2019 Internationaux de France: Day 2

[Manue93370]

The ice in the ladies was slush, with puddles.

A consistent issue with GP France, it has happened before more than once.

Hoping for it to be dropped and replaced.

I think the Gp will not be replaced because they announced on French television that it was extended for three years in Grenoble

 

[el henry]

Should have been called then. I don't think the judges was seeing that and overlooking it. Its not fair for the other skaters and I don't believe they follow such logic to oversee some skaters.

“Follow logic to oversee some skaters?” I am afraid I don’t follow that.

Judges call what they see. They called what they saw at IdF. Fans may disagree with the judge’s ruling. That’s :cool2: maybe the fans are right? Maybe the judges are right? That’s why we post.

If a judge makes a ruling that a fan disagrees with, that makes the judge’s ruling incorrect in the fan’s eyes. It doesn’t make the call “illogical”. And whether a skater got 83 gazillion points for the same element in previous comps doesn’t make the judge’s call in *this* comp “illogical”. I hope and pray that judges always just judge what they see on the ice ETA: at that moment and at no other.

There is no illogic, there is no “not a coincidence”, there is no conspiracy. There are calls.

 

[zounger]

“Follow logic to oversee some skaters?” I am afraid I don’t follow that.

Judges call what they see. They called what they saw at IdF. Fans may disagree with the judge’s ruling. That’s :cool2: maybe the fans are right? Maybe the judges are right? That’s why we post.

If a judge makes a ruling that a fan disagrees with, that makes the judge’s ruling incorrect in the fan’s eyes. It doesn’t make the call “illogical”. And whether a skater got 83 gazillion points for the same element in previous comps doesn’t make the judge’s call in *this* comp “illogical”. I hope and pray that judges always just judge what they see on the ice ETA: at that moment and at no other.

There is no illogic, there is no “not a coincidence”, there is no conspiracy. There are calls.

You misunderstood what I was writing.

 

[Mishaminion]

You misunderstood what I was writing.

No I don't think they did.

You are trying to argue that because these issues were not called before, they can't possibly exist.

 

[zounger]

Satoko Miyahara's chronic UR issues were also blatantly ignored for a long time too.

So why do you completely reject the fact that Alina has had her edge issues ignored too?

Blatantly ignored is your opinion maybe. I think the judges evaluated what they were seeing at the time. There was no purpose either evidence to believe something different. I don't think they saw something and ignored it. That will be bad judging and not only bad wrong judging on purpose. I think they saw clean jumps and they called them clean.

 

[el henry]

You misunderstood what I was writing.

I apologize, that is why I said I wasn't sure if I followed it. Of course posters will disagree with judge's calls.:thumbsup: Trying to find deep meaning or hidden background to a call is where I get lost

 

[Mishaminion]

Blatantly ignored is your opinion maybe. I think the judges evaluated what they were seeing at the time. There was no purpose either evidence to believe something different. I don't think they saw something and ignored it. That will be bad judging and not only bad wrong judging on purpose. I think they saw clean jumps and they called them clean.

Oh come on, really?

Satoko's URs have been a topic of discussion for years now, you really believe her jumps were squeaky clean up until the point she began to get UR calls?

The same goes for Zhenya's lutz, do you think she had a nice outside edge take off before?

 

[zounger]

I apologize, that is why I said I wasn't sure if I followed it. Of course posters will disagree with judge's calls.:thumbsup: Trying to find deep meaning or hidden background to a call is where I get lost

I said the same thing with you. That the judges evaluated what they saw. Other members where implying that they saw something and ignored it. I'm saying that if they saw something why should they ignore it?

 

[Mishaminion]

I said the same thing with you. That the judges evaluated what they saw. Other members where implying that they saw something and ignored it. I'm saying that if they saw something why should they ignore it?

Lenient panels, giving top skaters the benefit of doubt without closely reviewing their jumps, overlooking errors in otherwise great performances. All kinds of reasons

 

[Mathman]

Where is the comment I made earlier in this thread?

When a post is unpproved by the moderators for violating the Golden Skate posting quidelines, all subsequent posts that quote the off-limit post or continue the discussion are automatically hidden, too.

 

[Mathman]

Ok, so TS should have been a forger high level competitive skater.

Please bring us Monika KUSTAROVA's results. Because i dont think she even has a wiki page. Did she ever compete internationally?

I am pretty sure that the ISU regulations specify that "high level" includes, for instance, skaters who competed at the national level in their countries. I don't think you need to have been a star at the International level. You do have to participate in many seminars and training sessions, etc., and work your way up to assignments at prestigious events.

(After all, the ISU needs more technical specialists than it has former world champions interested in the job.)

 

[chuckm]

Jeroen Prins work as the technical controller in this competition was definitely a highlight for me. Particlularily for two reasons:
1) the guy have no idea about what edges should have been in lutz and flip. Judging by the calls he probably mixed them up. Except multiple false edge calls (with many of them skaters being called first time in their career) the guy have no idea about how URs are determined either. I wonder did he even passed ISU judge exam properly?
If you don't beleive there was really something fishy going on - just check this very telling statistics http://images.vfl.ru/ii/1572808416/4af893dc/28435528.jpg

2) the guy's calls inconsistency. Despite seemingly random pattern of the calls - majority of false calls were being gathered withing skaters from one particular nation, while skaters from other particular nation were payed just cursory glance from the TP. It even looked like TP was being impartial and tried to manipulate scores in order to change podium places - of course making some minimal amount of calls to pushed skater for coverage - but of course it was all just my imagination

In the end I feel the comp was absolutely ruined as the result - since this guy was the main hero of it, people were discussing him the most. And what can be more boring than discussing tech calls instead of performances? Unfortunately people had no other choice -many of them arrived in Grenoble, payed money to organizers and ISU (and to this guy pocket as well) just to watch and root for Zagitova - and what they got in return? Why other show sellers such as Shoma are always getting fully opposite treatment from judges (who are willing to ignore even his downgraded jumps) despite him not being even OlyChamp, I wonder?
Ideally judges should be as not noticeable as possible - people shouldn't even know their names! Obvious (to even audience) mistakes should be called - and that's it. The way this guy want to make look ISU competitions - will make fs unwatchable. Spectators, athlethes, coaches - all of them wouldn't be thinking or even cared about performances they did/saw just now. All they would care about how many calls being made or missed sitting in the K&C - not quality of performance. And that'll turn fs into a farce :disagree:

First of all: Jeroen PRINS was NOT the caller in the ladies event at IDF---He was the Technical Controller, and that is a big difference.

Monika Kustarova was the Technical Specialist, and Vanessa Gusmeroli the Assistant TS.

The Technical Controller is not involved in the calls at all, unless there is a disagreement between the two TSs. I would add that Gusmeroli has been known to be a very strict caller and you can expect lots of URs and edge calls when she is on a panel.

 

[Mishaminion]

First of all: Jeroen PRINS was NOT the caller in the ladies event at IDF---He was the Technical Controller, and that is a big difference.

Monika Kustarova was the Technical Specialist, and Vanessa Gusmeroli the Assistant TS.

The Technical Controller is not involved in the calls at all, unless there is a disagreement between the two TSs. I would add that Gusmeroli has been known to be a very strict caller and you can expect lots of URs and edge calls when she is on a panel.

Mr. Prins is the scapegoat of the tech panel because he holds certain views, that's all it boils down to.

It is also worth pointing out, because someone brought up Shoma in particular the Men had the same tech specialists but Prins was NOT tech controller.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

Aside from Alena's 3A in the SP, I don't think any of the calls were blatantly bad in the ladies event. Even that 3A wasn't all the way around (although it was close enough that I would have given it full credit). Personally, I like seeing the stricter calls because if everyone gets away with bad jumps, those with good technique and full rotation are disadvantaged. I'd just like the standard to be more consistent across events, because the results shouldn't vary wildly based on how strict the tech panel is.

 

[Globetrotter]

Blatantly ignored is your opinion maybe. I think the judges evaluated what they were seeing at the time. There was no purpose either evidence to believe something different. I don't think they saw something and ignored it. That will be bad judging and not only bad wrong judging on purpose. I think they saw clean jumps and they called them clean.

So now that they saw edge issues and <, you are implying they are wrong because they did not call them in the past??? That is really warped.

 

[Globetrotter]

Aside from Alena's 3A in the SP, I don't think any of the calls were blatantly bad in the ladies event. Even that 3A wasn't all the way around (although it was close enough that I would have given it full credit). Personally, I like seeing the stricter calls because if everyone gets away with bad jumps, those with good technique and full rotation are disadvantaged. I'd just like the standard to be more consistent across events, because the results shouldn't vary wildly based on how strict the tech panel is.

I second that 200%. Strict calls on rotations and edges on jumps will be overall better for FS as a sport. I will also add on the use of -GOEs for lack of rotations e.g. for jumps that look heavily prerotated, borderline jumps that a < call is not applicable. This will incentivise skaters to clean up their techniques to ensure that they leave no room for doubt. Unfortunately, I am realistic enough to know that this remains a distant idealistic concept.

 

[zounger]

So now that they saw edge issues and <, you are implying they are wrong because they did not call them in the past??? That is really warped.

No, I'm saying that they didn't saw any <, wrong edge in the past and they didn't call them. They saw <, wrong edges now and they called them.

 

[Mishaminion]

No, I'm saying that they didn't saw any <, wrong edge in the past and they didn't call them. They saw <, wrong edges now and they called them.

So what is the problem then?

 

[zounger]

So what is the problem then?

I replied to the member that quoted me, with what I meant. I didn't say there is any problem.

 

[Mishaminion]

I replied to the member that quoted me, with what I meant. I didn't say there is any problem.

Well I am having trouble understanding your point over the last couple of pages if you have no problem with that