Motion 6.1 Increase Protest Fees

[Canadian Paddler]

6.1 That rule 36.2 be amended to read "......is accompanied by a deposit of £5 for Premier and Division 1 and £2 for all other divisions.".

[Canadian Paddler]

I do not understand why. But then we do not have protests at the events we run & I do not think this level will deter Premier paddlers from protesting,. But that could be my cynicism showing.

[craig]

I do not wish to get into a cynical arguement about the lack of judging support at races as I think the work the regular judges and section judges do is fantastic and should be applauded by us all. However, speaking to many paddlers this year the quality of judging has been a point for much debate and hence to increase the protest fee I think would perhaps put certain paddlers off competition.

If changes in Judging were made i.e. more judges suddenly starting appearing and hence had less gates and more were qualified then an increase in fees would be warranted, as it stands I fear an increase in fees may be detrimental to the sport.

What do others think?

[John]

How many protests are generally made at an event and how many of those are generally upheld?

[Canadian Paddler]

As no one else is hazarding a gues, or a response to John I will give my 2p worth. (Note that the real figures are around somewhere as they are on the jury forms) :;):

The number of protests varies depending on the division and seriousness of the race, and of course the perceived judging standard. For example Peterborough Div 3/4 has not had a formal protest for years, although we do handle a query occasionally, but being a low key event we try to talk about the issues and the reasons.

A few years ago I was chairman of the Jury at a selection event. I spent the whole day investigating protests - I think there were over 20 of them, and at this remove I would guess that 75% of them were rejected. But at that level, if a two second penalty that you were unsure of, could mean you miss team selection, then you will protest it almost regardless of the cost.

From memory, the last Div 1 at HPP that I attended had about half a dozen protests, I think that the split was something like 4 rejected 2 upheld.

This is all based on the (fading) memory of a paddler who feels his age when kids on the start line are less than a third of his age, and the majority are less than half his age. so may be inaccurate, but hope it helps

[craig]

I think a similar figure of at least 20 protests were made at the Wasburn premier this year and alarmingly as I recall it at least half were upheld (I believe it may have been the majority of them).

Equally at other events you will get very few, I personally feel that as the above post suggests when 2 seconds can mean the difference between a good year and a bad year for protest fees to go up by such an amount has to reflect on the quality of judging. Hence, we should be seeing as little as one or two protests per event not 20!

Again this is not a dig at any judges I am prepared to put my hand up and say I could do more to help out judging events and aim to do so where possible.


Its a shame no one else is joining in this discussion, as this is only my opinion and it would be good to hear the voice of others, anonymously (spelling?) or not.

Cheers

[g_c1]

I think that protest fees should not go up.

I think this because
at lower divisions there should not have to be that many protests if situations are handled well and negociated, and
at the higher end it is sometimes so hard to get judges that sometimes i believe the judges do not have of enough experience to make some judging calls. (no disrespect meant and i for one should do more judging and praise thouse that do)

just my opinion

G

[beefy]

has anyone thought about the poor kis that are not in the financial position to pay maybe up to £10 just to "possably" be given the benefit of the doubt on a call that they definatley think is in adiquate i think that this will drive the sport into a more shown split of people who have the needed money and those that dont

[John Sturgess]

I think that here we have to draw a clear distinction between Prem/Div 1 events with Section Judges in place, and Div 1 - Div 4 events without Section Judges in place.

I (fairly) frequently act as Jury Chairman at lower division events; I see it as my duty to investigate paddlers' queries before they develop into 'protests'; as a result I have now been Chair at (by my count) 55 successive events without protests (no doubt Jackie will be able to confirm this?). I feel that this way of doing it keeps the paddlers happier.

However I have a problem with the system at Section-judged events which requires, in the event of a disagreement between Gate Judge and Section Judge, the higher of the two suggested penalties to be written down. That would appear to mean that a paddler can only in such a situation get the benefit of the doubt by protesting; indeed he/she has no way of finding out if there IS a doubt without protesting.

That is not the case at International races I have been to abroad; in particular as explained a couple of years ago when I had to interpret for English-speaking judges at Metz.

Certainly if I knew that the published score included giving the paddler the benefit of the doubt (i.e. in case of disagreement where both judges have an equally good view publishing the lower not the higher penalty) I would no longer feel it necessary, in most cases, to advise paddlers I coach at prem/Div 1 level to protest, as I do now.

[Canadian Paddler]

An amendment to the Rule *36.2 to read:
…..is accompanied by a deposit of £5 for Premier and Division 1 and £2 for all other divisions.
Proposed and seconded by Stafford & Stone Canoe Club
Was rejected with 16 votes for, 24 against with 2 abstentions.


remember that as this was an ACM, all decisions have to be ratified by the elected committee, and possibly by the BCU board :ohwell: