Audience to Hear Tech Panel Calls on Errors

[Mrs. P]

What kinds of criticisms do you think should be included in the letters?

It would be more effective to write to ISU headquarters or to members of the ISU technical committees than than to write to random tech specialists or judges who happen to live close to you -- they're just applying the rules, not necessarily at the events you're criticizing. You want to address the folks who make the rules.

Of course, if you actually get to meet a local judge or tech specialist and have a conversation about skating, by all means express your thoughts. They might agree with you on many points. They might have a good idea of where to address those observations.

I don't think it would do much good to criticize specific calls at specific events that resulted in unpopular results. The tech panels were just calling the event as well as they could in real time. Maybe they made a few mistakes, but it's too late to do anything about it after the medals have been awarded.

More comprehensive, thoughtful critiques of some of the rules, directed at the people who have the power to effect changes in the rules, might have some value.

E.g., maybe argue that scoring triple jumps just over 90 degrees short as if they were double jumps is too harsh a penalty compared to the difficulty of peforming an almost-rotated triple vs. a double, and it's confusing to audiences who see apparently successful triples. If enough fans and skaters and coaches and even judges express that opinion, maybe they'll choose a more generous point at which to draw the downgrade penalty and a less severe way to penalize moderately cheated jumps.

Or complain that too many of the step sequences, spiral sequences, and long program layouts look like they're following a template and limiting skaters' ability to showcase their individual strengths. Lament the loss of quick footwork that flies across the ice and spirals that interpret the music, and ask whether rules could be rewritten to encourage skaters to show off those skills.

Maybe if the decision makers hear enough voices asking reasonably for the same kinds of reasonable changes, they will consider making those changes.

That's exactly where I was going with this. I think talking to local judges/technical specialists can help garner support for them to go to the people who do make the decisions and/or help direct criticism to the proper people.

I think that it's super easy to go-off on a message board and rant, but it's much harder to actually take the time to find out how to take those criticisms to the decision makers. It takes time.

And perhaps people on this board could work together to write a letter, or maybe start some sort of effort to get the conversations going across the country. I think writings by people like Phil Hersch brings the issue to light, but it's up to those who have a true stake in the sport (whether as a fan, skater or coach) to find ways to keep the conversations going.

And in those conversations they can not revolve around one competition or skater. Doing so would actually reduce such criticisms as ones being made because a favorite skater did not do well.

 

[Spun Silver]

Derek Jeter doesn't get marked in terms of 5 components on how he fields a ball, whether he did it in a difficult enough position to warrant a high level, whether his cleats were properly positioned in the turf, etc. It isn't too practical for commercial TV to post and review the entire details after each athlete skates. Interested fans can check on the Internet; I do believe commentators should review the details, though, for the highlights, i.e. URs and Es, and obviously low Levels, and explain those to the audience.

That's not a good comparison since baseball doesn't have a COP-like judging system. What it does have are umpires who sometimes make dubious calls and those are invariably reviewed in slo-mo during the game and discussed by the commentators. That's what I'm asking for in FS.

ETA: In baseball the slow-mo often leads to the clear conclusion that the umpire was wrong. But it's a well-established principle in the sport that what the umpire decrees on the field is final, even if wrong. So while people complain, the sport and its crazy rules go on unperturbed. I think it's all more emotional in FS because the events are far fewer, and athletes' entire careers are determined by these judging calls. Tricky. It would be a big risk for figure skating to make things as transparent as they are in baseball.

About writing letters -- I think posting at the world-famous Goldenskate.com is more than adequate. I'm sure many judges and ISU officials are already reading.

 

[janetfan]

I don't think it would do much good to criticize specific calls at specific events that resulted in unpopular results. The tech panels were just calling the event as well as they could in real time. Maybe they made a few mistakes, but it's too late to do anything about it after the medals have been awarded..

.

Typically and maybe almost always that statement is true.
But that's not what happened in SLC back in 2002.

I can't think of any other times when medals changed - but it is a possibilty since it has already happened.

I certainly hope there is not a repeat of that but think it is bound to happen again because the secrecy in the current system makes many uncomfortable,

 

[Mrs. P]

About writing letters -- I think posting at the world-famous Goldenskate.com is more than adequate. I'm sure many judges and ISU officials are already reading.

That may be true, but I don't think it hurts to send the message via other mediums (or in person). It's the whole grassroots thing in me. I think GS has great discussions (that's why I read it), but there's something about someone like an ISU official getting a ton of letters in the mail.

I just believe that if you have a problem with something, you can't make any assumptions that the message will come across. Now if you do everything you can (call, write e-mail or whatever) and they don't respond, that's a whole other story.

 

[sk8rdad]

Derek Jeter doesn't get marked in terms of 5 components on how he fields a ball, whether he did it in a difficult enough position to warrant a high level, whether his cleats were properly positioned in the turf, etc. It isn't too practical for commercial TV to post and review the entire details after each athlete skates. Interested fans can check on the Internet; I do believe commentators should review the details, though, for the highlights, i.e. URs and Es, and obviously low Levels, and explain those to the audience.

I have been harping on this for years with any official who's ear I can bend. One of the better analogies to skating from a judging perspective is diving. This is a sport that has very similar criteria for judging each element as skating. The difference is that they actually do analyze each element in slow mo for the audience since the elements are seperate. While this wouldn't be possible with figure skating I have always thought that the broadcasters have plenty of time to show highlights that show both good and bad elements and explain why they fall into one of those categories.

We didn't need to have nearly as much K&C time listening to Sasha Cohen discussing the extra 2 pounds she felt she had around her middle. That time could have been spent showing replay of elements.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I was hoping the earbuds were a USFS device to allow the audience to understand that an element may have a defect be it minor or major. However, if it is not theTech Panel's call, but some hired hand, we will continue with endless discussion on this matter until we see the final protocols (when?). The Tech Panel has the final say on the 'errors' causing skaters' scores to deflate, and for fans who see the elements on the 2 dimentional screen just don't measure up for argument. The Tech Panel is infallible.

But the nitty gritty score for each element is not known to the public or even to the astute commentators until much later leaving everyone in the arena puzzled as to the win of one skater over an other who appeared to be the audience's winner'

This post is not about the Tech Panel's infallibility, but to have both officials and public leave the arena with an understanding of the results

The public has a right to know how the final result was reached. If it is just for those in-the-know types, well then expect more disinterest in Figure Skating.

 

[Mathman]

This post is not about the Tech Panel's infallibility, but to have both officials and public leave the arena with an understanding of the results.

The public has a right to know how the final result was reached. If it is just for those in-the-know types, well then expect more disinterest in Figure Skating.

:agree:

 

[KKonas]

I was hoping the earbuds were a USFS device to allow the audience to understand that an element may have a defect be it minor or major. However, if it is not theTech Panel's call, but some hired hand, we will continue with endless discussion on this matter until we see the final protocols (when?). The Tech Panel has the final say on the 'errors' causing skaters' scores to deflate, and for fans who see the elements on the 2 dimentional screen just don't measure up for argument. The Tech Panel is infallible.

But the nitty gritty score for each element is not known to the public or even to the astute commentators until much later leaving everyone in the arena puzzled as to the win of one skater over an other who appeared to be the audience's winner'

This post is not about the Tech Panel's infallibility, but to have both officials and public leave the arena with an understanding of the results

The public has a right to know how the final result was reached. If it is just for those in-the-know types, well then expect more disinterest in Figure Skating.

David Kirby is a tech specialist but he was not sitting with the tech panel and did not
have the same sight line or the ability to review the jumps. The commentators do have the protocols up immediately so should be able to comment on it in air time. Other Media generally have to go to the "mix zone" or the press room to get the protocols.

 

[Nadine]

In the famous words of Dorothy Parker, I say "what fresh hell is this?"hwell:

Seriously, what's next!?! Next thing you know they will be handing out calculators to everybody at the Olympics ~ ears full of bud & hands on calculator ~ listening to a COP expert drone on about "that's a 3axel, punch in 12 pts., but it was UR, so take away 3 pts.," etc. etc. etc.

Heck, one will be too busy listening to the so-called *expert* & looking down at one's calculator calculating figures to even see the performance! When it gets to this point, skating is truly dead, last nail in the coffin.:disapp:

I mean come on, it's like going to the movies, do you honestly need someone telling you what you just saw, or a narrator pointing everything out bit by bit by bit. It's like that famous quote about being too busy looking at the trees that one fails to see the beauty of the forest. You know, the overall picture.

Anyhow, that's my take on it. Lol, and that doesn't even take into consideration the audience watching on t.v.

I foresee ratings continuing to drop, as well as the viewing audience, except for us die-hard figure skating fans. Ah well, COP is here to stay, so we just have to make the most of it, like good little soldiers, never questioning the higher ups, nor the technical panel nor the judges, just following along like good little drones...

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

g

David Kirby is a tech specialist but he was not sitting with the tech panel and did not
have the same sight line or the ability to review the jumps. The commeintators do have the protocols up immediately so should be able to comment on it in air time. Other Media generally have ito go to the "mix zone" or the press room to get the protocols.

I'm assuming Mr Kirby is the voice one hears in the earbuds.

And what about the public or is it a case that the public be damned? They leave the arena confused thinking it's a strange sport.

Although the commentators of the TV media do get the protocols immediately, they do not say much, if anything over the air about scored errors. They prefer to talk about what they see, and not what the Tech Panel called.

Why can not the powers to be, care a little more about the public?

 

[Nadine]

All's I know is that if I make it to the 2010 OIympic Mens Final on 2/18/10 at 4:45PM in the PNE Pacific Coliseum in Vancouver (praying to God & crossing fingers), I will NOT be wearing earbuds!

Seriously, I didn't pay all that $$$$ or drive all that way just to hear some so-called *expert* tell me what's what, when I have a pair of eyeballs to see with & a pair of ears to hear with! Otherwise, I might as well just stay home.

 

[chuckm]

What Kirby said in the earbuds when there was a possible error was "review". That did NOT say the element would be downgraded, but that the tech panel would be likely to review the element on replay after the performance.

Saying "review" is what the actual caller would do, and that did not mean that any action would be taken. Remember that both TS and ATS must agree on a call or else the deciding vote defaults to the technical controller. So just calling for "review" just means the caller wants to look at the element more closely.

Kirby did not often call a downgrade and did so only if the skate was very obviously pointed the wrong direction on takeoff and/or landing.

BTW, the purpose of the earbuds is not to tell the audience what to think, but only to impart information on how the tech team looks for in a performance. Those who don't want the information aren't going to be forcefed.

 

[Nadine]

Good to know because I'm not going to let some joker tell me what's what.

 

[chuckm]

It wouldn't be Kirby at Vancouver anyway. He said he would be on the tech team at one of the disciplines.

If you don't want to know the nitty gritty about how IJS works from a tech team perspective, then don't use an earbud. I used the earbud at Nationals and it was an eyeopener to know exactly what is being looked at and to what level of detail. I really appreciate how much knowledge I picked up in the process.

I will now be paying attention to the number of rotations in spin positions and seconds of poses in spirals and the number of turns in different directions in footwork. Those things can make a difference in the outcome of a competition, and prevent needless cries of wuzrobbed.

 

[Nadine]

I, or we, have Mathman on this board for that. I don't need Kirby, tech team, et al.

Like I've said before, call me old-fashioned, but I'm just going to sit back & enjoy the show!:thumbsup: I'll be too busy watching the forest to see the trees.

You are you, and I am me, and let us just leave it at that.

 

[Mrs. P]

It wouldn't be Kirby at Vancouver anyway. He said he would be on the tech team at one of the disciplines.

If you don't want to know the nitty gritty about how IJS works from a tech team perspective, then don't use an earbud. I used the earbud at Nationals and it was an eyeopener to know exactly what is being looked at and to what level of detail. I really appreciate how much knowledge I picked up in the process.

I will now be paying attention to the number of rotations in spin positions and seconds of poses in spirals and the number of turns in different directions in footwork. Those things can make a difference in the outcome of a competition, and prevent needless cries of wuzrobbed.

I see the earbuds as something like a commentary on a movie DVD. Some might not want to hear it all the time, but they serve as an interesting way to understand the behind-the-scenes and such.

People are by nature pretty curious, and I think some people might find the information interesting (esp. if it's presented by a really good and vivid tech specialist).

 

[Nadine]

P.S. This explains why I love silent movies, and IN (oops, except when it comes to Nationals). Rotflmao!

 

[i love to skate]

Why all the fuss over earbuds? If you don't want to listen then don't wear them. Problem solved.

 

[antmanb]

We had ear phones and receivers given out free at British Nationals. The receivers at best worked intermittently, though i suppose higher quality ones that you might pay something for might work better.

The main thought i had was - but that's the beauty of live competition you don't have to hear the mutterings of people through the performance, you can see the programme as it is meant to be!!

That said having the earphone made it very tempting to listen in - especially during warm ups and the like. If you don't know what a skater looks like, it helps to identify them!

Ant

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Good to know because I'm not going to let joker tell me what's what.

I am sure the 'joker' is well versed in figure skatings rules and regs, but he is at a disadvantage since he doesn't have the equipment that the T Panel has, and I believe he is a TS, but not on the panel of the present comp

It would be really beneficial to the audience if someone on the Panel would give the calls on the earbud as well as for the competition. At least the audience could go home with more understanding.

Unless the call is transferred to the Jumbothon (not necessarily a rerun), the TV audience will not get that understanding immediately.

Now once the call is given, it is official, and not subject to change. Fan disagreements may continue but their view should be directed to the Panel and not to the Skaters.