So what? People like controversy. It gives them something to talk about in their puritanical lives. The airways are full of controversial gossip which people love and devour daily. I dont see him as as a 'good little two shoes' and his interest is stricktly skating. I have an interest in skating. What else he does is of no conseqence to me.Originally Posted by mskater93
Toni - The second mark is based on opinion, and nof quantifiable. It's pagaent judging. The majority judging is used in rhe second mark.
Because what he said is being perceived as a diss of D/W who, even when finishing second to V/M, have always been classy about being "focused on themselves improving" in front of the press, even if they're pissed off about the scores. Basically, the way this reads, Moir is saying they should have won easily, even with him on his backside in the SD because they are artistically superior to every team they have ever competed with (hyperbole, here). Sorry, but D/W have worked their butts off to close the gap on the second mark and this vehicle is an AWESOME one to showcase their skating. People have complained about Meryl's unguarded reactions (rolling her eyes, etc) to scores that she felt were a diss, so this is an appropriate backlash to something WAY more obvious. As it is, I think he'd better watch his comments, because THOSE could be bulletin board fodder for D/W to not let up. (I think D/W have made the most improvements of the two teams and have made it a toss up when both go clean which is basically what the FD was). Moir is not acknowledging the improvements their rivals have made, which is a huge mistake.
Last edited by dorispulaski; 12-13-2011 at 06:06 PM.
I like skaters speaking their minds and showing their personalities. I try to understand their mindsets and how they fit into their realities and affect their competition results. I accept them as they are and appreciate their quirks. In a very few exceptions where I don't care much for the personality, I never feel the need to bash them as if they are actually a bad person or they have unforgivable character flaws. These are very successful young athletes with outstanding personal qualities to get to where they are. I'm humbled by them even if sometimes they act or speak unwisely, but who does all the times, especially at their age?
Plushenko amuses me. Takahashi is fascinating and complex and I wish to have more in depth information about him. I appreciate it when he does express his goal/ambition and disappointments at poor results. I give kudos to both for their great accomplishments and understand why they are national heroes.
I like to find the commonalities among the champions' characters and mindsets. These commonalities are there but expressed and shown to the world differently. I appreciate opportunities to read into their minds instead of finding opportunities to further characterize them into preconceived favorable or negative images.
As a skating fan, I strongly dislike bashing of these hard working young successful athletes who brought so many so much joy. You won't find me joining a zealous crowd to hype or bash them but I am compelled to defend them when I find the criticism unfair, harsh, and overblown, regardless of my fandom. Doesn't make me popular but that's not important to me. I get to write my opinions at my convenience, with time to formulate my thoughts and edit them to make their expression as clear as I can. Still, sometimes I react emotionally. Politicians have their speeches carefully and professionally crafted to please the masses. These young skaters often speak at times of peak emotions, answering questions shoved in their faces in public. Can we expect them to be impeccable orators with perfect answers all the time? Can these words be accurately and fairly extrapolated to represent their usual feelings and whole personality? I prefer to look at their actions and holistic personality.
1. I think people would have applauded Daisuke if he said that, actually. There's what, 25 pages of hate in the Men's LP thread. Daisuke is a god for Golden Skate (and I can see why - he's awesome) and Chan is the current enfant terrible who gets called a spoiled brat. Skate Canada gets compared to the mafia. If Takahashi had said the exact same thing, people would be praising him for speaking out against corruption, for having the courage for taking on the Chan-club machine. I have no doubt about that, and really, the level of hypocrisy there would be a piss-off if it weren't amusing.
2. I'm not sure what you mean by your second comment re: Plushenko not killing cats.
No, he couldn't have!
I'm sure it's not cat fur on his jacket collar.
Good point.
I don't mind Takahashi claiming he should have won over Chan, but it would bother me a lot if we substitute Chan with Kozuka. The difference is not in skating abilities but in the perceived relation between the skaters. Moir's comment indirectly put his training mates down, which is the part that disturbed me the most.
Last edited by skatinginbc; 12-13-2011 at 11:29 AM.
SF, I get what you're getting at, but that's a lot to ask of people when they're reading an article quoting Scott Moir. The amount of time people spend on an article -- particularly online -- can be as little as a minute or even less. On print it's not much better. I don't think it's realistic for the average person (i.e. people reading these articles who are not skating fans) to spend extra time thinking "What was Scott Moir's intentions in saying these words?"
But that said, and I only can speak for myself as a person who is willing to spend time analyzing things, I don't think Scott has some inheritant character flaw or is a terrible person. Nor would I ask him to censor himself (I do believe in freedom of speech and of the press). However, I think it's fair to question the context and the words of the comments — not of Moir himself.
I think there's a middle ground between the harsh criticism you speak of (Scott Moir is an ***!) and not saying anything at all. I think it's reasonable to have thoughtful constructive criticism, which many posters have offered here. (Does he really think Funny Face is that superior of a program that he could have bridged the gap? Is that a subtle dig at his teammates artistry? Could he have said it differently?)
I feel that many here are bunching constructive criticism into the harsher kind into one category and saying, "That criticism is unfair! We shouldn't make any! He's a human being and we should accept his personality and praise him for honesty!"
Last edited by dorispulaski; 12-13-2011 at 06:09 PM.
Respect is one thing, veneration is another. V/M have been top competitors in the sport for a number of years now. Moir should be able to handle questions at a press conference or losing a competition without resorting to having what amounts to a "temper tantrum."
Sorry, but I think D/W have equaled if not surpassed V/M the past year or so, it is now their time in the sun. Moir should be more careful with his words, he sounds like a sore loser and that just diminishes him IMO.
D&W will never surpass V&M
D&W has beaten V&M in the free dance three years in a row, including when they won the overall world title in 2011.
D&W has now beaten V&M in GPF twice, and on home territory no less.
In their head-to-head meet ups since the 2010 Worlds, D&W are 2-0 against V&M. (I don't count 4CC since V&M withdrew).
Obviously, D&W will never surpass V&M in your eyes, but on paper it's already been done.
I didnt say they would never win, i just said they will never be as good.
^Wow more than a one thought declaration of undying fandom. Two thoughts this time. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
But what does that mean? In artistry? technically? overall? Something else?
Winning competitions, in my view, is an indicator that a team has exhibited the skills to be "as good" or even better than their competitors. All your posts have been these one-line statements about how V/M is the best, regardless of D/W beating them in competition. So why not elaborate and explain why you have that opinion?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks