Can someone please help me understand what Jay Clark means?

[ugadawgkat]

After the LSU / Missouri meet Clark said,

“The issue is not that I think scores should remain unduly high. The issue is that this thing that we’ve put in place either intentionally or unintentionally only attacked one part of scoring. We haven’t created a more consistent situation this year. We’ve created a more erratic situation here."

Then he went on to say that Helen Hu deserved a 10 for her beam set.

What is he saying? Is he insinuating that Hu got a deduction that she didn't deserve from 1 judge because of the new scoring? Please help... I'm confused.

 

[rlayt]

He’s trying to talk around Dunne’s statement, not irritate the people who disagreed with her but not disparage Helen Hu’s score.

For it to be clear he would have to explain “this thing we put in place”. I think he means the intention of replacing the tradition of unrealistically high scores with realistic ones and that he thinks it didn’t address other aspects of the way thrr we y are scored and it hasn’t been done by all the judges at every meet.

 

[MaryClare]

I kind of see Jay Clark’s point. I do feel that scoring is a lot more ambiguous this year. I can no longer watch a routine and confidently estimate what it will score.

College gymnastics needed tighter scoring to come in to allow for greater differentiation but there is definitely a lack of consistency with scoring.

I wonder if the reason is down to judges education. What was the process of rolling out these changes actually like?

 

[cuuf]

Difficult to interpret, the context is definitely the Dunne statement. I feel reasonably confident "the thing we put is place" is in reference to the new score board oversight on judging. I am unsure what "one part of scoring" means. And why the score board oversight is making things more erratic? Maybe he means NCAA should re-evaluate SVs like they have done with vaults? Idk, I am more inclined to believe it is coach talk running cover for Livvy and nothing of any particular merit.

 

[Kara]

I think he's right that whatever the oversight board is doing hasn't fixed any problems. Scoring this year is even more wacky than ever. I'll watch some meets that seem to be actually judged fairly and then turn on a different meet and it's insane high scores with a ton of missed deductions. My non gymnast parents who watch with me are totally lost. Not sure how to fix it, but the solution definitely isn't Dunne's just give everyone a ten nonsense.

 

[irichluck21]

Its also a pilot year for the oversight system.
Anytime you pilot something, there are some tweaks and issues along the way.

It is interesting that the GEC (Gymnastics East Conference) has opted out of not reporting judges scores.

There definitely is a lacking of consistent scoring across the country.

I also wonder how the judges viewing angle effects the score. We aren't seeing the routine from the POV of the judges as well.

 

[RedBirdie]

The whole thing is just ridiculous. The moment judges get told "we're piloting an evaluation system" they all panic and show they can indeed not hand out tens like candy.

It almost feels like to start of a new elite quad and a new code. How strictly will deductions be applied? Will different competitions use different "pens"? What exactly is the code asking judges to do in such-and-such scenario? What will this all shake out to be at the end of the day? We're not used to this in NCAA.