 mcroxford
|
Posted: 22 April 2012, 2:38 AM
Hmm... This is an interesting thread and one that raises a 'whole of sport' question to me. Is our member base and collective skill set as a sport big enough to support our current elite abilities and expectations? The answer for me is No, not everywhere but Yes some club's can. For me it comes back to each club trying to invent the wheel each time. Too much knowledge within orienteering is in people's heads and any documents take time to troll through. I think the issue is bigger than one map. In my opinion, the Nationals should not be granted to one club but one Association. All clubs within the association should be responsible for delivering the event and the skill sets from all those clubs should be available to deliver the event. Sorry, just stirring, but this model is already used for larger events such as Oceania or APOC.
|
|
robbie
|
Posted: 22 April 2012, 4:48 AM
Why do we invent these gray areas in a protest?
A protest should be simple. The protest is right or wrong.
Upheld or declined end of story.
But there is a bigger question here. We have modern technology and we dont use it. This I can not understand. It is used in other sports but we are behind the times.
For example.
Protest on number 22. Jury upholds the protest. Number 22 gets deleted from the course. Course still valid
Organisers happy--protester happy--everyone who has competed still has a result--Happy. All meet at the nearest pub. The whole pub happy
|
|
rossmaxmo
|
Posted: 22 April 2012, 3:00 PM
haha 
But if it was control #2 and control #4 in protest for example, and the runner lost a lot of time in the beginning of the course, the time for the rest of the course will more than likely be impacted greatly - either positively or negatively depending on the person's attitude and/or temper! :D
|
|
onemanfanclub
|
Posted: 23 April 2012, 12:52 AM
Not quite that simple Robbie, the varying amounts of time spent on the "wrong" control will have varying impacts on competitors for at least the next few legs if not the rest of the course. I'd add to Ross's example, varying time spent can equal varying energy loss, especially in steep or green areas... packs that otherwise wouldn't have formed are often created by dodgy controls... and what if you just took out the control that knocked out course 2 at the middle champs? Well then what if that then meant that I won by mere seconds? (which would not have been the case) Would that be fair given I finally confirmed I was visiting the correct control by relocating back from the next one, so heading back to the next control had a split that was way faster than any of the contenders? Or I know of at least one competitor who just happened to miss that particular control - would their result stand as they visited all the controls that are now counting towards the race, even though they did not visit every control on the map?
|
|
Jamie
|
Posted: 23 April 2012, 1:32 PM
I heard a rumour that Robbies suggestion was considered at the South Island superseries event the other day? The arguments for and against may be fresh in the minds of some people there...
(By the way, did that event stand? How could it if people were seriously considering removing a split?)
|
|
James
|
Posted: 23 April 2012, 2:07 PM
* Removing 4 splits to be exact
control #9 was in the wrong place for the majority of the field (so splits 8-9 and 9-10 are being removed)
control #22 was the wrong control number (so splits 21-22 and 22-23 and being removed)
|
|
Chris Forne
|
Posted: 23 April 2012, 2:25 PM
I agree with ross 
|
|
Chris Forne
|
Posted: 23 April 2012, 2:33 PM
Well, actually Ross' earlier post. But I guess I have to agree with his later post as well.
|
|
rossmaxmo
|
Posted: 23 April 2012, 3:27 PM
Hey Chris! I agree with both your posts too!
|
|
onemanfanclub
|
Posted: 24 April 2012, 1:50 AM
I guess it makes a difference if the entire field are asked and express a preference for a modified result over no result.... but that still leaves a bit of a cloud over things.
The other thing that comes to mind is that if the controller knows that if something goes seriously wrong with a course that whole course will be invalidated, rather than there potentially being clever out-clauses that supposedly keep everyone happy, perhaps that is a greater incentive for the controller to be absolutely pedantic?
|
|
robbie
|
Posted: 24 April 2012, 6:08 AM
James
#9 in the wrong place? #22 wrong control number?
I didnt know it was that bad.
And this was checked by setter--controller--iof advisor
Must have been a dark dark night!!
Now I really need to go to the pub and find James.
|
|
robbie
|
Posted: 24 April 2012, 6:38 AM
oneman
It is as simple as I explained. The danger is that when you add other things you are then creating a new rules. There is nowhere in the rules that refers to "if a protest effects a top placing" Now if you bring that into judgement you are making a new rule.
My suggestion of using technology and dropping a suspect control would work in most cases and I agree that its not going to be perfect, but its better than cancelling a course.
It would appear that on this occaision there were too many problems so there is only one answer, especially considering what was at stake.
|
|
Iva
|
Posted: 24 April 2012, 6:58 AM
Robbie you are an idiot!
Read document supplied earlier here http://orienteering.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Cancelling-a-competition.pdf
You just dont ever want to cancel a course, which clouds your view
Put in the remove control rule, then watch the smart people run the rest of the course to know where everything is, even test some route choices, then go back and nail the entire thing.
Protest was put it, it was not upheld - all I am hearing is a bunch of bitches having a cry
|
|
rossmaxmo
|
Posted: 24 April 2012, 2:38 PM
haha, WOAH! back the truck up
Robbie's point/suggestion is a valid one, and even he admits it's not perfect. Why the rage?? I personally don't agree with Robbie's suggestion, but I didn't freeze a lump of my crap and then grate it all over his living room floor while he was out.
I was not even a competitor in this competition, nor am I a bitch. I have more experience running World Ranking events than most of the people in NZ. I have seen big events invalidated over much less, but I've also seen protests turned down with very strange reasoning as well.
I don't think it's fair to say it's a 'bunch of bitches having a cry', especially when most of the people commenting here were not even affected by the decision of the protest. If it is drawing that much attention from outsiders then obviously something is wrong.
This is a bunch of PEOPLE discussing several issues with the protest and the 2012 nationals sprint courses in an attempt to find preventative solutions for future problems of a similar nature. All comments are welcome, except direct personal attacks such as yours.
Think before you write.
|
|
onemanfanclub
|
Posted: 24 April 2012, 2:57 PM
and the prize for metaphor of the year goes to Ross Morrison! :-D
|
© Ruffneck Productions