BEOC

[graeme]

Just checking for consistency you're not confused by Mharky. Even I find your keenness to devalue someone's run surprising.

[Gross]

Maybe YES/NO is too simple for a meaningful poll.... maybe there should be a 3rd option... did all the competitors compete on the same course?

[FatBoy]

The answer in my opnion is yes, she deserves to be british champion, and yes she was clearly the best W21E on the day. Course should still have been voided though. Deserving to be and being given a perfectly fair opporunity to do so are different things.

M21L makes entirely different reading to W21E though. I guess I have to accept it's not such a presitgous course, but the "medal" positions were affected by the misplaced control.

[awk]

On at least two previous occasions, other top women deserved to be champion, but weren't crowned as such because the courses were voided, on one because the 'champion' herself was so p*ssed off with the mistake she herself protested. Deserving to be, and being, are two different states. Whatever Jenny deserves, that should not be an influence in the decision. The course either provides a valid result, or it doesn't.

Having said that, I do think it's quite justifiable for a jury to look at the results and say that the result is still valid if they believe the problem didn't materially affect the result (whether that should be just the winner, or podium places, or for the whole field, I'll leave for another discussion), and let the result stand. That's where split times can help. What I don't find justifiable are the reasons given in the report.

To my mind, the decision making process has to be a lot more clearly defined than the touchy-feely way it's done now.

[mharky]

Gross: genius.