Americans want to get opportunity to protest

[DanseMacabre]

The thread title is misleading. Americans (plural) don’t “want” anything.

Tom Z., after Vincent’s placement in Skate America, wrote a post where he wanted more camera angles, which I believe has been discussed elsewhere. There are direct links to Tom Z.’s social media comments, which I don’t have here.

The cited article not only incorrectly refers to Americans, but talks about the World Cup AFAIK, that had nothing to do with TomZ.’s suggestion. I don’t know this link, is it a “real” paper or a blog link of some sort?

Discussing whether skaters should have the opportunity to protest calls is certainly an issue, but without reference to this misleading article.

It does sort of feel like an attempt to stir up drama.

Side note: The ISU's Lakernik does agree with TZ re improving the quality of video replays, according to this article (or blog or whatever it is).

Excerpt:

However, some do not see in the proposal of Zakrajsek anything new. Vice-President of ISU Alexander Lakernik was one of the first to speak in this regard. According to him, video replays already exist and hardly demand changes at this moment, and he agreed with the opinion on bad technical equipment of judges.

''Zakrajsek is a good coach, professional, and his emotions in this case are understandable,'' said Lakernik. ''But video replays already exist in figure skating, in full amount, the judges and the audience can see them. The system is totally transparent. The only thing I would agree with in this case is the comment on the quality of these video replays, which should be improved.''​

(I realize that the OP wants to focus on whether it should be possible to file protests -- but I previously was unaware of Lakernik's comments re the quality of video replays.)

Figure skating has always been behind the times when it comes to video replay technology so he's spot on. It was shameful how long it took to get them in the first place and that they're so rudimentary in application is honestly baffling.

 

[Tahuu]

Using high quality video replay and permitting error call protesting should be discussed by ISU. It may be doable especially in televised major competitions.

ISU could modify their TV contracts to give the technical panel access to multiple TV camera feeds for their review. It won’t cost much money if at all to implement. In these high stake competitions, skaters and their coaches should be allowed to protest tech calls they believe to be erroneous, with conditions. Their protest may be decided by the referee to dismiss or pass it on to the tech panel. The tech panel doesn’t have to review it immediately so as not to delay ongoing competition. Their final decision will be announced only at the end of the competition.

 

[Koatterce]

imo, in terms of ur and downgrade calls, more replay angles would help more than ability to protest. There's going to be some element of human error or just overall differences in perception if it's measured by people watching slomo replay (even with posters here, I often see some people thinking the jump is clean while others think its under etc.). But the tech panel needs to have enough info to definitively say "I think this was clean/underrotated/downgraded" (even if there is mild disagreement between people on more borderline jumps). There really shouldn't be any instance of "I can't really tell but I guess it looks kinda ur so that's what I'm gonna say". More angles would definitely help with that, so if they can't see the landing clearly, then they can look at a different angle which will hopefully be clearer.

There's definitely some way of protesting very objectively wrong calls like getting credited for the wrong element or second half bonus. At one comp last season (worlds? don't really remember), Tursynbaeva had a jump in the second half that wasn't credited with the bonus but I guess they protested or whatever and it was corrected.

 

[Ziotic]

Something of this nature occurred at WTT I believe.

D/R did a 4S throw and the tech panel called it a 3S. It was a quad though and they had to go back and adjust after protocols had come out I believe.

 

[Eclair]

I strongly dislike how Tom is making this about Vincents judging as if he didn't have UR issues, but his suggestions are good. Let coaches demand to re-evaluate jumps if they think it was called wrongly (or not called wrongly).

But these changes won't happen. You heard Lakernik. He said, the system is totally transparent and changes are not necessary. And he has the say.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

Side note: The ISU's Lakernik does agree with TZ re improving the quality of video replays, according to this article (or blog or whatever it is).

The fact that Evgenia is getting "!" on most of her lutzes says everything there is to say about the quality of video replays.

 

[StitchMonkey]

Side note: The ISU's Lakernik does agree with TZ re improving the quality of video replays, according to this article (or blog or whatever it is).

Excerpt:

However, some do not see in the proposal of Zakrajsek anything new. Vice-President of ISU Alexander Lakernik was one of the first to speak in this regard. According to him, video replays already exist and hardly demand changes at this moment, and he agreed with the opinion on bad technical equipment of judges.

''Zakrajsek is a good coach, professional, and his emotions in this case are understandable,'' said Lakernik. ''But video replays already exist in figure skating, in full amount, the judges and the audience can see them. The system is totally transparent. The only thing I would agree with in this case is the comment on the quality of these video replays, which should be improved.''​

(I realize that the OP wants to focus on whether it should be possible to file protests -- but I previously was unaware of Lakernik's comments re the quality of video replays.)

Isn't this a bit disingenuous? Correct me if I am wrong but I think the judges and tech panel are limited to what cameras/camera angles they are allowed to view (not all the ones we have access to) and is slo mo even allowed?

 

[lanceupper1114]

Problem with video replay protests is that it would still be a human subjective call. You can even see on this forum that there have been some pretty......um, passionate....debates and disagreement about whether an edge is (!) or (e), UR or not, downgrade or not based on videos people see. It wouldn't really work.

In tennis, computers decide the challenged line calls, not people, so theres an objective element to that. I suppose its possible that ISU can invest a giant bag of money they don't have into some sort of blade to ice computer recognition system, but thats about as likely as Michelle Kwan coming back next year to do pairs with a throw quad axel.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

Problem with video replay protests is that it would still be a human subjective call. You can even see on this forum that there have been some pretty......um, passionate....debates and disagreement about whether an edge is (!) or (e), UR or not, downgrade or not based on videos people see. It wouldn't really work.

The calls don't have to be perfect for there to be an improvement from what we see now. The "!" should be rarer than it is, because most of those are clearly "e" when viewed at the right angle. There will always be jumps that are very close and debatable from even optimal angles, but those are less common than you might think given the number of "!" calls.

 

[Tahuu]

Only slo-mo review of prerotation is prohibited, which is a bad rule and should be changed. Vincent and shoma are some of the skaters using prerotation techniques on their toe jumps.

 

[Weathergal]

Strange about the title on the article reading "Americans". It appears it was a suggestion from Coach Z.

I was thinking the same thing. Can we please not have Tom Z speaking for all American coaches...or all Americans?

 

[lanceupper1114]

The calls don't have to be perfect for there to be an improvement from what we see now. The "!" should be rarer than it is, because most of those are clearly "e" when viewed at the right angle. There will always be jumps that are very close and debatable from even optimal angles, but those are less common than you might think given the number of "!" calls.

But unless a "challenge" system is very very accurate, it would only create more debate, uncertainty, and lack of confidence in the judging system. A challenge is also a prospect for one to improve their score, so I don't think anyone is going to challenge their (!) if they know it's actually an (e), but i get what you are trying to say.

 

[Mathman]

I like the idea of each skater keeping track of his own scores. Whoever submits the highest total, wins.

 

[ice coverage]

Isn't this a bit disingenuous? Correct me if I am wrong but I think the judges and tech panel are limited to what cameras/camera angles they are allowed to view (not all the ones we have access to) … ?

I believe that is exactly one of TZ's points.

---

btw, TZ's Facebook post says: "... The ISU council must take action to improve this current situation. (Note: This is not the first time these ideas have been suggested. They have been talked about for years.)"

So TZ would agree with Lakernik that TZ's proposal is not anything new.

---

Strange about the title on the article reading "Americans". It appears it was a suggestion from Coach Z.

I was thinking the same thing. Can we please not have Tom Z speaking for all American coaches...or all Americans?

Yes, agree that whoever wrote the headline for Realnoe Vremya had no basis for extrapolating from TZ to "Americans."

TZ's Facebook post seems quite clear that he was speaking only for himself "as one of [Vincent's] coaches."

 

[NymphyNymphy]

Vincent's called jumps were indeed correctly called. Why is there such a controversy? Johnny was adamant that Vincent's 4Lz was not UR'd while it was being played in slow motion. It was clearly UR'd.

 

[skylark]

But none of the calls Zakrasjek was complaining about were incorrect.

Even I, who care very little about URs, have seen posts disagreeing about this.

Problem with video replay protests is that it would still be a human subjective call. You can even see on this forum that there have been some pretty......um, passionate....debates and disagreement about whether an edge is (!) or (e), UR or not, downgrade or not based on videos people see. It wouldn't really work.

Exactly. All you have to do is take note of the pbp posts on our own GS comp threads. Discrepancies can clearly be seen, according to the poster's preferences. Sometimes jumps are "called" UR or DG by the poster when that skater is a threat to the poster's favorites, but that doesn't reflect what the Tech caller ruled. Those passionate GS debates after the fact are more evidence.

I am not claiming to be objective. Figure skating is so much more interesting because it's part art, and art is partly subjective.

All this trying to tweak the rules, or insisting that one person's call is always right or fair (or that it even CAN be), is an attempt to fix the things that are wrong with trying to put number values on everything, when numbers don't tell the whole story.

 

[Xen]

Hmm, there are some issues with the implementation of the review process. I'm all for more angles, slow-mo's etc to reduce human error when it comes to Tech calls. But there is definitely a fear I have regarding how it will be applied, and if it'll make TP calls more political.

Here's the problem I have- if the goal is for fair calls for everyone, it might not happen. Unless the person calling for the review has the authority to request a replay check of another skater. So in the end, we'd still get selective calling- I doubt big feds who know they had a UR but did not get a UR called will have coaches and skaters lined up to get reviews (well maybe they might, but the Fed will probably knock them out before they get to file the request).

In the end, it may becomes a case of whose fed is stronger than whom. So it might be possible that bigger fed skaters will get their review requests accepted, and have calls reversed. But smaller feds and medium feds either won't use the replay rights (due to not wanting to upset the applecart), or will not get calls reversed. And if a big fed doesn't get initial calls, it's unlikely that they'll suddenly start calling replay reviews and get new calls added. In the end, a larger fed could use this politically to berate TPs, which begs the question, does TP now also turn into a political game (more so than even now)?

So while I support the idea of more cameras, more angles, more technology, I'm very cautious about how fair this process will be used.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

It is better he spends his time fixing Vincent's UR.

It is not like that is something new that Vincent got called on. He ALWAYS underrotates.

The idea is not bad, but dont like where it is coming from because it makes matters worse for him when the victim is known for doing that act in the first place.

False. http://www.isuresults.com/results/season1718/wc2018/wc2018_Men_SP_Scores.pdf
http://www.isuresults.com/results/season1718/owg2018/OWG2018_MenSingleSkating_FS_Scores.pdf (Ok, second half quad lutz UR but the other ones were all clean)

Also, since a couple people have mentioned it - why can't TomZ still be fixing his students' tech issues AND be advocating for having the ability to protest? Are they somehow two mutually exclusive actions?!

 

[Hyena]

I can't see any downsides to allowing skaters to appeal their scores or to have higher quality video reviews of elements. But I wish they would invest the money in computer technology to recognize underrotations. They'd be much fairer than human subjectivity and help coaches and athletes recognize which jumps truly are underrotated in training. No one would be misleading anyone else, intentionally or unintentionally.

 

[ice coverage]

… Also, since a couple people have mentioned it - why can't TomZ still be fixing his students' tech issues AND be advocating for having the ability to protest? Are they somehow two mutually exclusive actions?!

I have the same questions. :agree:

More questions:

If Skater X has an inconsistent and/or poor track record in competition with something, X's ardent supporters have no problem understanding that X and his/her team have been working long and hard on the "something," but succeeding with it in competition still does not come easily.

But if Skater Y has an inconsistent and/or poor track record in competition with something, why do some for whom Y is a non-favorite make assumptions that Y and her/his team have not been working on improving the something and/or do not care about improving the something?​