I feel a bit sorry for Ashley Wagner...

[caseyl23]

But that's not true - Scott Hamilton said it several times after both the SP and LP.

I heard it, too, but I think there's a big difference between saying it could happen, and actually educating the viewers about what exactly might occur and why. If you say something could happen, I'm sure a lot of casual fans thought something along the lines of "Yeah right – it's never happened before – why would it now?" If they had said, "Last year, before the start of the season, USFSA released its criteria for the Olympic team, these events are being taken into consideration, and Ashley Wagner has by far the best body of work of the contenders for the team. She's done a and b and c, so she will probably be taken even if she has an off night. Mirai has done d and e, so she'll have a much harder time," that's a whole different message – it's something concrete that people can grasp and understand.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again – the USFSA could have done a lot to make this situation better for themselves. We should have been hearing/reading about the Olympic selection criteria the entire week of Nationals until we wanted to throw something at our TVs/computers, especially since this was the first year for it. They also could (should in my opinion) have introduced it at the start of the cycle and used it the first chance they got, so people could get used to the idea coming into the Olympic year. Then, once they did use it, rather than being transparent, all casual fans probably heard was the statement on NBC during the exhibitions (I think that's where I heard it.) that the selection criteria was applied correctly. Well, what exactly does that mean? It's just another chance for those fans to say, "Yeah, right – back to the NFL." Frankly, if I were in charge of the USFSA, I'd fire whoever's advising them on their PR approach, because the whole situation's been badly mishandled in my opinion.

 

[R.D.]

^ well said.

 

[Tonichelle]

I heard it, too, but I think there's a big difference between saying it could happen, and actually educating the viewers about what exactly might occur and why.

He read the rule on air after the LP. He couldn't say it *would* happen or even it was *likely* to happen because he, too, had no idea if they would. The last time he made the bold statement of "this is enough to win" etc he was part of what caused an upheaval in the media of Olympic proportions. NBC is not at fault, they did their job in letting people know it was possible. They couldn't say anything more without having inside knowledge of how it would go down. They pointed to Ashley's track record vs Mirai's "having inconsistent results". They did pretty well to stay impartial and not show favoritism over either girl that night.

Now, Peter Carruthers on Universal Sports this week commentating the 4CC was where NBCUniversal really screwed up. IMO

 

[ice coverage]

I heard it, too, but I think there's a big difference between saying it could happen, and actually educating the viewers about what exactly might occur and why. If you say something could happen, I'm sure a lot of casual fans thought something along the lines of "Yeah right – it's never happened before – why would it now?" If they had said, "Last year, before the start of the season, USFSA released its criteria for the Olympic team, these events are being taken into consideration, and Ashley Wagner has by far the best body of work of the contenders for the team. She's done a and b and c, so she will probably be taken even if she has an off night. Mirai has done d and e, so she'll have a much harder time," that's a whole different message – it's something concrete that people can grasp and understand.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again – the USFSA could have done a lot to make this situation better for themselves. We should have been hearing/reading about the Olympic selection criteria the entire week of Nationals until we wanted to throw something at our TVs/computers, especially since this was the first year for it. They also could (should in my opinion) have introduced it at the start of the cycle and used it the first chance they got, so people could get used to the idea coming into the Olympic year. Then, once they did use it, rather than being transparent, all casual fans probably heard was the statement on NBC during the exhibitions (I think that's where I heard it.) that the selection criteria was applied correctly. Well, what exactly does that mean? It's just another chance for those fans to say, "Yeah, right – back to the NFL." Frankly, if I were in charge of the USFSA, I'd fire whoever's advising them on their PR approach, because the whole situation's been badly mishandled in my opinion.

caseyl23:
How do you explain the low level of interest in November in at least one GS thread that pertained to the USFS selection criteria?
If GS members truly were thirsty back then for information and discussion regarding the topic -- and had strong feelings one way or the other about the content of the criteria -- I don't understand why they were not posting comments at that time.
Seems that "Yeah, right – back to the NFL" is the reaction most GS members had when they had the chance to discuss the criteria in detail much earlier in the season.

He read the rule on air after the LP. He couldn't say it *would* happen or even it was *likely* to happen because he, too, had no idea if they would. ... NBC is not at fault, they did their job in letting people know it was possible. They couldn't say anything more without having inside knowledge of how it would go down. They pointed to Ashley's track record vs Mirai's "having inconsistent results". They did pretty well to stay impartial and not show favoritism over either girl that night. ...

Thank you, Toni. :agree: As I said previously, the obvious advantage of 20/20 hindsight makes it easy for critics of USFS and the media to keep insisting, "coulda, shoulda."

 

[ice coverage]

delete

 

[louisa05]

He read the rule on air after the LP. He couldn't say it *would* happen or even it was *likely* to happen because he, too, had no idea if they would. The last time he made the bold statement of "this is enough to win" etc he was part of what caused an upheaval in the media of Olympic proportions. NBC is not at fault, they did their job in letting people know it was possible. They couldn't say anything more without having inside knowledge of how it would go down. They pointed to Ashley's track record vs Mirai's "having inconsistent results". They did pretty well to stay impartial and not show favoritism over either girl that night.

Now, Peter Carruthers on Universal Sports this week commentating the 4CC was where NBCUniversal really screwed up. IMO

Post of the week. Thanks for explaining it so succinctly. No one who had the volume up on the television during Nationals should have been caught unaware that the top skaters in standings were not guaranteed a trip to Sochi.

 

[caseyl23]

He read the rule on air after the LP. He couldn't say it *would* happen or even it was *likely* to happen because he, too, had no idea if they would. The last time he made the bold statement of "this is enough to win" etc he was part of what caused an upheaval in the media of Olympic proportions. NBC is not at fault, they did their job in letting people know it was possible. They couldn't say anything more without having inside knowledge of how it would go down. They pointed to Ashley's track record vs Mirai's "having inconsistent results". They did pretty well to stay impartial and not show favoritism over either girl that night.

Now, Peter Carruthers on Universal Sports this week commentating the 4CC was where NBCUniversal really screwed up. IMO

When? I just went and looked up the end of the ladies free skate on You Tube, and after Gracie's performance, the commentator says the choice will be made and announced the next day and that Ashley's international body of work might be enough to get her on the team and that Ashley's performance at worlds last season was one of the reason the U.S. has three spots this year. Here's the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IKvT64zQvc

The relevant part I can find starts at 8:30. Nowhere in this clip do the NBC crew make any effort to explain the rule. Is there another one somewhere where they do? Was it after the men's free skate? I couldn't find a video of the very end of that. Here, all they do is what I wrote above.
Going on this, if I'm a four-year fan, I'm asking what exactly is an "international body of work?" How good does it need to be to count ahead of the Nationals results? Why does "international body of work" matter this year when it never has before? When did this come into play?

 

[Mathman]

^ I think “body of work” is an unfortunate and inappropriate phrase here. We say things like, “Michelle Kwan was great even though she didn’t win an Olympic gold medal because her body of work, meaning dozens of amazing performances over a decade-long career, warms the cockles of our wee little hearts.”

The charge to the USFSA Selection Committee, as announced last June, goes like this.

“To field the most competitive team, U.S. Figure Skating’s ICMS and International Committee will take into consideration the results and/or performance data from [in decreasing order of importance]:

2014 U.S. Nationals
2013 Grand Prix Finals
2013 World Championship
2013 Grand Prix events
2013 (not 2014) Four Continents
2013 U.S. Nationals
2013 World Juniors
2013 Junior Grand Prix Final

to determine athletes who will have the most performance impact and the best chance for success at the 2014 Winter Olympic Games.

It has been the experience of U.S. Figure Skating that the athletes who have had success at the International and Olympic level are those who have demonstrated consistent performances as opposed to the athletes who have had only a single great performance. Therefore, by not having the selection process based solely on one event, U.S. Figure Skating can select the best athletes to represent the United States at the 2014 Winter Olympic Games.”

Speaking for myself, I didn’t believe them, since in the past they always pretty much went the list of the Nationals podium. Looks like I was wrong.

Anyway, I can see why the NBC announcers did not want to say, “Ha ha, suckers, what are you watching this for? It’s already a done deal, since Ashley hits on items 2, 3, 4, and 6.”

Still, yeah. They could have said, "Ashley already has coin in the bank by virtue of medaling at the Grand Prix Final, a top five finish at the World Championship, and the 2013 U.S. Nationals title (show vid clip). So she's got a head start going in, in terms of meeting the Olympic criteria. The other ladies better bring it if they want to challenge for a spot!"

 

[Icey]

Her dream is coming s true even though not under the best of circumstances, so why feel sorry for her. Every athlete has bad days. Hers just occurred at an unfortunate time.

 

[Tonichelle]

Scott read the rule I believe after Ashley's skate, not at the end of the night.

 

[caseyl23]

Scott read the rule I believe after Ashley's skate, not at the end of the night.

I'm sorry, but I'm still not seeing it. Here's the video of Ashley's skate and commentary afterwards:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HoshyPbp8M
Scott's comments come at about 5:05, and again, it's not what I'm personally looking for. He says he thinks she's earned her spot on the team with her international performances, but there's still not anything specific. I think NBC tried to do something like Mathman suggested, with Scott's words, tempered by Sandra's saying they wouldn't know until the other ladies skated and the selection committee decided the next day, but it still fell short of what I think USFSA and NBC needed to do to avoid this situation blowing up in their faces.

Also, I can see why they didn't, but I almost wish NBC would have said, "It’s already a done deal, since Ashley hits on items 2, 3, 4, and 6,” or at least, "It's almost guaranteed Ashley is going because she hits on items 2, 3, 4 and 6." It kills suspense for TV viewers, but at the same time, it's honest, it lets fans know why, and it's a chance for skating to be transparent and honest – for once, in the minds of those four-year fans. This is just (again, in their minds – not necessarily ours) a case of same-old, same-old from skating, and I don't think that's a good thing for the sport.

As an aside, I had a bad feeling before Ashley even skated this program. Everyone pointed to it as such a sweet moment, but when she hugged Christina Gao as she was going out onto the ice, I remember being worried. She was sitting in fourth place and seeing a peer coming off in tears – when she came over, I remember hoping she wouldn't be thrown off by it. She might have been better off if she'd stepped on the ice and skated in the other direction without looking at Christina. When she saw her crying, she had to go off her rhythm to skate over and comfort her, and then she would have had to be superhuman not to think back to her history of near-misses on top of it. Lovely moment, but it couldn't have put her in a good state of mind for coming back and fighting for a national championship.

 

[caseyl23]

^ I think “body of work” is an unfortunate and inappropriate phrase here. We say things like, “Michelle Kwan was great even though she didn’t win an Olympic gold medal because her body of work, meaning dozens of amazing performances over a decade-long career, warms the cockles of our wee little hearts.”

The charge to the USFSA Selection Committee, as announced last June, goes like this.

“To field the most competitive team, U.S. Figure Skating’s ICMS and International Committee will take into consideration the results and/or performance data from [in decreasing order of importance]:

2014 U.S. Nationals
2013 Grand Prix Finals
2013 World Championship
2013 Grand Prix events
2013 (not 2014) Four Continents
2013 U.S. Nationals
2013 World Juniors
2013 Junior Grand Prix Final

to determine athletes who will have the most performance impact and the best chance for success at the 2014 Winter Olympic Games.

It has been the experience of U.S. Figure Skating that the athletes who have had success at the International and Olympic level are those who have demonstrated consistent performances as opposed to the athletes who have had only a single great performance. Therefore, by not having the selection process based solely on one event, U.S. Figure Skating can select the best athletes to represent the United States at the 2014 Winter Olympic Games.”

Speaking for myself, I didn’t believe them, since in the past they always pretty much went the list of the Nationals podium. Looks like I was wrong.

Anyway, I can see why the NBC announcers did not want to say, “Ha ha, suckers, what are you watching this for? It’s already a done deal, since Ashley hits on items 2, 3, 4, and 6.”

Still, yeah. They could have said, "Ashley already has coin in the bank by virtue of medaling at the Grand Prix Final, a top five finish at the World Championship, and the 2013 U.S. Nationals title (show vid clip). So she's got a head start going in, in terms of meeting the Olympic criteria. The other ladies better bring it if they want to challenge for a spot!"

I remember more than one poster, when the criteria was first announced, seemed to think USFSA was announcing this, but they didn't intend to use it. Some people seemed to think this was USFSA's way of keeping Nationals from falling into control of the USOC, which was a possibility if Nationals were often seen as the only basis for selecting international teams.

As for NBC, as I wrote in my reply to Tonichelle, I almost would have rather they said (or USFSA announced) Ashley was safe on the team before the competition. From a sport that has a perception problem with fairness and transparency, it would have been an honest, refreshing change to those casual fans. Instead, in their minds, well – what do you expect? It's figure skating, and as someone who (believe it or not!) loves this sport, that's so frustrating to me, especially when the solution seems so simple.

 

[Chris_E]

Now, Peter Carruthers on Universal Sports this week commentating the 4CC was where NBCUniversal really screwed up. IMO

What did he say? I don't have that channel anymore.

 

[Tonichelle]

What did he say? I don't have that channel anymore.

He's obviously very upset that Mirai was off the team. I don't have a direct quote, but he basically came out and said that a nationals medal is all one needs to be on the team.

caseyl23 - I will try to find time to track down where Scott quoted the rule. I can't be sure where exactly he said it, because honestly I didn't think it was such a huge issue. NBC did more than enough to educate on this subject. The only reason every 4 year viewers are/were in an uproar is because the media said it was a controversy.

 

[burntBREAD]

I think it's also because there hasn't really been a situation before when one of the favorites/leading ladies placed off the podium -- so before, from what I recall, commentators often just lumped podium with Worlds/Olympics spots, and never really had to discuss other options.

 

[caseyl23]

\caseyl23 - I will try to find time to track down where Scott quoted the rule. I can't be sure where exactly he said it, because honestly I didn't think it was such a huge issue. NBC did more than enough to educate on this subject. The only reason every 4 year viewers are/were in an uproar is because the media said it was a controversy.

There, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. Again, this is just my personal opinion, but I think education would have been everything in quelling the storm or at least being able to tell people, "The rules changed, here's how they changed, and here's when we told you they changed. Oh, and by the way, here's what they are again." Again, they needed to beat us over the head with those rules, especially if they thought they might need to utilize them this year, because they were new, and they were different from USFSA's customary practice of going with top Nationals finishers unless someone was hurt.
I can't remember that happening during the ladies free skate (Admittedly, I didn't get to watch the men's.), but if it did, I'd love to be corrected on this – that's why I've been looking it up when you suggest times.

 

[Mrs. P]

FWIW: Jason Brown, in his interview with Arsenio Hall last night after he asked why Jason had to wait after his skate to be named to the Olympic team, referenced there was a "criteria." and then said "It's not just the top two at nationals that get to go."

A bit OT, but I think Jason had done a great job breaking things down to the media, i.e. the general public. He was able to explain quite simply why the quad was important ("The jump is worth a lot of points and I can't make up for all of them.") in many interviews and the yesterday, why there was a possibility he would be passed over for the team despite a top two finish. So the USFSA could have definitely explain the situation simply and clearly.

 

[ForeverFish]

Scott read the rule I believe after Ashley's skate, not at the end of the night.

I distinctly recall the NBC announcers explaining the criteria as a list of the relevant events flashed up on the TV screen. Unfortunately, I can't remember when in the competition it happened.

 

[ForeverFish]

FWIW: Jason Brown, in his interview with Arsenio Hall last night after he asked why Jason had to wait after his skate to be named to the Olympic team, referenced there was a "criteria." and then said "It's not just the top two at nationals that get to go."

A bit OT, but I think Jason had done a great job breaking things down to the media, i.e. the general public. He was able to explain quite simply why the quad was important in many interviews and the yesterday, why there was a possibility he would be passed over for the team despite a top two finish. So the USFSA could definitely explain the situation simply and clearly.

The USFSA should hire Jason Brown as their PR guy.

 

[Mrs. P]

The USFSA should hire Jason Brown as their PR guy.

Seriously, though! I been impressed at how he's handled himself amid all this attention. For a guy who previously wasn't in the spotlight, he seems to be a pro at it already. But somehow he remains genuine and true to himself too, which makes him even more appealing, I think.