Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 57

Thread: Technical Panel Disclosed

  1. #1
    Spectator
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    857

    0 Not allowed!

    Technical Panel Disclosed


    Go Ad-Free! Become a GS Supporter! Thank you
    So there it's written.

    Lots of fan-buzz foreseen...

  2. #2
    Spectator
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,989

    0 Not allowed!
    So, what is Sissy Krick infamous for?

  3. #3
    Spectator
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    813

    0 Not allowed!
    Dunno about Sissy Krick, but I do know that the entire technical panel for the ladies is basically the same as the one from the GPF (you know, the one that downgraded Kim's 3-3 combo). I have a feeling that this isn't gonna be pretty folks.

  4. #4
    Tripping on the Podium
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    713

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by HCOSurfer View Post
    Dunno about Sissy Krick, but I do know that the entire technical panel for the ladies is basically the same as the one from the GPF (you know, the one that downgraded Kim's 3-3 combo). I have a feeling that this isn't gonna be pretty folks.
    What? The messageboards or the Olympics?

  5. #5
    Spectator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    644

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by HCOSurfer View Post
    Dunno about Sissy Krick, but I do know that the entire technical panel for the ladies is basically the same as the one from the GPF (you know, the one that downgraded Kim's 3-3 combo). I have a feeling that this isn't gonna be pretty folks.
    That downgrade was ridiculous. If they try the same crap at the Olympics, I won't begrudge the fans for going crazy on the panel.

  6. #6
    Spectator
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    813

    0 Not allowed!
    The message boards.

  7. #7
    Tripping on the Podium
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    713

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by HCOSurfer View Post
    The message boards.
    Did you expect otherwise?

  8. #8
    On the Ice Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    33,889

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Hsuhs View Post
    So, what is Sissy Krick infamous for?
    She voted for the Canadians Sale and Pelletiere over Berezhnaya and Sikharudlisze in 2002, so she will probably favor Patrick Chan over Evgeni Plushenko this time around.

  9. #9
    Medalist
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,510

    0 Not allowed!
    They are using the same tech from the GP for the ladies? I can just see the controversy now~~~~~

  10. #10
    Spectator
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    135

    0 Not allowed!
    But Kim's 3-3 WAS underrotated. I'm a huge Kim fan and think she will/deserves to win the OGM, but the techs have been kind to her re: rotation calls. I was happy to see that call at the GPF.

  11. #11
    Spectator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    644

    0 Not allowed!
    If claiming you're a huge fan of hers validates your technical call, then let me say I'm not a huge Kim fan, and that 3/3 was not under-rotated.

  12. #12
    Spectator
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    135

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by DesertRoad View Post
    If claiming you're a huge fan of hers validates your technical call, then let me say I'm not a huge Kim fan, and that 3/3 was not under-rotated.
    Not really. I just prefaced it with that to guard myself from any Mao-bot accusations.

  13. #13
    Medalist
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,510

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by doug_log View Post
    Not really. I just prefaced it with that to guard myself from any Mao-bot accusations.
    So do believe it was justified or not? I don't think it really matters if it is or not on that night, because since it's that judge again, if she downgrades her 3-3, there will be complaining.

  14. #14
    Spectator
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    135

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by miki88 View Post
    So do believe it was justified or not? I don't think it really matters if it is or not on that night, because since it's that judge again, if she downgrades her 3-3, there will be complaining.
    Yes, I believe it was justified. But, you're right. If she's downgraded, there'll be a huge uproar. But the new rules that prevent the judges from seeing the techs' downgrade should keep the scores from changing too much (unless it's a blatant downgrade). I guess that's the most important thing.

  15. #15
    Spectator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    644

    0 Not allowed!

    Go Ad-Free! Become a GS Supporter! Thank you
    I take it back. I just downloaded her SP and rewatched it. It does appear she landed forward on her 3toe, thus justifying the downgrade.

    Well, it's up to Yu Na and all the other athletes to land their jumps, and the tech panel to call it correctly. Let's hope one follows the other.

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •