from the French Federation and it may be a decision they come to regret in the future expecially in the light of the disputed water touch where they clearly haven't taken into account video evidence. I think in the context, "Farce" would be the most appropriate word that you can use in front of the children. The whole thing puts our sport in a bad light. Television isn't going to be very interested in a sport where we have to wait 6 months to find out who the winner is.

If video evidence were to be allowed by the ICF it is very likely it would have to be independantly filmed and watched by a video judge (like rugby etc). So, four cameramen and a video judge all the time. (Therefore, at least an extra ten people)

Taking this to domestic events in the UK. I don't see Jonny's dad waving a camera at the Jury Official as independant. So, where is the independant filming going to come from? Well, it isn't, is it? We struggle enough to get enough officials to time the race never mind run about filming it all.

Yester Years Kayak · Post by **Yester Years Kayak** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:48 pm

This is a load of crock if you ask me..... Anyone know if the french have an equivilent to April Fools day?

The two times were seperated by 2.47 secs, so there was no way you could call it a dead heat even if you did add on a penalty for a touch.

oh and there is nothing on the ICF web site to either confirm or deny the story. Anyone seen any press releases etc about it?

Vicky · Post by **Vicky** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:43 pm

Yester Years Kayak wrote:Anyone seen any press releases etc about it?

There are some french press releases about...

http://www.sport.fr/autres....11.shtm

which basically says the french 'protested' for the 50 at the time but the italians counter protested it, and it just vaguely says that the iCF changed their minds on their decision after the FFCK kicked up a fuss about it!

it also says that the FFCK have kicked up a fuss about the fact that 5 members of the competition commitee (?) were also members of the directors commitee, and so the decision could not be impartial.

hmm.

ive no idea how the iCF came to this decision. He either got the 50 or he didnt. ie hes either 10th (or wherever that would of put him) or hes hes 1st. ???

Dutch Geezer · Post by **Dutch Geezer** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:59 pm

Dave

I agree that there should be no increased burden on the organisers part.

I also agree that a parent or a coach waving a camera in front of a Jury is not the way to review the evidence.

But if a paddler gets given a 50 for missing a gate and the judge has written it down so there is no room for doubt based on the judges evidence. Would you not be annoyed if there was video of the paddler clearly negotiating the gate correctly and you were told sorry its not admissable.

All I am saying is that I think its worth considering and asking for other peoples opinion.

John · Post by **John** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 10:15 am

<OBJECT CLASSID="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=200><PARAM NAME=MOVIE VALUE=http://video.google.com/googleplayer.sw ... -GB><PARAM NAME=PLAY VALUE=TRUE><PARAM NAME=LOOP VALUE=TRUE><PARAM NAME=QUALITY VALUE=HIGH><EMBED SRC=http://video.google.com/googleplayer.sw ... 9&hl=en-GB WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=200 PLAY=TRUE LOOP=TRUE QUALITY=HIGH></EMBED></OBJECT>

<OBJECT CLASSID="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=200><PARAM NAME=MOVIE VALUE=http://video.google.com/googleplayer.sw ... -GB><PARAM NAME=PLAY VALUE=TRUE><PARAM NAME=LOOP VALUE=TRUE><PARAM NAME=QUALITY VALUE=HIGH><EMBED SRC=http://video.google.com/googleplayer.sw ... 0&hl=en-GB WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=200 PLAY=TRUE LOOP=TRUE QUALITY=HIGH></EMBED></OBJECT>

katonas · Post by **katonas** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:51 pm

Have the BCU appealed already ? Why was the French appeal so successful ? What nationality were those that made the decision for the ICF ? When are the BCU going to appeal the French way ? So many questions.......

All the fuss damages the sport, but the wrong decision damages it even more.

Geebs · Post by **Geebs** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:26 am

Dutch Geezer wrote:But if a paddler gets given a 50 for missing a gate and the judge has written it down so there is no room for doubt based on the judges evidence. Would you not be annoyed if there was video of the paddler clearly negotiating the gate correctly and you were told sorry its not admissable.

Yes as this has happened to us, I had a video clearly showing that a gate was negotiated clean but the judge had given a 50, there were also some 15 other paddlers saying it was clean as well but the jury would not listen. Cost us an extra trip to Wales when it was not needed for promotion.

Video evidence should be admissable I have been saying it for years, I know it is difficult to have independant people filming, but surely if the date/time mark is on the video does it matter what the source is as long as it can prove the point? I am sure we don't all have editing suites in our pocket during a race?

Vicky · Post by **Vicky** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 12:20 pm

'de toute façon le champion du monde c'est Campbell Walsh, entre autres

félicitations à julien aussi'

'D'accord avec Pakoo, le vrai Gentleman de cette triste histoire :
Campbell Walsh

'

'Bon, sinon, ben bravo a Julien, je suis content pour lui. Et quand même bravo à Cipressi, il a bien joué le coup, et puis, comme ça a été dit, bravo à Walsh, parce que bon, c'est vrai que l'attitude anglaise n'a pas manqué de classe.'

Basically acknowlegding that campbell is the rightful winner, that hes the real gentleman in this story and that the attitude of the english hasn't be short of class.

....amongst other things said on the general matter @ eauxvives of course.

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:13 pm

My concerns over video evidence are:
- Fairness - not all paddlers are video'd, so admitting evidence will give more of an advantage to those lucky enough to be coached and have people on the bank to provide such services.
- OK it should be easy to tell if a paddler missed a gate completly, but how about the 'half head decisions' Judging posts are set up to try to ensure that there is a gate or section judge in teh right place for this decision, the camera angle will be different.
- How far do we go? The video clearly shows water hitting the left (nearer ) pole, but the judge saw a small touch with the right hand paddel blade, masked from the camera by the body. Result upset paddler but the penalty stands. But if the video does not show the touch (on a 3 inch screen), but the judge saw a small touch (full size), what do we do?

I MUST declare my interests. I have been known to drift down courses, have not been (knowingly) videoed this century - unless someone was doing a bloopers reel, and have been known to section judge and be on the jury.

If we could get eveyrone videoed to the same standard, I woudl be happy to use video as PART of the Jury investigation, but it must be secondary to what the judge actually saw.

(ps, bet teh section judge at the worlds will not be running an international section again, wonder where his position was that he was so unsighted?, BUT judges tend to be river left at Prague, and the camera was river right.)

Dave Royle · Post by **Dave Royle** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:12 pm

A cynic would say that slalom is not about negotiating the gates correctly, but convincing the judge that you have negotiated them correctly. Paddlers look at where the judges are, and who they are, as well as where the gates are before determining the final strategy.