- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
sounds like you have the virus I picked up a while back. it's not a GS thing.
I feel a bit sorry for Ashley Wagner...
- Thread starter wootie
- Start date
sounds like you have the virus I picked up a while back. it's not a GS thing.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2012
Thanks, Mrs. P.
And here's another way of looking at this situation:
Let's pretend that we all can climb into a time machine together and travel back to the GP season.
Suppose that someone at NBC had made the following comment -- during its GP coverage: "We should mention that Ashley Wagner could finish fourth at 2014 Nationals and still be chosen for one of the three spots for U.S. ladies in Sochi."
Suppose further that someone had started a GS thread -- in autumn 2013 -- with the title, "NBC says 4th place for Wagner in Boston would not be automatic dealbreaker for Sochi slot."
My hunch is that everyone moaning and groaning at this point that they were oblivious to the criteria would have reacted then by yawning and/or rolling their eyes -- and by letting the comment go in one ear and out the other because of its far-fetched premise that Wagner would place fourth.
Suppose further that someone had started a GS thread -- in autumn 2013 -- with the title, "NBC says 4th place for Wagner in Boston would not be automatic dealbreaker for Sochi slot."
I bet that most of the comments in the thread would have been along the lines of: "Why is NBC wasting our time with such a ridiculous scenario? Obviously Wagner will finish in the top three at Nats."
And other comments would have debated whether Wagner would win her third U.S. title or whether Gold would win her first, etc.
And I bet that very, very few -- if any -- of the comments would have paid any attention to what the USFS selection criteria are.
And other comments would have debated whether Wagner would win her third U.S. title or whether Gold would win her first, etc.
And I bet that very, very few -- if any -- of the comments would have paid any attention to what the USFS selection criteria are.
Bottom line: relying on 20/20 hindsight to complain about unawareness of the criteria is not persuasive.
If you believe Christine Brennan's sources, that didn't matter in Ashley's case – she had more than one person who said Ashley's status was secure "even if she's 10th."
Here's the column for you: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/sochi/2014/01/11/ashley-wagner-us-olympic-team-sochi/4437227/
...then they should have named her to the team before the competition
Still, while it was definitely feasible for Wagner to end up 2nd or 3rd, I think 4th was unprecedented and unexpected by so many. Perhaps they'll attempt to "pre-name" in 2018 when there is a clear favorite in case something like this happens again?
In reading through this thread, I noticed you alluded to this question, and I'd missed it before – I do apologize for that. Do you think you can point me to the thread you're talking about? I scanned through the threads from November and saw one asking about criteria for the U.S. and Japanese teams, but that was it. I want to make sure I'm looking at the right thread before I venture an answer.
Also, please keep in mind, I'm not looking at this from the perspective of GS members – I consider all of them to be enthusiastic, die-hard fans who probably know more about the sport than me. I wrote this in another thread, but I work for a small time weekly newspaper, and one of the first things I learned was that you don't write for the people who have been there their entire lives – you write for that person who's coming into town for the first time and picking up your paper. That's the perspective I'm trying to bring to this conversation. I (like you) was well aware of the selection criteria coming into Nationals, so I understood where Ashley's selection onto the team came from, but I can also understand (from what I remember seeing) how a less-informed person might not.
...then they should have named her to the team before the competition
Still, while it was definitely feasible for Wagner to end up 2nd or 3rd, I think 4th was unprecedented and unexpected by so many. Perhaps they'll attempt to "pre-name" in 2018 when there is a clear favorite in case something like this happens again?
If they were that certain about her status, I agree.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2012
Yes, we're talking about the same thread, re the U.S. and Japanese criteria:
Interestingly, although "U.S." is in the thread title, noticeably fewer of the posts discussed the U.S. criteria (compared to the Japanese criteria).
Regarding the perspective of a less informed person:
What I do not understand is why/how a less informed person would feel entitled to complain. When I am less informed on a particular topic (gymnastics is the example that I have used repeatedly), I "know what I do not know" -- and I am perfectly willing to acknowledge that my own lack of curiosity and/or effort is the reason that I am less informed. If the gymnastics rules are available to the public on the USA Gymnastics website and I haven't read them, whose fault is that? It's my own fault, of course.
The reason the lack of interest in the GS thread seems pertinent to me is that even self-described fans of figure skating did not care enough about the criteria to make comments back then -- and yet almost a week after the USFS announcement re Wagner's inclusion, some GS members still are crying foul. Makes no sense to me.
Of all the people that I know, exactly one person has mentioned this issue to me. (She's my one friend who also follows figure skating, sort of).
I know it made some papers prominently but my instinct tells me that the general population looked at the pictures of Ashley and Mirai and thought: "Who are they? Huh. A judging controversy in figure skating what a surprise! ... I wonder what happened to Michelle Kwan?"
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
In fairness that wasnt the same thing at all as Kerrigan didnt actually skate and get defeated by Kwan (which this particular year would have never happened either, even if Kerrigan bombed). She was unable to skate due to being attacked by Harding's thugs. To deny her a place on the team when she was clearly the #1 American at the time, and after a gruesome attack kept her out of Nationals, and in favor of a 13 year old no less (even if one with amazing promise who went on to become a unwordly legend it turned out), would in fact have made the USFSA even more vilified than they are being now.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2004
- Country
-
Friends of mine who are "casual" fans asked me about the choice of Ashley for the US Olympic team. I explained to them that Ashley had had pretty good results @ internationals events in recent seasons, and that Ashley & Gracie helped secure 3 spots for the US @ 2013 Worlds. Personally, I really wanted the team to be Gracie, Mirai, & Ashley. I have nothing against Polina Edmunds. She skated beautifully in both phases of US Nationals, but is it my understanding that she doesn't have any international experience yet on the SENIOR level? If so, then I would have sent Mirai. If Polina keeps up skating as well as she did @ Nationals (and doesn't get hit by the "puberty" monster), then she should have a very bright future. I just don't want to see a situation of bad feelings directed to Ashley vs. Mirai (as in Ashley taking Mirai's spot).
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2012
I've had the same conversations with friends since I've been back from Boston. Pretty much said the same thing as iluvtodd. I think if Mirai had won 4 CCs or even medalled these conversations would have taken an ugly turn once again. I just hope Ash keeps it together at the Olys.
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
True but with being so ill she had no real chance to skate well. If this wasn't her only international championship assignment this year, I'm sure she would have withdrawn.
I tried replying last night but my Internet went down when I hit "post"
so I'm going to try again today.My first guess is that, if I remember right, the U.S. criteria was posted and discussed in an earlier thread that lasted multiple pages, so people might have expressed their opinions then. The reason could also be that the thread was posted outside the "peak" time of the season, so there just weren't as many people around to discuss the issue then. My third possible explanation is that, with the way the question in the title was worded, a few people came on and attempted to answer the question (with varying degrees of success from what I read), and there just wasn't much extra discussion.
As far as the less-informed fans are concerned, personally, I agree with you wholeheartedly. As someone who works for a newspaper (small-town weekly paper, not anyplace that would have been reporting on Nationals) one of the press's responsibilities is to educate and inform their readers/viewers. I'm not saying they had to go on air and say, "Skater A stands a much better chance than Skater M of making the team because of Rule 2, Item B, Paragraph I, which says 'blah, blah, blah' because she meets bullets a, b, c, d and e." Something along the lines of the explanation in Christine Brennan's column, though, would have been an improvement over what I saw from NBC. "USFS has emphasized all week that a skater's "body of work" will be strongly considered in its Olympic selections. This rule has been in the books for a while, but this is the first time it has been mentioned — and it has been mentioned over and over again this week." It says 1) There is a rule which allows for deviation from Nationals standings, 2) This rule is not new and 3) USFS might feel the need to use it. I'll back down from U.S. Figure Skating if they really were publicizing this the way she makes it sound, but I still believe NBC is at fault for not coming out and saying (from what I've seen so far) that there was a rule, instead of just hypothesizing that Ashley was safe because of her "body of work" over the past couple seasons.
It's impossible to be completely sure, but I'd be willing to bet if the USFS criteria had been posted on this board the week of Nationals, there would have been much more interest than in November, especially as the results came in and we started seeing the possibility of Ashley (and to a lesser extent, Denney/Coughlin) finishing outside the top 3/2. Interestingly, I watched a post on Nationals on The Skating Lesson's website, and they thought, if USFS wouldn't have had to name Ashley to the team ahead of Mirai, that D/C would be Olympians right now, despite finishing third. Personally, I think, if the decision was that close, USFS should have named both to the team. Even that might have stemmed some of the controversy, because they could point to D/C and say, "See? We're not playing favorites – we did it here, too." Instead, even among the die-hard fans, I've seen discussion asking why they only made the exception in this one case. Why not in pairs? Why not between Mirai/Polina, which in my opinion is a much different (and interesting) conversation. After all, which should count for more – a bad record (in comparison to her potential) in Mirai's case, or a non-existent one in Polina's case?
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2013
I don't think this is issue of virus or travel, the problem was that at National, US judges gave Mirai a "pass" on her UR problems, and at 4CC, those international judges are merciless and made the call which made her TES looks ugly (IMO). I don't see much differences on the performance and deliveries between her programs at National and at 4CC.
Her jump techniques need to be fixed many years ago. This can only do her good in long run...
Her jump techniques need to be fixed many years ago. This can only do her good in long run...
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2012
I tried replying last night but my Internet went down when I hit "post"
My first guess is that, if I remember right, the U.S. criteria was posted and discussed in an earlier thread that lasted multiple pages, so people might have expressed their opinions then. The reason could also be that the thread was posted outside the "peak" time of the season, so there just weren't as many people around to discuss the issue then. My third possible explanation is that, with the way the question in the title was worded, a few people came on and attempted to answer the question (with varying degrees of success from what I read), and there just wasn't much extra discussion. ...
Thanks for your reply, caseyl23.
(1) If another even earlier thread had a longer discussion of the U.S. criteria, I would love to go back and read it. If anyone else remembers it, I hope s/he will provide a link to it.
If the existence of the postulated even-earlier thread is real, it would further negate the argument of some in this thread that they had no way of knowing about the criteria until the announcement that Wagner was selected for the Sochi team.
(2) As for the November thread that we do know about, it was started during the heart of GP season, so I do not buy the theory that it was not a peak time for attention to figure skating.
(3) As for your third explanation, thank you for reinforcing the point that I was trying to make.
The thread was clearly about U.S. and Japanese selection criteria, and very few GS members were interested in the topic.
So for those who keep insisting that NBC should have been discussing the criteria throughout the season, my point is that very few GS members were interested in the criteria earlier in the season. Why should NBC have discussed something that held practically zero interest even for self-selected skating fans? NBC's' job as a broadcaster is to hold the attention of its viewers, not to turn them off with stuff that they don't want.
I agree that the press has some responsibility to educate and inform the public.
BUT .. a TV network cannot educate and inform "its" audience if its audience has turned the channel to find more interesting programming.
If your newspaper is a for-profit enterprise (as NBC is), its first order of business is to sell newspapers. If it has no readership, then it has no one to educate and inform.
I do not have an answer for your question, MM.
What I do know is that many of the complaints in this thread -- complaints that I do not support -- are along the lines of: the decision in Wagner's favor gives the general public additional ammunition to denigrate figure skating... the decision is another embarrassment for figure skating on the level of Sale/Pelletier's silver medal in Salt Lake City ... yada, yada, yada ...
