No way that with Weir's rather empty, old concept - new program, buffet-like choreography, jumps+crossovers LP, he could get medal or even 4th place in Vancouver. So much, out of proportion hype on his skating. It was being portrayed as the skate of his lifetime. I see it as just his come-back kick. He held onto it, did great compared with his usual skating of last a couple of years. He could be placed ahead of Chan in 5th. That's about it.Originally Posted by Hernando
I'm not interested in the TV or the abridged Jumbo Thon display. I'm worried about the Tech Panel who see the perceived errors that we do not. The Jumbo Thon is not run by the Officials to which a judge mentioned some time ago in answer to one of my sarcastic cracks.
High jumper A: "I cleared the bar cleanly. High Jumper B knocked down his bar on his way down with his heel. I should be the winner! Not fair!"
Official: "You cleared 1.95 m. High Jumper B's bar was at 2.45 m."
High Jumper A: "But I cleared my bar clean! You don't like me and robbed me of my win!"
South Section Spectators: "Boo! Corruption! Scandal! High Jumper B is ugly! Sexy High Jumper A wuzrobbed! Boo!"
Just change it back from high jumping to CoP skating and you will have it just about right.
One problem is that the ISU's replay uses only one camera. So if that particular camera angle is not the best one, the technical specialists still has to just do the best he can. Some types of calls allow slo-motion, but for others the error has to be visible in real time or else the skater automatically gets the benefit of the doubt.
It is not exactly "instant" replay. In real time the technical specialist shouts out "Review!" if he wants the replay operator to prpeare a shot of that particular element. Then after the skate is over, the tech panel gets to see the reviewed elements. The TV audience actually gets to see more than the tech panel does, thanks to the multiple angles of the TV cameras.
NBC had a very interesting feature in this process at 2011 U.S. nationals. They used footage from 2010 nationals to illustrate the procedure. This wqs kind of ironic, because they selected Sasha Cohen's short program and in particular the call on her triple Lutz. We did get to see exactly what the tech panel saw (no slo-motion), and the call of the tech specialist was clearly wrong (the wrong edge was quite evident, but the tech panel did not call it, despite the review.)
"I see it as just his come-back kick. He held onto it, did great compared with his usual skating of last a couple of years. He could be placed ahead of Chan in 5th. That's about it." (Bluebonnet)
He should also be placed ahead of uncharacteristically clunky-landing Lambiel as well, to come in 4th.
I agree about Johnny Weir. This is an example of someone who didn't fall being beaten by at least one person who did. I also thought he should've been third, though I'll concede to Daisuke, who fell on a quad IIRC but still did very well overall. Patrick and Stephane were held up big time. I was not impressed by either of them.
My question is: do the judges scrutinize every jumper's jumps equally? Is every jump checked for rotation, and every lutz/flip checked to see if the right edge was used? Or do they only check if something looked wrong with their naked eye?
I can see how this could be abused if the answer is no. The "beloved" skater will be assumed to have rotated totally and used the right edge, while the "out of favor" skater will be scrutinized. Skater #2 will get the edge/UR call, while #1 will not, even if #1 also did a double flutz instead of a triple lutz.
I think they only check elements that looked questionable to the naked eye in real time. I believe it goes like this. If any one of the three people on the technical panel sees something they think is fishy, they call out "Review" to the Replay Operator. The Replay Operater then tags that segment of the tape and the tech panel reviews it afterward.
As I mentioned above, one problem is that there is only one replay camera. If it doesn't have the right angle, then the tech panel must make the judgment as best they can from what they can see.
I agree that skaters can get a bum rap once they get a reputation for under-rotating, flutzing, etc. The technical panel will be extra scrupulous in examining their elements. I think this is a big problem, because, to me, almost every jump is under-rotated and more than half of all ladies' Lutzes are flutzes. This means that the contest can be determined more by what the tecnical panel calls or doesn't call than by the actual performances.
There is only one way to check a landing, and that is from the rear of the skater where the entire landing is obvious. If the Tech Panel can not do that then what reason is there for fans to believe what they call? His inability to see the jump landing in reatime; and his personal TV view is limited.
When using the visible realtime for errors, a skater can UR and if it not caught for any reason, the skater will get the benefit of the doubt. Another point in making this a girly sport. (btw, my use of the word 'girly' is not against the Lady fans. It's a term used by softee regulations.)
Granted there are some shots by TV showing some instant replay, but not all. I presume, too, some questionable landings are within the 45 degree barrier, so a 2.45 jump can be considered a Triple. Tell me whose measuring the landings or is it just eyeball?
What the Tech Panel sees, is the official ruling on URs. What the fans see are bad calls of their favorite skaters. What the TV SloMo shows are not those of all the contenders for the championships. Just the top 3 skaters from the SP,and probably an American who did not skate a good SP. While most Fans would object to a separate Tech segment because of there need for the 'artisty' fix with with slices of music. I contend there is an emotional fix in Sporty terms wihout slices of music.
Interesting comment. I have never heard the Review mark, although it makes sense. I can believe the three members of the Panel who have their own favorites could be furious with each other.It is not exactly "instant" replay. In real time the technical specialist shouts out "Review!" if he wants the replay operator to prpeare a shot of that particular element. Then after the skate is over, the tech panel gets to see the reviewed elements.
Last edited by Joesitz; 04-20-2011 at 05:29 PM.
In soccer (or football as we call it on our side of the Atlantic), goals, fouls, offsides, etc are credited / given / whatever only when witnessed by the referee or assistant referees. This means as far as the rule is concerned, the definition of a goal is NOT whether the ball has gone into the goal net or not, BUT whether the ball is witnessed to have gone into the net by the referee. These are conceptually two different things.
I understand under rotations, wrong edge take off, rotation count in spins, etc in figure skating is the same. It doesn't matter whether a skater has actually taken off from the wrong edge or not, but whether the technical panel has seen he/she has taken off from the wrong edge or not is what matters. As long as the same rule is applied to all skaters participating the competition, then it is considered to be a fair rule. (I heard the technical panel hold a meeting before the competition to agree on the criteria of under rotation for the competition. So the same criteria is applied to all participating skaters of the event. This is, I believe, one of the reasons why comparing scores from different competitions is sometimes futile.)
In soccer, video replay is not allowed and the referee is prohibited from overturning his / her decision even though it is proven to be wrong afterwards. This of course causes a huge controversy sometimes - for example in the last year's World Cup Final, the ball kicked by an England's player did physically go into the German goal net, but the goal was not credited because the referee failed to see it. But the scene was filmed by the camera and shown in the stadium's enormous screen live. The spectators saw it, the players saw it, but they could not do anything about it because the only one person who matters, the referee, did not see it with his own eyes. Crap. But that is a sport for you. The rule is the rule. Accepting the rules and following them is the very first step in any kind of sports.
Last edited by mot; 04-20-2011 at 06:58 PM. Reason: double negative!
From the footage I have seen, the camera is right at the judges box, so they see on camera the same view that they see with their own eyes.
I don't think I would characterize this as girly. As Mot writes above, many macho sports have a long and proud history and tradition that the referee is part of the game. In baseball, it would be very easy nowadays to have an electronic camera that would record the exact point and height at which the ball went over the plate. There would be no need for a plate umpire at all.
But baseball has not chosen that route. The umpire is expected to stand in there and yell S-T-EEEEEE-RIKE! in full voice, then take the boos of the fans like a man.
That's how figure skating should be. The judges should say, yeah I marked your favorite skater down for a wobbly landing. Wanna make something of it?
(Then the skater's coach comes out and kicks ice chips on the judges' shoes and gets thrown out of the arena.)
Last edited by Mathman; 04-21-2011 at 07:35 AM.
Amen!But baseball has not chosen that route. The umpire is expected to stand in their and yell S-T-EEEEEE-RIKE! in full voice, then take the boos of the fans like a man.
That's how figure skating should be. The judges should say, yeah I marked your favorite skater down for a wobbly landing. Wanna make something of it?
(Then the skater's coach comes out and kicks ice chips on the judges' shoes and gets thrown out of the arena.)And that's the ballgame!
and All That Jazz!
Do skaters, male and female, need to fight to man up and make figure skating a real sport?
I can guarantee the rating will go through the roof in the US.
I'm sorry this is off topic, but I'm a soccer referee and I have to correct this. A referee can overturn their decision under certain circumstances. Goals can be disallowed after they have been awarded as long as the referee signals their decision before the kick off. Referees can also rescind cards after they have awarded them on the advice of the referee. This take a very brave ref, and I've only ever seen it done once at the last world cup. The main point of the statement is true, if the referee didn't see it, it officially didn't happen no matter what the rules or reality dictates. I also feel the need to point out that the goal was not awarded because the assistant referee didn't see the goal, he was most likely out of position. Sorry for the digression.
no one is suggesting that, as far as I can tell. If we skating fans wanted that we'd watch Hockey.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks