- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
please refer to the guidelines on how to take personal issues with another poster, instead of further dragging an otherwise good thread down go to PMs and have it out, or email...
Anonymous Judging
- Thread starter SeaniBu
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Hey Sean, don't worry about ChuckM; I am going to get the best of him when JULIA SEBESTYEN doesn't finish last in the GP Final. 
One of the questions that you raised in your first post is quite intriguing and something that has not been debated very much. You argue that it is better for the ISU to handle complaints about inappropriate judging "in house," thus sparing the sport public embarrassment. I think there are two things that can be said on the other side.
First, if the ISU looks the other way when judges cheat, they deserve public ridicule, come what may.
Second, you always invite trouble when the only oversight of an organization's activities is provided by the principals in the organization themselves. The light of public scrutiny is universally the friend of the good guys, and sometimes their last resort.
JMO.
One of the questions that you raised in your first post is quite intriguing and something that has not been debated very much. You argue that it is better for the ISU to handle complaints about inappropriate judging "in house," thus sparing the sport public embarrassment. I think there are two things that can be said on the other side.
First, if the ISU looks the other way when judges cheat, they deserve public ridicule, come what may.
Second, you always invite trouble when the only oversight of an organization's activities is provided by the principals in the organization themselves. The light of public scrutiny is universally the friend of the good guys, and sometimes their last resort.
JMO.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Sean there are two judges in Boxing and the Referee makes the deciding choice in case there is no knockout and the two judges differ in their decisions. I would let that happen in figure skating although it would be very easy to fix the result as sometimes happens in boxing.
Joe
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
First, if the ISU looks the other way when judges cheat, they deserve public ridicule, come what may.
Second, you always invite trouble when the only oversight of an organization's activities is provided by the principals in the organization themselves. The light of public scrutiny is universally the friend of the good guys, and sometimes their last resort.
JMO.
Those are good points and I agree with the idea. It is also disturbing to think they would let something like that slide, very disturbing. I think you are correct it just bothers me to think they would let that get perpetuated. In light of that theory, I might just be swayed to believe anonymous is not such a good idea. I was under the impression the ISU acutely has more integrity than that. But you all would know better than I.
I really think it must fall into the slander aspect,
http://www.expertlaw.com/library/personal_injury/defamation.html
Personally I think some of that law defiantly protects a person who does not deserve to be protected - "justice is blind??? - particularly in the cases of molestation that have only recently been over ruled (thank God! I still say ...well I wont perpetuate "hate" anymore, but I think most will know what I would like seen done to those freaks) to say that they must have public notification when moving into a new neighborhood. IMO there has been way to much protection via the "Slander laws." But I think Legalgal (I think is their name) could shed light on that topic better much than I.
Anyway I don't think they (cheaters) should be protected in anyway if I follow my heart, but the fact that some might just made one careless mistake and are "honestly" looking at changing their life around... well I am just torn on whether that it is appropriate to destroy someone's character for one careless mistake. But there again a "scape goat" for the whole of ISU might be a good thing as well.
Yes I am second guessing myself.
And of course there is that old saying, "first time shame on me, second time shame on you (them)."
I would have PMed this but I wanted to clarify for the others that might be under the impression that I am. Maybe I am missing the fact that one of the Judges is a ref besides the one in the ring. This would be surprising to someone (myself) who has met Sugar Ray Leonard in Los Vegas after a fight (only saw it on the TV) when I was 7 years old. I used to like the sport much more when I was younger, but that was when I was a kid who got into a lot of fights.
http://www.wheretobet.com/boxing-betting.shtml
"IBA - International Boxing Association:
No Standing 8 count
3 Knockdown rule is in effect
Only in the last round boxer can be saved by the bell
Only the referee can stop the boxing fight
3 judges score IBC (International Boxing Council)"
Anyway I am open to being wrong, like I said I was more into it when I was a kid.
BTW, I googeled it before I made the comment earlier.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
They already DO let it slide, and have since the beginning of time (it seems)... read any number of 'insider' books be it autobiographies of skaters or books on the sport in general...
people thought with the doing away of figures juding would improve, but it didn't.... people thought the CoP change would improve the situation... and the jury is still out (But so far the public opinion's been leaning away from anything positive lol)
I like the point value system... I just HATE that the judges and the governing body are so untrustworthy.
I'm kind of in favor of audience participation, sort of along the lines of the recent Marshall's 'Challenge'.......
That way, it is ENTIRELY CLEAR from the get go that this is first and foremost a popularity contest - which is often what it is the way it is now, anyway......
No matter whether judging of FS is open or 'secret', the judges will always be subjective, maybe even 'confer' beforehand about who they want to win (unless he/she/they screw up really badly.....).
At least with audience participation, FS would move closer to other sports by giving it an element of 'homefield advantage', something fans of other sports are intimately familiar with and can definitely relate to.
Irina Slutskaya would be unbeatable in Moscow, Kimmie Meissner would rule Philadelphia, hey, maybe Katy Taylor might even win something if they have the thing in Houston........ 
That way, it is ENTIRELY CLEAR from the get go that this is first and foremost a popularity contest - which is often what it is the way it is now, anyway......
No matter whether judging of FS is open or 'secret', the judges will always be subjective, maybe even 'confer' beforehand about who they want to win (unless he/she/they screw up really badly.....).
At least with audience participation, FS would move closer to other sports by giving it an element of 'homefield advantage', something fans of other sports are intimately familiar with and can definitely relate to.
Irina Slutskaya would be unbeatable in Moscow, Kimmie Meissner would rule Philadelphia, hey, maybe Katy Taylor might even win something if they have the thing in Houston........
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Sean. You are correct. 3 judges in boxing and a referee. Nice for me to learn something. Some of those stories about boxers are fascinating. It is a Man's Sport.
Joe
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
Sorry if this is OT, but the show the contender - from what I have seen was good. Only watched 3, but it was good stuff. Made me feel like throwing on the gloves again. Sugar gave me some good advice and I still have never lost a fight - but I also took some karate training after his advice.
BOT. I think you might be onto something with the 3 judges thought for FS. I kinda like it at first thought. I hope there is some feedback on that thought.:agree: Like to see it evolve or whatever... just some other's thoughts on this.
Good thoughts!:agree:
Similar threads
