Grandtully Section Judges

Geebs · Post by **Geebs** » Tue Nov 24, 2009 12:48 am

Will there be a proviso that there will be qualified section judges at Grandtully for next years races before the events are agreed?

There has been cause for concern over the level of judging plus the other senior officials for a few years now, it is a long way to go and at great expense for sometimes wild guesses on what the penalties should be (if any)?

Whilst the course and general organisation is very good and it is a great venue, you do sometimes wonder if it is worth the effort to get there when the results do not reflect the actual true competition?

oldschool · Post by **oldschool** » Tue Nov 24, 2009 4:09 am

I must point out that just because your qualifed doesn't mean your a good judge!

Two judges, however quaified, judge the sections and the section judges only real difference should be to relay the results to the control team. In the event of doubt the jury must decide the penalties using their judgment as to which judge is better positioned to judge the gate (as should happen now!).

Whoever judges at events does so to the best of their ability, and too lose more excellent real river races because enough qualified section judges can't be persuaded to travel that far is a ridiculus.

We'll soon end up having an entire season's races on Nottingham if we keep looking for reasons not to go other venues. Maybe some people would welcome this but I for one would certainly not. 4 races at one venue in a season is more than enough.

I appreciate that section judges give up their time and they do a very good job but to cancel races because we can't find enough of them at a site is just a very bad idea. What if they all decide to go on strike, cancel the season?

Why not make the process of becoming a section judge a bit easier, I have passed my gate judges exam about 4 times since i was about 12 but have never seen a senior judges exam advertised in 17 years of slalom. As i understand it the next stage to become a section judge is by invitation only. How many new section judges are invited every year?

Once agian i'll repeat i appriciate section judges and all they do and the time they give up to help run the sport, before people get mad with me.

Seedy Paddler · Post by **Seedy Paddler** » Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:29 am

Too late to change the rule book Geebs so I hope having got that off your chest you can relax and chill.

Many points of utter b*****x in your rant but to highlight:

1/ It is a UK Ranking series, hence there are events in Wales, England and Scotland. I have seen as many lotteries with weather, water, judging etc in Nottingham and North Wales. Tully is one of the longest standing events, distance is relative and for many Tully is the home course. The decision to travel is a personal one and should have nothing to do with the rules. However if Tully is regarded as a step too far, then I would suggest those concerned don't plan on International selection.

2/ To suggest that results at Tully do not reflect the competition is a fabrication. They are as representative as at any other venue. A quick look through 2009 results demonstrates that clear winners in the majority of classes were based on time. Any judge can make mistakes, section judges included, over the piece it will generally even out with good and bad decisions on or against your favour.

Just talk to the Irish and you will understand that even with professional (i.e. paid) and highly qualified International judges (Referee) - mistakes will still happen! And as one of their own Greats has said - "Get over it!"

Nick Penfold · Post by **Nick Penfold** » Tue Nov 24, 2009 4:50 pm

Re "As i understand it the next stage to become a section judge is by invitation only."

All you need to do is ask Jacky Wetzig or Jenny Walker. I'm sure an invitation will be forthcoming.

davebrads · Post by **davebrads** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:12 am

There is no doubt that the judging at Grandtully is more haphazard than at any other venue, but I don't believe that it is due to having weaker judges. In my experience the section judges are no better or worse than the volunteer judges at seeing what is going on on the water, the only advantage of the section judges is that they have a firmer grasp of the rules.

The problem lies with the size of the river, judges are often having to judge gates that may be a good 25m or more from where they are sitting/standing. For some reason the poles are often set 2ft or more above the water, and it can be impossible to judge whether a paddler has passed between the poles or not with any real confidence, and this has produced some real travesties of justice in the past (don't get me started on that one). I think a lot of the problems could be sorted simply by better attention to pole height.

GlennRoberts · Post by **GlennRoberts** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:23 am

davebrads wrote:I think a lot of the problems could be sorted simply by better attention to pole height.

At last year's Grandtully August Div 1/2 event, when small competitors entered a far off gate in the bottom of a wave, I couldn't judge their line relative to the gate, because of poll height. I'm sure I missed several 50s, but had no choice other than to give benefit of doubt. This was not due to poor attention or lack of knowledge of the rules.

This problem would have been solved by correcting the poll height (on each day there were at least three mid-stream gates too high), and also by making sure gate and section judge communication was working correctly; this is vital when gates cannot be reliably judged from some positions.

The gate judges were often not sure which gates they were watching, particularly because they were not always the same as their nominated section judge (some had to signal to two section judges.) Also the confusion was increased by the fact that some gate judges could not see their section judges; some were given an unreliable headset but when judges changed the new gate judges thought they were section judges.

The confusion could have been reduced by additional information from the event organisers, particularly at the beginning of the day or after breaks. I got the impression the organisers for this event were short of manpower to fix problems.

So yes mistakes may occur at this venue, but simple steps could be taken to reduce the mistakes - more knowledgeable (qualified) judges would not totally solve the problems.

davebrads · Post by **davebrads** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:26 pm

There is one other difference with the section judges, they have the authority (and sheer bloody mindedness) to prevent the running of the event until they are happy with the judging positions and the pole heights. They can be quite forceful about this as I found out at my event at HPP when I had a low pole and the bearer was not straightforward to raise. Whether you think this is a good or bad thing depends upon whether or not you are an organiser quickly running out of time to get the event started

DavidDickson · Post by **DavidDickson** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:43 pm

As the organiser of the race in August I spent most of the weekend in and around the control hut - I don't remember anyone, judge or competitor complaining abut pole height or asking for any adjustments. We did have manpower to deal with course alterations and would have preferred to have sorted a few poles than have a judge feel they couldn't make accurate decisions... feedback from officials and competitors can be very useful when running a busy event.

We are planning to upgrade the gate system at tully this winter which should make course construction/alterations much easier and quicker.

The event this year was very busy and we did have a shortage of volunteer judges. I'm sure I remember competitors having to judge at events in the 80's - maybe we need to go back to this if sufficient volunteers are not available............

oldschool · Post by **oldschool** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:38 pm

A bit off topic but what is the rule on pole height at the moment? If i remember rightly, last time i checked (in 199? before my current comeback) poles were to be at least 6 inches from the surface of the water at ALL times. which is always a tricky judgement on waves if they are inconsistant/breaking. Can anyone quote the current rules on this?

John · Post by **John** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:07 pm

The lower end of the pole should be approximately 20 cm above the water, and the pole must not be put in motion by the water.

Geebs · Post by **Geebs** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:17 am

David, not having a go at you personally or any of your team, but there were at least three requests from competitors asking for the pole height to be altered made to control over that weekend, sadly it appears that you were not made aware of it.

Appreciate it was difficult with the water level dropping over the weekend from the Friday when the course was set, but on Saturday the poles were well clear of the water some by about 2 foot.

I am sure that the amount of protests over penalties gave a bit of a clue?

Grandtully is a wonderful venue, it does have its inherent difficulties with it being a wide river for judging, but I think that some of the earlier comments about pole height and better information for the section and gate judges may relieve some of the problems.

Hopefully this thread has highlighted the problems and these can now be resolved for future years by the constructive comments received, which was its aim.

2010 the way forward

RussJohnson · Post by **RussJohnson** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:44 am

DavidDickson wrote:I don't remember anyone, judge or competitor complaining abut pole height or asking for any adjustments.

in response to david's post.

i & a few other people remember asking to a member of the team in the hut (can't remember who) if there was a chance to have a few specific poles lowered or better judging posistions because it was difficult to tell if a paddler had even passed through or near a gate.

i was a member of the judging team that weekend and had a few problems making a decision and had to give B.O.D

when i asked about the posibility about having the poles lowered i was rudely told that the gates are fine as they are.

i am not complaining about how the event is run, as i think you all do a brilliant job and its a really enjoyable weekend.

oldschool · Post by **oldschool** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:06 pm

I must just point out that it is the jury who have the responability of approving the course, not the organiser.

The organiser just has to provide the bodies to get the changes done, if the jury is not happy with the course pole heights they should be changed, but the course should be approved before offical practice and rechecked before the start of the event by the jury. The course should also be checked by the head judge to make sure they are happy that the course can be judged consistantly. If a judge has concerns over pole heights they report these concerns to control and therefore the jury and the jury can re-examine the section. But if they think its fine, its fine, Just get on with it and race, it is the same for the whole class!

once an event has started pole height can only be changed between classes, so at events like Abbey Rapids this year getting the pole heights right can be tricky if the water is going up/down at any significant speed. but the minimum heights have to be set on the first run of the class not the last if the river is dropping. as far as i understand if its going up that's just bad luck for the later boats.

In their defence, Tully has a lot of breaking waves which means that poles have to be higher to maintain the minimum height at all times.

RussJohnson · Post by **RussJohnson** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:11 pm

i wasnt meant to be having a go at the organiser.

i know that a course cannot be changed during the event (other than when you stated). but i was asking about the course changes during free practice and well before the course was offically approved.

a member of the team in the hut could have politely told me who was on the jury and tell them, or even say they would pass on the message. but instead i was faced with a rude reply basicly telling me not to bother them and that the course was fine the way it is. and i wasn't the only person to face this reply.

i know that they would have been busy, ive had experiance in helping in the background. but it would have been nice for them to be polite!

i totally agree that 'tully' faces many more organisational problems because of the river and i admire how they run it.

Granddad · Post by **Granddad** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:34 pm

to add some clarification:

The course designer is responsable for hanging the gates and maintaining them as per the design ( rule 9.6).

The course is approved by the Jury chair before the event startes

The section Judge is responsable for the correct judgement made and penaties givern,(rule 9.5) this includes making sure their section of the course is judgable and reporting deficences through control.

If the poles are high the section Judge would contact the control who inturn should inform the course designer or team who changes the pole hieghts as required. any disputed should be resolved by the jury.

Pole heights are normally altered between each class as the height will be the same for all paddlers in the class, but where the levels continually change it is possible to continually alter the hpole heights to ensure the poles remain the same height for all paddlers as it could end up with poles in the water before the end of a class. It takes a lot of resourses to do this and has not been done for many years.

The gates at tully have historically always been heigh and oftain difficult to get altered. I have in the past (several years ago and not areflection on the current organisers)reported high poles to no effect and stopped judging a particular gate as I had no idea if the paddlers were anywhere near the gate. It made no difference, The poles were the same for the next class and again not judged.