Selection
In reading Bills original post I cannot see that Bill ever suggested that the coach(es) influenced the decision of the jury. The problem is that the coach(es) have encouraged paddlers to put in dubious protests in the first place.
It seems to me that judging has become far more difficult recently, due to the current prevalence of "necking" gates, and far too many high hanging poles. When poles are strung a couple of foot above the water, it becomes extremely difficult to be sure that a paddler has passed between the poles, especially when they are necking the pole. This is why there is often disagreement between the gate judge and the section judge, and it is this disagreement that is being taken advantage of by the protesting paddler. The answer, which will be unpopular with quite a number of paddlers (and their coaches) is to bring the poles back down to the height stipulated in the rules, that is approximately 15cm (6") above the water. That is approximately. Not plus two foot minus nothing, which seems to be the current interpetation of the rule.
It seems to me that judging has become far more difficult recently, due to the current prevalence of "necking" gates, and far too many high hanging poles. When poles are strung a couple of foot above the water, it becomes extremely difficult to be sure that a paddler has passed between the poles, especially when they are necking the pole. This is why there is often disagreement between the gate judge and the section judge, and it is this disagreement that is being taken advantage of by the protesting paddler. The answer, which will be unpopular with quite a number of paddlers (and their coaches) is to bring the poles back down to the height stipulated in the rules, that is approximately 15cm (6") above the water. That is approximately. Not plus two foot minus nothing, which seems to be the current interpetation of the rule.
-
Bill Denboro
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 8:54 pm
Like Dave said I never said that the coach influenced the jury in their decision.
Dave has come up with another good point regarding pole height. If poles were lower then judging would be made a lot easier and less room for paddlers to try and exploit any discrepancies between the section and gate judges.
I know that in the past judging has been criticised, and its true that some decisions perhaps aren't the best. (judges are only human too!) However I expect 99% of the time the judges are correct. I think it was Mrs H who asked for volunteers not to be criticised. Well by paddlers protesting 50's which were blatent is an insult to the volunteers who sit for the whole day in all weather conditions. So no wonder when 30 protests or more are made on one day I can see why some people assume its poor judging, because we assume we are honest and we all play by the rules !
Dave has come up with another good point regarding pole height. If poles were lower then judging would be made a lot easier and less room for paddlers to try and exploit any discrepancies between the section and gate judges.
I know that in the past judging has been criticised, and its true that some decisions perhaps aren't the best. (judges are only human too!) However I expect 99% of the time the judges are correct. I think it was Mrs H who asked for volunteers not to be criticised. Well by paddlers protesting 50's which were blatent is an insult to the volunteers who sit for the whole day in all weather conditions. So no wonder when 30 protests or more are made on one day I can see why some people assume its poor judging, because we assume we are honest and we all play by the rules !
He thrusts his fists against the post and still insists he sees the ghost.
Rules are Rules as we all know, the problem comes from the interpretation by the judges on what they see or did not due to other distractions which is only human after all.
This then has a reflection on the juries decession on what is written down by the judge.
A few weeks ago a paddler did a completely clean run watched by some 30+ people and filmed by two video cameras all the way down from top to bottom of the course and they were given a touch on a gate when it was clearly shown by the two videos that it was clear, but the protest was not up-held because there was a note on the judges sheet that it was a touch.
This cost the paddler vital points for promotion, the end result was that they then had to do another race (more enty fees and funding for the cause) which should not have been required if the the right decesion was made with video evidence being used.
This as you all know is not an isolated case, it is the norm, it is about time we caught up to the 21st century and used the equipment available, or do we all want to stay in the "dark ages"
This then has a reflection on the juries decession on what is written down by the judge.
A few weeks ago a paddler did a completely clean run watched by some 30+ people and filmed by two video cameras all the way down from top to bottom of the course and they were given a touch on a gate when it was clearly shown by the two videos that it was clear, but the protest was not up-held because there was a note on the judges sheet that it was a touch.
This cost the paddler vital points for promotion, the end result was that they then had to do another race (more enty fees and funding for the cause) which should not have been required if the the right decesion was made with video evidence being used.
This as you all know is not an isolated case, it is the norm, it is about time we caught up to the 21st century and used the equipment available, or do we all want to stay in the "dark ages"
Paddle fast,,,Paddle safe Yorkshire Canoe Coaching
-
Canadian Paddler
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
- Location: Peterborough
- Contact:
As a section judge/sometime jury member/sometime chairman, but above all paddler in all classes, I would welcome the ability to use all means to check penalties BUT we also need to be fair.
If we allow video evidence, how do we ensure the same is used for all paddlers? No one videos my runs (unless to see how not to do it!), so would my appeal be less rigerously investigated? Even then a run that appears clean on a video may have a touch on the side away from the camera that has been seen by the judge.
As far as the judge having 'written down a touch', that is never enough, and judges are encouraged to write down what was touched, with what and when. So the penalty may have been a slight tough of the right pole, with the back of the bouyancy aid on exit. Almost invariably missed by the paddler, often missed by the bank crew who are naturally looking on down the course, and hard to spot on a small video screen. (Ps as I havent been to an event for weeks, if this is correct it is just a fluke). When I am Chair, I usually give more ffedback to the paddler than just 'it was a touch' bu that is down to style and business.
Ah well lets hope it is OK this weekend at Bala
If we allow video evidence, how do we ensure the same is used for all paddlers? No one videos my runs (unless to see how not to do it!), so would my appeal be less rigerously investigated? Even then a run that appears clean on a video may have a touch on the side away from the camera that has been seen by the judge.
As far as the judge having 'written down a touch', that is never enough, and judges are encouraged to write down what was touched, with what and when. So the penalty may have been a slight tough of the right pole, with the back of the bouyancy aid on exit. Almost invariably missed by the paddler, often missed by the bank crew who are naturally looking on down the course, and hard to spot on a small video screen. (Ps as I havent been to an event for weeks, if this is correct it is just a fluke). When I am Chair, I usually give more ffedback to the paddler than just 'it was a touch' bu that is down to style and business.
Ah well lets hope it is OK this weekend at Bala
All spelling errors are intentional and are there to show new and improved ways of spelling old words. Grammatical errors are due to too many English classes/teachers.
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points
-
lil smurf
Judgeing members of "staff" should not be approachewd and or intimidated at events over protests. this is happening too much this year and people are getting up sett about this. some of these people are highly regarded within the sport and should not be put in thoes possitions as should no other people trying to offer to help, weather highly regarded or not.
If these people were not at an event then a lot of the time they would not end up beeing run! think...... NO JUDGES, NO TIMEING NO JURY how would it run?
You would complain if you had to run all the way down the course with a stop watch in your hand!
If these people were not at an event then a lot of the time they would not end up beeing run! think...... NO JUDGES, NO TIMEING NO JURY how would it run?
You would complain if you had to run all the way down the course with a stop watch in your hand!
Thanks for your comment Jim, a little harsh seeing though you we have never met and you do not know my background?
Yes I will bring a motion to the ACM and look forward to a positive response.
Thank you for the invite to become a Section Judge, we and several other people have tried on several occasions to become qualified and receive training to become section judges and have been repeativly been "stone walled" so your offer is most welcome. I will be intouch with you shortly.
Thank you.
Yes I will bring a motion to the ACM and look forward to a positive response.
Thank you for the invite to become a Section Judge, we and several other people have tried on several occasions to become qualified and receive training to become section judges and have been repeativly been "stone walled" so your offer is most welcome. I will be intouch with you shortly.
Thank you.
Paddle fast,,,Paddle safe Yorkshire Canoe Coaching
-
Guest
Good points have been made about both the difficulty of judging and the bad decisions that have been made in some races, affecting crucial decisions for promotion points and selection.
But everyone seems to forget that in cases of doubt, the benefit should be given to the paddler. Too often it seems that section judges are allowed to over-ride gate judges' decisions, but when the paddler makes a protest it is invariably the section judge who prevails with the harshest penalty.
I think the rules state that in cases of disagreement between section and gate judge, the section judge should record the higher penalty and note the disagreement. If the paddler subsequently appeals and the panel see that the section and gate judge disagree, then they should award the lower penalty.
I believe these are the rules but no doubt someone will correct me if I a wrong. If this is correct the rules are surely due an overhaul - it would be as easy for the sector judge to note the disagreement but award the lower penalty on "benefit of doubt" grounds. This might go some way towards reducing the current abundance of appeals.
But everyone seems to forget that in cases of doubt, the benefit should be given to the paddler. Too often it seems that section judges are allowed to over-ride gate judges' decisions, but when the paddler makes a protest it is invariably the section judge who prevails with the harshest penalty.
I think the rules state that in cases of disagreement between section and gate judge, the section judge should record the higher penalty and note the disagreement. If the paddler subsequently appeals and the panel see that the section and gate judge disagree, then they should award the lower penalty.
I believe these are the rules but no doubt someone will correct me if I a wrong. If this is correct the rules are surely due an overhaul - it would be as easy for the sector judge to note the disagreement but award the lower penalty on "benefit of doubt" grounds. This might go some way towards reducing the current abundance of appeals.
It is disappointing that you have had a negative responce to take up Judging if you let me have you name & address I will take your points to the next Slalom Committee Meeting on May 21st. If you wish to train to be a section Judge contact Jacky Wetzig or her details are in the Slalom Yearbook page 18.Jim
It is correct that the section judge must record the highest penalty given, however it is not always the section judge that gives the highest penalty. the jury in the event of a protest will look at both judges comments and discuss with both judges individually to understand the reasons behind giving the penalty, consideration is also taken as to has the best possible view of the gate. If there is no clear cut conclusion then benifit of the doublt to the paddler must be given.
On the discussion re video evidence, to be able to take this into consideration every paddler must have the same opportunity, i.e. every paddler must be videoed in an equal manner. video evidence is not conclusive, small light touches are very often missed by the video camera, especially on the unseen side. The present rules are fair to all concerned, where possble there are judges on either side of the river thus giving the best possible view, what a gate judge may see may be different from what the section judge sees because of this and vica verca. The judges do not have to agree, it can depend upon their view of the penalty.
New section judges are always welcomed, infact encouraged. Anyone wishing to be a section judge needs to discuu with Jacky Wetzig at and event or contact me, see year book, Anne Hounslow and I can pass on your details.
On the discussion re video evidence, to be able to take this into consideration every paddler must have the same opportunity, i.e. every paddler must be videoed in an equal manner. video evidence is not conclusive, small light touches are very often missed by the video camera, especially on the unseen side. The present rules are fair to all concerned, where possble there are judges on either side of the river thus giving the best possible view, what a gate judge may see may be different from what the section judge sees because of this and vica verca. The judges do not have to agree, it can depend upon their view of the penalty.
New section judges are always welcomed, infact encouraged. Anyone wishing to be a section judge needs to discuu with Jacky Wetzig at and event or contact me, see year book, Anne Hounslow and I can pass on your details.
Suprise Suprise once you ask for some one who is not happy about subject their proper name so you can take action it all goes by the ball. It make you wonder? I agree that a lot is owed to the individuals who give up their time to judge and we all owe them our thanks. However, I also think that some judges do not always give benefit of doubt to paddlers. They must be absolutely certain that a 50 was incurred before they record it, not "pretty sure".
A 50 at selection is no small thing given the amount of training and personal sacrifice that many paddlers have to endure to contend in selection. Athletes are out there in wind, rain and cold twice a day in many cases, putting off careers and higher education in some cases to train so they can make the team and go on to get international medals. I know first-hand how heartbreaking it is to get a 50 you know is unfair in selection.
I'm not saying judges should turn a blind eye when they are certain that a gate has been 50ed, but I am saying that if there is ANY doubt in their mind they MUST NOT give a 50.
A 50 at selection is no small thing given the amount of training and personal sacrifice that many paddlers have to endure to contend in selection. Athletes are out there in wind, rain and cold twice a day in many cases, putting off careers and higher education in some cases to train so they can make the team and go on to get international medals. I know first-hand how heartbreaking it is to get a 50 you know is unfair in selection.
I'm not saying judges should turn a blind eye when they are certain that a gate has been 50ed, but I am saying that if there is ANY doubt in their mind they MUST NOT give a 50.
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
Mrs H states that the Section Judge 'must' record the higher penalty.
This is certainly not an ICF rule - it isn't done that way in France, Germany, Poland, or Slovakia - tho' they do it in different ways, in none of those countries is it necessary to protest in order to be given the benefit of the doubt
Nor am I quite certain what its validity is in GB: I have looked back at the AGM Minutes for the last 20+ years, and I can find no trace of a resolution to that effect; and it is not mentioned in Slalom Rules 9.4/9.5 where you might expect to find it
I strongly dislike protests - and have now been Chairman of the Jury at 52 protestless evens running - but I find myself having to advise Div 1/Prem paddlers to protest inorder to 'smoke out' a doubt to get the benefit of
I would suspect that this accounts for a substantial proportion of all protests at section-judged events
This is certainly not an ICF rule - it isn't done that way in France, Germany, Poland, or Slovakia - tho' they do it in different ways, in none of those countries is it necessary to protest in order to be given the benefit of the doubt
Nor am I quite certain what its validity is in GB: I have looked back at the AGM Minutes for the last 20+ years, and I can find no trace of a resolution to that effect; and it is not mentioned in Slalom Rules 9.4/9.5 where you might expect to find it
I strongly dislike protests - and have now been Chairman of the Jury at 52 protestless evens running - but I find myself having to advise Div 1/Prem paddlers to protest inorder to 'smoke out' a doubt to get the benefit of
I would suspect that this accounts for a substantial proportion of all protests at section-judged events