South Korea will attempt to pass 'host nation' automatic qualification through ISU.

s_parks said:

They earned the second entry for men? When?

Click to expand...

I think she's saying that the first entry was theirs rightfully and the favor would have been the second entry. It's basically the same situation as now. South Korea is asking for a similar favor when they want to have an entry because they're the host country. It's a horrible double standard to say no to one and criticize and then turn around and grant a similar favor to another country or merely support it.

Having said that though, I actually think the host country having one spot in each of the disciplines is a good thing.

Isabel_O'Reilly said:

I think she's saying that the first entry was theirs rightfully and the favor would have been the second entry. It's basically the same situation as now. South Korea is asking for a similar favor when they want to have an entry because they're the host country. It's a horrible double standard to say no to one and criticize and then turn around and grant a similar favor to another country or merely support it.

Having said that though, I actually think the host country having one spot in each of the disciplines is a good thing.

Click to expand...

I see what you and karne are saying, but did Russia just want that favor for that particular situation, or to have it applied in general? Forgive for being nitpicky, but just curious on the details. I still find that the conditions were a bit different in these two cases.

Isabel_O'Reilly said:

I think she's saying that the first entry was theirs rightfully and the favor would have been the second entry. It's basically the same situation as now. South Korea is asking for a similar favor when they want to have an entry because they're the host country. It's a horrible double standard to say no to one and criticize and then turn around and grant a similar favor to another country or merely support it.

Click to expand...

Thanks. That's what I was saying, I thought it was pretty clear.

Having said that though, I actually think the host country having one spot in each of the disciplines is a good thing.

Click to expand...

I think so too. I'm just curious to know how this will work out (if it's approved of course)? Is this going to apply to those host countries that don't have 1 entry in all 4 disciplines?
Also, I'm not sure if I understood the proposal very well. Are they asking to get an entry only for those disciplines where they don't have an entry or for all 4 of them?

As long as it's an additional skater to the line-up, and not taking away a spot from another team, then I'd be fine with it.

Isabel_O'Reilly said:

I think she's saying that the first entry was theirs rightfully and the favor would have been the second entry. It's basically the same situation as now. South Korea is asking for a similar favor when they want to have an entry because they're the host country. It's a horrible double standard to say no to one and criticize and then turn around and grant a similar favor to another country or merely support it.

Having said that though, I actually think the host country having one spot in each of the disciplines is a good thing.

Click to expand...

No, it is absolutely not the same situation, it is absolutely not the same favor, and it is not a horrible double standard to be say no to one and grant a similar favor because the favor is NOT the same. There's a historical precedent and tradition for the "favor" that South Korea is asking for--this tradition was JUST taken away for the 2018 games when every previous host had it. However, there is no historical tradition or precedent for a host nation getting a second spot that it hadn't earned.

The host country of the Olympics was previously traditionally entitled to one guaranteed spot in each discipline. It was not guaranteed any extra spots beyond that--a second or third spot in any discipline--that it hadn't earned.

See this Phil Hersh article from 1994 that references the automatic host qualification rule: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...an-skating-association-olympic-singles-titles

South Korea is asking for a return to what was a traditional benefit of the host nation, which was ironically removed just in time for its 2018 Winter Olympics, for just two of the disciplines in which it is the weakest--ice dance and pairs. (It isn't even a sure thing that it will earn a men's spot or a ladies spot, in spite of So-Youn Park's nice showing at 2014 worlds.)

South Korea is now basically asking for even less of a benefit than what previous hosts, including Russia, got. Russia was protected by the traditional rule as it was guaranteed a spot in each discipline at the 2014 Olympics regardless of what happened at 2013 Worlds--see page 3 of this PDF: http://corporate.olympics.com.au/files/dmfile/ISU_FigureSkating_Sochi2014_Sept2012.pdf In the end, they didn't need that guarantee, but it was nice insurance to have nonetheless.

HOST NATION QUALIFICATION

In the case where the skater/pair of the Host country - Russia went through the normal qualification procedure and did not qualify, one (1) skater (man and lady)/pair/couple from Russia shall have the right to participate in each event (Ladies, Men, Pairs and Ice Dance), as skater number 30 in the Single events, as pair number 20 in the Pairs event and as couple number 24 in the Ice Dance event. In such case the number of skaters/pairs/couples taken
from the Senior International Competition designated by the ISU will be reduced (See ISU Rule 400. A/B, paragraph 5).

Click to expand...

For whatever reason, this guaranteed spots benefit for the host in all disciplines was taken away; now Korea is asking for it to be applied to ice dance and pairs.

What Russia asked for was an unprecedented benefit for the host nation--an EXTRA men's spot beyond the 1 spot that was traditionally guaranteed for the host country that it had NOT earned nor was traditionally entitled to. Russia earned that spot but it was guaranteed it anyway.

Russia asking for one EXTRA spot versus Korea asking for only ONE spot is not the same in terms of historical precedence. A second spot is not the same as one spot.

True. Not to mention Russia didn't even get to use it's one spot in the individual, after requesting two.

Maybe Korea is just trying to have an entry in each discipline so the Koreans actually stick around to watch the event. :sarcasm:

I like this idea, no problems with it. Getting one spot to get an entry, no problem. Getting a second (for Russia) was the stickler, at least for me.

As sky_fly20 mentioned, they have a Russian-imported ice dancer already competing with Rebeca Kim. Let's see how their pairs develop. Do they even have a competitive one, or perhaps one rising through the junior ranks?

I'm not against this idea. Why was this right taken away in time for 2018 anyway? Host country having one entry per discipline seems fair, and from a financial standpoint, will be good for ticket sales. (I can see where Karne is coming from, and I did frown a little when I realized what she was saying. But there is historical precedent for what Korea is asking for... even if both boil down to being favours. Maybe there should be a more complex procedure for winning spots instead of just one Worlds).

Hopefully it'll inspire Korea to actually develop their pairs/dance, instead of just cobbling a team together to take advantage of the rule. Maybe they'll actually give the team competition a shot too (if it's still around in four years).

jaylee said:

What Russia asked for was an unprecedented benefit for the host nation--an EXTRA men's spot beyond the 1 spot that was traditionally guaranteed for the host country that it had NOT earned nor was traditionally entitled to. Russia earned that spot but it was guaranteed it anyway.

Russia asking for one EXTRA spot versus Korea asking for only ONE spot is not the same in terms of historical precedence. A second spot is not the same as one spot.

Click to expand...

So, if Korea will earn just one spot, let's say in ladies or any other discipline, they will not use the guarancy (or the new rule eventually) to get another extra spot? This is something which I still don't understand, how is suppose to work.

carriecmu0503 said:

Russia did not suggest the same thing. They already had at least one Olympic entry for all 4 disciplines. They wanted a second entry for the men. This is what people didn't like.

Click to expand...

Korean idea is more unfair. They want to take the 10th slot in Team Event from the country that actually earned it.

mich2 said:

Korean idea is more unfair. They want to take the 10th slot in Team Event from the country that actually earned it.

Click to expand...

I think the idea is to add one team not to take one slot from others?

How about pair or dance couple who indeed earned #20 and #24 in fair play? Korea wants to take these slots from skaters who won them on the ice. Is it fair?

Alba said:

I think the idea is to add one team not to take one slot from others?

Click to expand...

No, they want to be #20 and #24, not #21 and #25.

Hmm, reading it again, the #20 and #24 thing is kinda suspicious. Since Pairs are limited to 20 entries and Dance to 24... that does sound like they're trying to take the spots of people who actually earned them. Since there'd only be 19 and 23 spots left for everyone else to earn.

If that's the case, this indeed is worse than Russia's proposal.

mich2 said:

How about pair or dance couple who indeed earned #20 and #24 in fair play? Korea wants to take these slots from skaters who won them on the ice. Is it fair?

Click to expand...

Now I'm totally confused about this request. Are they saying they want a slot, therefore adding one in total, or they are saying they want one slot from those available now?

mich2 said:

No, they want to be #20 and #24, not #21 and #25.

Click to expand...

Ok. I must say I don't like it but there are sports, like football, which this rule does exist for Worlds and Euros.

Sandpiper said:

If that's the case, this indeed is worse than Russia's proposal.

Click to expand...

Well, if the russians wanted that extra spot by taking one from others, while having already one spot earned, the Korean proposal it's not worse.
I would say it's a bit better.

Alba said:

So, if Korea will earn just one spot, let's say in ladies or any other discipline, they will not use the guarancy (or the new rule eventually) to get another extra spot? This is something which I still don't understand, how is suppose to work.

Click to expand...

The new proposed rule is not about asking an additional spot. Even in the past, the host rule was to grant one spot if the host country could not earn any entry, per each discipline.

For example, let's assume Korea has earned one entry for ladies and zero entry for all the other disciplines for 2018. If the proposed rule is accepted, they can ask for one entry for pair and one entry for dance.

From the financial point of view, this makes sense. Men's singles is popular in Asia. People can buy shuttle plane tickets between Korea and neighboring countries at a reasonable price. They would sell enough tickets even if there is no Korean man in the competition. Not for pairs or dances.

seabm7 said:

The new proposed rule is not about asking an additional spot. Even in the past, the host rule was to grant one spot if the host country could not earn any entry, per each discipline.

For example, let's assume Korea has earned one entry for ladies and zero entry for all the other disciplines for 2018. If the proposed rule is accepted, they can ask for one entry for pair and one entry for dance.

Click to expand...

This is what I didn't quite understood. Now it's clear. They want a spot in those disciplines for which they didn't earned a spot through the qualification process, not an extra one.
Thanks. :thumbsup:

Alba said:

Well, if the russians wanted that extra spot by taking one from others, while having already one spot earned, the Korean proposal it's not worse.
I would say it's a bit better.

Click to expand...

Is that what Russia wanted?

Anyway, can't root for either proposal. Why not just add an extra spot for Korea?

Sandpiper said:

Is that what Russia wanted?

Click to expand...

I don't know really, it seems so from the comments here.

Anyway, can't root for either proposal. Why not just add an extra spot for Korea?

Click to expand...

That will be a good idea. I brought the football rule above but it's more difficult there to add another team (too many team and matches to be played in 90 minutes), while in FS it's just 8 minutes more. Not a big deal.