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

[Passion]

JINX lol

 

[ruby]

There's also the fact

Well I HAVE judged line.

I resonate with you on the fact that it's a hard judgment to make sometimes, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the jugment was wrong, that there was no mechanism to check it, and that it determined a medal in the FX final.

There IS a mechanism to check! They just didn't use it. Those coaches are not stupid. Ignorant, but not stupid.
There are "juding 101" seminars for coaches at Worlds and online. There is constant communication between judges (including the TC) and coaches during (podium) training and on off-days. Many coaches choose to listen, too many don't. I don't know why everyone is so surprised Camelia belongs to the latter group.

 

[onodian]

That judge did the right thing. If you are very unsure you put in the ND so the coach can inquire

So, in doubt you don't favour the gymnast except when you want the gymnast favoured in which case then do.

I'm sorry, I realise and see how this process has been horrible, but Jordan was awarded a 0.1 that nobody here thinks was fair, and voinea, ghost oob that someone saw someone else talk about on twitter pending, was unfairly docked a tenth. This has been a shitshow from the start, but if Ana thinking she had bronze was not an argument against what happened, which it wasn't, then Jordan sadly having to go through this isn't either. Sorry it can't be both ways.

If rules, then rules for everybody. If rules, but lenient, then let that be the standard for everybody

 

[Aeris]

They can’t award Voinea anything. Her situation whilst unfortunate, is irrelevant to the actual dispute. If you believe you have been score incorrectly, you need to appeal it within the given time.

In slow motion replay, maybe she didn’t go oob. But in slow motion replay, can the judges ignore her form errors? Inquiries can bring a score up or down.

Her form doesn't matter for inquiry (since there was nothing to downgrade b/c of that), the E-score isn't what changes. The E-judges should be able to review elements on their own though. Ideally, Voinea's E-score would have been relatively lower if the judges were given more tools to do their job.

Voinea did appeal in the given time too. This is a regulation that needs to be changed - an inquiry should review ALL things in a routine not related to E-score. It shouldn't have to be specified that you're trying to inquire an out of bounds call.

Also, it hasn’t been proven that she didn’t go OOB

Yes it has. Her routine has been closely viewed from multiple angles. She was never out of bounds.

 

[MaryClare]

Her form doesn't matter for inquiry (since there was nothing to downgrade b/c of that), the E-score isn't what changes. The E-judges should be able to review elements on their own though. Ideally, Voinea's E-score would have been relatively lower if the judges were given more tools to do their job.

Voinea did appeal in the given time too. This is a regulation that needs to be changed - an inquiry should review ALL things in a routine not related to E-score. It shouldn't have to be specified that you're trying to inquire an out of bounds call.


Yes it has. Her routine has been closely viewed from multiple angles. She was never out of bounds.

You have to specify what you are inquiring about. It isn’t a general request to re-score the routine.
Right or wrong, those are the rules

 

[Denn]

That judge did the right thing. If you are very unsure you put in the ND so the coach can inquire.

This is how they are training WAG judges now? When in doubt, penalize?

 

[MaryClare]

This is how they are training WAG judges now? When in doubt, penalize?

Always has been the case since 2006. In the 10 era, there was an unofficial “benefit of the doubt”. Formally ended with the new scoring system

 

[onodian]

Mary honey, is the nanny back? Cause your trolling is being superb atm

8.1

 

[Aeris]

You have to specify what you are inquiring about. It isn’t a general request to re-score the routine.
Right or wrong, those are the rules

No, they are supposed to look at the entire routine again. Hence examples like Kara Eaker's D-score dropping on inquiry: because they watched the whole routine again and not only sided with the initial downgrade of one element, but also downgraded a second element.

 

[Denn]

@ruby @MaryClare Perhaps you both need to study the Code of Points a little better:

 

[MaryClare]

Mary honey, is the nanny back? Cause your trolling is being superb atm

8.1

Indeed.
When it is being added as an Olympic sport?

 

[MaryClare]

@ruby @MaryClare Perhaps you both need to study the Code of Points a little better:

View attachment 11092

Right. Now do you feel that’s what’s actually happening in the last few years?

 

[Denn]

Right. Now do you feel that’s what’s actually happening in the last few years?

Nope, that's not what you claimed. You said "formally ended" in 2006.

 

[MaryClare]

No, they are supposed to look at the entire routine again. Hence examples like Kara Eaker's D-score dropping on inquiry: because they watched the whole routine again and not only sided with the initial downgrade of one element, but also downgraded a second element.

They do look at the whole routine. But you have to specify what you want, including a ND.

 

[MaryClare]

Nope, that's not what you claimed. You said "formally ended" in 2006.

Sorry that was my error.

 

[ruby]

This is how they are training WAG judges now? When in doubt, penalize?

You can't compare crediting a skill with an oob deduction. Even upon review the naked eye would not be able to tell whether a Gogean was 29 or 30 or 31° short. So, when in doubt, you should give the element.
An oob deduction should always be clear, hence neutral deduction. Again - if you do not take an ND that happened and your mistake is decisive - you are in far more trouble.

 

[Puffin]

Hold up: The elder Voinea has some responsibility in this, yes, but you are sidestepping the fault of the judges in at least three other ways:

A) The line judge took a neutral deduction that should not have taken. That was a blatant error. She single-handedly decided the floor exercise medal with that error, and...

Isn't the issue that we have no idea whether Voinea went oob because Camelia never appealed it?

I have seen 2 photos of Sabrina's fx
photo 1 - the heel - seems to suggest that she did not go oob
photo 2 - the toes - do suggest an oob - that her big toe was over the line

But we do not know which of these potential oobs was deducted because there was no ND inquiry to it was never assessed

 

[onodian]

Indeed.
When it is being added as an Olympic sport?

Ugh if only. Golds everywhere a la szerbo for u

 

[Doug1233]

that there was no mechanism to check it

There was, no?

 

[Denn]

Isn't the issue that we have no idea whether Voinea went oob because Camelia never appealed it?

I have seen 2 photos of Sabrina's fx
photo 1 - the heel - seems to suggest that she did not go oob
photo 2 - the toes - do suggest an oob - that her big toe was over the line

But we do not know which of these potential oobs was deducted because there was no ND inquiry to it was never assessed

Has photo2 been posted in this forum? Apologies if I missed this — I would be happy to be corrected on the error.