Short Dance: 2013 Skate Canada International

The problem was with their lift. You can tell that because an illegal move as part of an element means the element gets either Level 1 or no score at all. Their lift was the only element they had that was Level 1 in the SD.

So let's look at their lifts this year:

Lift at SC "pop my cork"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=NIKwwpoJz9o#t=154s
Lift at Nebelhorn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KLY4Rjz3GAg#t=158s

Here's the rule:

If there is an illegal movement during the execution of any element, the deduction for an illegal movement will apply and the
element will receive Level 1 if the requirements for at least Level 1 are fulfilled. Otherwise the element will be called No Level.

Rule 604, Paragraph 16
The following movementsand/or poses during the lift are illegal:

Lifting hand(s) of the lifting partner higher than his head*;

Lying or sitting on the partner’s head;

Sitting or standing on the partner’s shoulder, back;

Lifting partner swinging the lifted partner around by holding the skate(s)/boot(s) or leg(s) only
with fully extended arm(s) or by holding the hand(s) with full arm extension by both partners;

Lifted partner in upside down split pose (with sustained angle between thighs more than 45
degrees)**;
* It is not considered as an Illegal Lift Movement/Pose if:
· the point of contact of the lifting hand/arm of the lifting partner with any part of the body of
the lifted partner is not sustained higher than the lifting partner’s head;
· the lifting hand/arm which is used for support or balancing only or which touches any part of
the body of the lifted partner is not sustained by the lifting partner higher than his head for
more than 2 seconds.
** A brief movement through an upside down split pose (with any angle between between thighs) will be
permitted if it is not established (sustained) or if it is used only to change pose.

Click to expand...

I've highlighted the sections that apply. Nebelhorn tech panel thought the movement was not established or sustained or was used only to change pose. Or that she was not sitting on his shoulders for a brief time. SC panel disagreed.

Sitting or standing on the partner’s shoulder, back;

Click to expand...

Last year Virtue/Moir did a lift where Tessa sitting on the Scott's shoulders.

This lift could be illegal too.

http://youtu.be/qp70e8oMkVE?t=50s

That lift also looks amazing!

elif said:

Last year Virtue/Moir did a lift where Tessa sitting on the Scott's shoulders.

This lift could be illegal too.

http://youtu.be/qp70e8oMkVE?t=50s

Click to expand...

I never did really figure out why it was OK to sit on someone's shoulders facing them, versus sitting on someone's shoulders facing the other way. But all the tech panels agreed that Tessa & Scott's lift was OK. So that is not sitting on the shoulders.

Oh, thank you Doris!! So this means that they lost at least 4.50 points because of that lift With those 4.5 points they could have been 5th... Well, let's hope that they'll change that position!!

FSGMT said:

Oh, thank you Doris!! So this means that they lost at least 4.50 points because of that lift With those 4.5 points they could have been 5th... Well, let's hope that they'll change that position!!

Click to expand...

Shame about that as I'll bet they had some specialists "look" at their lifts, but nothing was said before the event. To get nailed during a competition like a Grand Prix really sucks.

dorispulaski said:

I never did really figure out why it was OK to sit on someone's shoulders facing them, versus sitting on someone's shoulders facing the other way. But all the tech panels agreed that Tessa & Scott's lift was OK. So that is not sitting on the shoulders.

Click to expand...

I don't think having your legs hooked over someone's shoulders would technically be considered sitting. However when facing the other way, it could be considered sitting on the partner's back (not shoulders). According to the rules:
"Sitting or standing on the partner’s shoulder, back;", that would be illegal. For V/M's lift to be considered illegal, the rule would need to say
"Sitting or standing on the partner’s shoulder, back, or chest;". Why they allow chest but not back would likely have been an arbitrary past decision. Perhaps because facing the other way and sitting on someones back is just too ordinary. Even little kids ride on their parents shoulders/back that way.

To me, the shoulders are the features either side of your neck. Whichever way someone is facing, if both their legs and/or their butt or thighs are pressed down supporting them on either or both shoulders, they're sitting on someone's shoulders.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder

The human shoulder is made up of three bones: the clavicle (collarbone), the scapula (shoulder blade), and the humerus (upper arm bone) as well as associated muscles, ligaments and tendons

Click to expand...

and sitting is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sitting

Sitting is a rest position supported by the buttocks or thighs where the torso is more or less upright.

Click to expand...

Clearly the ISU does not agree with me (nor with the above definitions), and I am OK with that, but I wish they would publish a question/answer about why it is OK, exactly, in their view-teams planning new lifts could use the clarification.

This lift of G&F looks more questionable for "sitting" than for "upside down split" because the split is clearly transitional, and should be OK.

Several people had different theories of why V&M's lift was OK. If team G&F bought into the wrong reason, the ISU caused their confusion, and that makes me angry. There should have been a clarification of the rule.

I recall one person who claimed to be a dance coach claiming that sitting on shoulders meant the lifted partner sitting on a single shoulder. If that's how the rule should be interpreted, either sitting forward or backwards astride the neck would be OK.

sweetskates1 said:

That lift also looks amazing!

Click to expand...

Yes I love that lift too. I hope its not illegal. :think: