FX EF INQUIRY (Jordan Chiles Stripped Of Bronze Medal/USAG launches appeal) PART 2

[JaJa]

The silver lining is that robo-judging D Scores (and OOB) will now come in. Let the machine make the call. It has cleared up a lot of the issues in Tennis.

Not at all sure robo-judging is a silver lining

 

[Matilda23]

Maybe they should just move judges back into the field of play. grumble grumble grumble.

Why were they moved in to the stands? Was coaches interrupting them and speaking rudely to the judges?

 

[RAFIKI]

I think it was to improve the look of the field of play for spectators, TV, photographers (not necessarily in that order of priority). Having them raised does help with some judging angles/not looking up at lights as well. It does look better and my amateur photos are much improved without water bottles and judges cluttering the background. However it’s not worth it when it demonstrably hurts the sport. I also dislike how floor choreography is now focused on the judge’s viewpoint rather than in a range of directions.

 

[Puffin]

Wasn't it a Grandi thing that they wanted gymnastics to be more "performance" without judges cluttering up the viewer/audience "experience"? It was also the reason that they banned (now reinstated) warm-ups.

 

[phoenix7]

Wasn't it a Grandi thing that they wanted gymnastics to be more "performance" without judges cluttering up the viewer/audience "experience"? It was also the reason that they banned (now reinstated) warm-ups.

Did that contribute to dark cavernous arenas with spot-lit gymnasts too I wonder?

I like "people-watching" at the mostly older well lit tournaments.

 

[RedBirdie]

Which worlds started this wretched trend? Glasgow? I hate how contrived and theatrical it all is. It's a damn sporting event. Light the freaking arenas. Put the officials where they can actually see the event they're assigned to.

Angrily shakes fist at clouds.

 

[Puffin]

I remember there being a big problem at 2017 worlds when gymnasts complained about the dark arenas and being blinded by the spotlights

 

[Passion]

Which worlds started this wretched trend? Glasgow?

Yep, it was Glasgow.

2014 Worlds the lights were all on and the judges tables were up against the podiums.

2015 the judges were gone and everything was plunged into darkness.

 

[KristyJ]

The silver lining is that robo-judging D Scores (and OOB) will now come in. Let the machine make the call. It has cleared up a lot of the issues in Tennis.

I remain extremely skeptical that removing people from it will make it better. We've been trying to use more AI over the last few years while seating judges increasingly far away and it's not done much good.

 

[JaJa]

I remain extremely skeptical that removing people from it will make it better. We've been trying to use more AI over the last few years while seating judges increasingly far away and it's not done much good.

agree, agree, agree

 

[makam]

I feel like ai judging might work on a single skill thing like vault but can you imagine the fustercluck if the computer glitches during Rebeca Andrade's vault and doesn't record a result? They can't even figure out the difference between the time a verbal inquiry is made and the time a person records that an inquiry was made and they took away a medal based on that stupidity. I'd love for human subjectivity to be limited but fear the chaos while they try to get there.

 

[makam]

How do we know time has run out?

1. The Omega system, which was first used for these Olympic Games, records everything: hours, minutes and seconds.

So, for example, when a sportswoman is given a mark, the hour, minute/minute, second/second are recorded.

When this is displayed on the screen, the same. When a verbal challenge is made, the referee you address it to immediately records it, and the Omega system "remembers" the time you made it.

Then it's simple. It looks at what time your athlete's score was posted, then when you notified the referees that you wanted to submit a written protest, and it comes up with a result.

In the case of the U.S. challenge, one minute and four seconds. Enough for CAS to say that the action was not in accordance with the rules and decide to annul it.

So from the first post in this thread, the Romanian case hinges on the fact that the person hearing the verbal request "immediately records" that you put in a request. From the video from Simone's documentary, it appears that no one as "immediately" doing anything. Simone's challenge was never actually recorded and Cecile had to call out twice for Jordan's. And then, eventually, the person in charge of logging the request logged it. At 1 minute and 4 seconds. But clearly the request(s) came in before that time. I'm assuming FIG and/or the IOC also had video footage that showed this sequence of events as they were broadcasting the event and had cameras everywhere. So, did they not bother to look or did they ignore the data?

With this information that Cecile was within the rules with her verbal request at <1m, do we think Jordan is going to get her medal back (officially)? Are they going to take Ana's away since they wrongly overthrew Jordan's results?

 

[Matilda23]

Was the correct process followed with the enquiry’s review of Jordan’s D score? Jordan’s higher score came very quickly after the enquiry was received. Even though the Gogean doesn’t look complete.

 

[makam]

Was the correct process followed with the enquiry’s review of Jordan’s D score? Jordan’s higher score came very quickly after the enquiry was received. Even though the Gogean doesn’t look complete.

I think everyone here agrees that the judges granting the challenge was a gift to Jordan. They also clearly didn't do a whole rescore like Kara got at worlds that one year because the answer came so quickly. But so far, judges errors have not been allowed to be heard (Sabrina's erroneous ND) and the case so far has been about procedure/rules.

The initial belief was that Team USA was late in their challenge thus the challenge was void and Ana wins the medal. I don't think they even allowed Sabrina's ND issue to be heard. Since there is evidence that Team USA wasn't late with the verbal part of the challenge (as was required of them) but it was the official who was slow/late in recording the challenge, the ruling on procedural grounds made during the Os was wrong unless the time a judge records is the final-never-to-be-questioned number. (did I get my lawyer terms right? It has been a long time since I watched a lawyer show) And if that is the case, then all the judges have to do is feign deafness (as they apparently did for Simone's challenge?) and they'll never have to entertain a rescore again!

 

[phoenix7]

The problem with Simone's enquiry seems to have been that Laurent never gave the D score.

Cecile also walked away without giving Jordan's D score. On the USAG video, you hear the official calling her back and telling her she needs to give the D score, which she then gives followed by Simone's D score. But it is obviously far too late for Simone by then even if Cecile was allowed to submit it - six minutes after her deadline for verbal enquiry.

 

[phoenix7]

Dvora Meyers has an article out which agrees with Romanian press that D score is required as part of verbal enquiry.

The most controversial Olympics moment came down to four seconds

How the fate of Jordan Chiles’ first solo medal came down to inquiries and appeals

www.theverge.com

I'm still doubtful about that, but if so the enquiry for Chiles was certainly late.

More to the point, the article confirms that the verbal enquiry isn't a matter of speaking from a distance - you're confirming what's on a screen. That ties in with the Washington Post article that claims USAG and Omega start the clock a few seconds apart. In that case it looks as if the official did submit immediately.

 

[mnesiptolema]

What's frustrating about this (one of many, many frustrating things) is that this particular rule is clearly barely ever enforced - and that inquiries seem to be so haphazardly done in general, to the point that nobody is entirely clear on the rules and routines are sometimes wholly rescored and sometimes not.

All of that, and that this entire argument about four seconds is clearly just a proxy for the Gogean being incorrectly credited.

 

[phoenix7]

I know the article said it was rarely enforced, but it seems to have been enforced only seconds earlier (with Simone). It was enforced at least one other time during this last Olympic cycle. It was enforced automatically using the Longines system until ? last year's worlds? We would not know if there had been refusals more often - Laurent and Simone said nothing until that came out.

I don't think it was because of the Gogean. I think people forget that Barbosu was shown on the official scoreboard as third placed after any enquiry should have been announced. She was past the stage when she was official Olympic bronze medallist when the enquiry was announced 20 - 30 seconds later.

Romanian Federation (and anyone watching the uncut broadcast) were rightly left asking, how can that happen? NBC cut this section so to American audiences unaware of that, it looks as if Barbosu celebrated prematurely. That's a myth (whether or not Landi enquired on time).

Before the first CAS judgement, the president of the Romanian Federation gave an interview in which she was very clear: everybody was used to enquiries changing rankings, but they were not used to that happening after the final rank was posted and the competition ended.

Whether or not Landi enquired on time, it was announced late. Romania didn't get lucky with a guess. Their fed asked, very reasonably, when that enquiry went in and how it was resolved so fast. They uncovered a nest of real problems. They never made an argument on the basis of four seconds - that's something the press keeps getting wrong. CAS and FIG came up with the four seconds.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

Yes I don't get why Devora made that claim about rare enforcement.

Some of gym twitter was saying, after Alicia's wee outburst, that Mustafina tried to enquire in the 2010 worlds vault final but the enquiry wasn't considered because it was too late. Is that true, and did everyone know except me? It seems like the sort of thing that should've been dragged into a lot of ill-tempered discussions since, particularly when not actually relevant to the topic being discussed.

 

[makam]

The problem with Simone's enquiry seems to have been that Laurent never gave the D score.

Cecile also walked away without giving Jordan's D score. On the USAG video, you hear the official calling her back and telling her she needs to give the D score, which she then gives followed by Simone's D score. But it is obviously far too late for Simone by then even if Cecile was allowed to submit it - six minutes after her deadline for verbal enquiry.

So you have to say "Inquiry for Jordan Chiles, 5.6 D" or whatever verbally for it to be accepted initially? That seems overly complicated because why do the judges need to hear the D score back at the when they are the ones who awarded it? Maybe there needs to be a script that all coaches are taught/reminded of prior to every competition. "Official inquiry for (gymanst name) about D score/ND taken/both D score and ND" or something similar.