Re-Run Review - for discussion

[Don Raspin]

Re-run Review

At the General Discussion following the 2006 Slalom ACM those present requested the Slalom Committee ‘to provide guidance to Organisers and Jury members as to the circumstances and conditions under which re-runs can be granted’. This request was overlooked and so at the 2007 ACM the request was repeated.

The Minutes of the Slalom Committee meeting on the following day (2.12.07) report that ‘the committee discussed the re-run situation and concluded that the existing Rule 31 is adequate’. I suggest that this statement does nothing towards providing the guidance requested at the 2006 ACM.

The problem for Jury members is that they often have to resolve differences between disappointed competitors and pressurised judges in a minimum of time (multiple protests, limited water, scheduled prize giving) and with minimal information (no video or consultation with spectators, pressurised judges). As a sometimes Jury member/Chair working under the current Rule 31 (applying to the overtaking situation) my guiding principle has been: did we give this competitor as fair a run at the designed course as others in the same class, within the limits of the prevailing conditions over which we have no control. If there is any doubt that his/her attempt at the designed course has been hindered by obstruction of the competitor’s intended line, either by the obstructing paddler’s equipment or the movement of a relevant gate pole by the paddler who is being overtaken, then this constitutes a hinderance worthy of a re-run under Rule 31.

I should be interested to hear comments or proposals from others interested in contributing to the guidance requested following the 2006 ACM.

Don Raspin.