maptalk.co.nz Forum   |   Links    

  Forum

Forum Home   Start New Topic   Edit Profile   Register  

1   2  

Protests: Has the rule change worked?

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 18 May 2006, 1:38 AM  
Just started thinking about protests again after the recent European champs hoohaa.

In NZ we changed our protest rules not so long ago, to increase the importance of the controller in the protest system.

I am interested in peoples perceptions as to the effect of this rule change.

My experience and feeling is that often it is very hard to protest to a controller because they are very intimately involved with the production of an event and get angry very quickly when you suggest you have issues with the event.

It seems like strange procedure to make someone audit their own mistakes.

I put the case last year at Akld Botanical Gardens as an example. Among several I could name in recent years

Would it be btter to have an independent person nominated as a contact point for protest complaints who would then liaise with the controller?

I am a firm believer in protesting, not only to maintain the technical standards in our sport but also to maintain its fairness and reputation as something more than a treasure hunt.

Show Profile  Neil K Posted: 18 May 2006, 3:09 AM  
I'm starting to agree more with protesting for championship races. Lets face it the European Champs wasn't a fair race, everybody knows it. And therefore you start disrespecting the competition and even the sport. Which results are fair ones? Only those people at the event know.

Unfortunatly we still have major problems, firstly with volunteers controllers/organisers, getting upset when an error has been made (quite understandably, they put alot of effort in).

Also there is a problem of the scale of the problem. When a control discription is incorrect (eg Massey University Sprint) The issue doesn't warrent an invalidation of the results (thats overreacting), but it did effect the fairness and a formal process should be available for this to be recognised. Then on some occasions the whole field is effected badly and the results shouldn't stand.

Show Profile  AlanHorn Posted: 18 May 2006, 3:48 AM  
I recently invalidated a course (not just class) at a WOA OY due to a bingo control. I did it based on some verbal moans and groans and after talking to others on the course. No formal protest or complaint was laid.

Okay, it still upset me somewhat but after a deep breath and "oh bugger" or two, I as controller had to make a fair decision.

ie Protesting to the Controller may still be the best first option as they know the courses and control placements etc and can hopefully make a decision quickly.
Then again the whole personality/denial thing might kick in which forces the formal Complaint.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 18 May 2006, 4:33 AM  
Some loose use of terms above.

We didn't change the procedure to increase the importance of the controller. NZOF (following the IOF rules) introduced a friendlier first process which would, in clear-cut cases, be faster and avoid the "bad-taste" feel of a formal protest.

The first process is called a complaint. There's no fee and the controller decides.

Of course there may be doubt as to whether the problem is serious enough to invalidate the course, often the only action possible. I think the controller should be conservative in deciding on complaints, so as to bump the matter up to the next stage - a protest decided by a jury who were not part of the event arrangements.

So no-one should grizzle about inaction following a problem, unless they have gone through one or both of the processes.

Interestingly, WOA has a "cut-down" one-stage process for its OY's. It's called a "complaints procedure" I suppose in an effort to be friendly, and it has no fee. But it requires the controller to form a jury to decide:-))

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 18 May 2006, 5:34 AM  
The processes you describe Michael both involve liaison with the controller. I'm 6,2 nearly 100kg and known for being a stirrer but even my skin isn't thick enough to deal with some of the controllers around.

How hard would it be to have an independent person nominated to make the process more user friendly.

And we should forget about the fee...sure make the protest be in writing but there isn't normally too much reason to have cash at an orienteering event. The person protesting should be made to feel like they are doing the right thing. The fee / bond is a measure of disrespect and deterrence which is not worthy of our orienteering community.

Show Profile  mark Posted: 18 May 2006, 5:47 AM  
It's nice that there are procedures to follow, but how often do people actually follow them?
Somebody complained to me after a WOA OY last year, but I didn't realise I was supposed to form a jury to decide on what to do.

I just followed my normal procedure of ignoring the complaint and doing nothing.

Show Profile  Greg Posted: 18 May 2006, 9:50 AM  
The biggest problem is what Jamie stated

" it is very hard to protest to a controller because they are very intimately involved with the production of an event "

I feel the controller should be taking a more independent role. Their job is to make sure the event is fair, not help plan courses or legs. This is where they can start to get the feeling of "their event".

After just returning from putting out controls I feel that one suggestion is that controllers should NOT put out controls. How can you take an objective view of a control placement if you have put it out? Don't get me wrong it is an absolute must that the controller visit every control site before the event, and possibly mark the sites but maybe should not actually put out the controls. This way, the controller has checked courses for fairness (not changed themselves only check), checked controls (courses and legs) out on the map, done all the other checking (control descriptions, etc) and then on race day can still have an objective view about control placement, cause lets face it 99% of complaints are about the control placement.


Show Profile  Alistair Posted: 18 May 2006, 11:30 AM  
Yes Greg, the controller should never put out controls.

In Sweden here they seem to have a system where the controller is always from another club. Clubs thus have a sort of trading system where club A lends a controller for race 1 by club B then club B will lend a controller to club A when they organise a race etc. Of course some transportation logistical problems may occur but it seems to be a good ideal to strive for and maybe those clubs who have a relatively near neighbour could start to try this out.

Amd yes - get rid of the fee but require that the protest/complaint is in writing, and signed & dated & with time when accepted by the organiser.


Show Profile  Neil K Posted: 18 May 2006, 11:32 PM  
I agree, the fee has to go. For the reasons Jamie gave.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 19 May 2006, 4:24 AM  
Jamie wrote...I'm 6,2 nearly 100kg and known for being a stirrer but even my skin isn't thick enough to deal with some of the controllers around.

Eh? Can't use a process which is pretty well word for word the IOF one, used for problem resolution in major events the world over? Why didn't you use it at the QB Sprint last year if "I am a firm believer in protesting, not only to maintain the technical standards in our sport but also to maintain its fairness and reputation as something more than a treasure hunt."

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 19 May 2006, 8:36 AM  
I think the answer to that question is reasonably self-evident...eg "my skin is not thick enough", read - I'm a coward/didn't want to get into more of a confrontational situation/ burn anymore bridges than I already have in the NZ orienteering community.

I maintain we need to depersonalise the protest system, which can be done by removing the controller as the first point of contact. I think this would be easier to be than change the current practice in NZ of the controller being intimately involved in the planning of courses and the placement of controls.

Show Profile  HeadHoncho Posted: 19 May 2006, 9:06 AM  
What was wrong with the QB sprint last year???

Show Profile  Greg Posted: 19 May 2006, 9:22 AM  
It was shit, just ask Mark Lawson

This message was edited by Greg on 19 May 2006, 4:22 PM

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 19 May 2006, 10:31 AM  
My error Honcho, I was thinking about the sprint in the Bot Gardens that Jamie had referred to. That was Labour Weekend, and I apologise to the controller of the QB sprint.

Show Profile  addison Posted: 19 May 2006, 10:46 AM  
QUOTE
Jamie wrote...I'm 6,2 nearly 100kg and known for being a stirrer but even my skin isn't thick enough to deal with some of the controllers around.

Eh? Can't use a process which is pretty well word for word the IOF one, used for problem resolution in major events the world over? Why didn't you use it at the QB Sprint last year if "I am a firm believer in protesting, not only to maintain the technical standards in our sport but also to maintain its fairness and reputation as something more than a treasure hunt."
UNQUOTE

Michael you have just proved Jamies point.

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 19 May 2006, 3:42 PM  
apologies I was thinking of labour weekend too...


1   2  


Ruffneck Productions © Ruffneck Productions maptalk.co.nz