BOC/BRC appeals

[freaky_phil]

The posting on the BO web site is not in fact the whole response from the rules group reply to the protests/appeal. The rules and appendices of what circumstances a course should be voided are being written for event officals and will be available in 2008. As is the statement that leg split times should not be removed - so presumably Appendix I (which states that they can be) will also be re-written.
Your options will presumably be to 1) leave the results stand or 2) void the course.

[RJ]

awk... I agree with your line of argument. The weakness is in the recognition of there being a problem.... whether a control is misplaced etc. It will always rely on a competitor feeling agrieved at some point in their run to lodge a protest after they have finished. The jury can only find out about a problem if it has been identified.

So how do they do this..... Stand at the finish and listen to competitor gossip? A protest has to be made and formalised. Yes, the jury then investigates and decides. I think from your reasoned argument one might assume that the jury is scouring the event looking for problems and inconsistencies and making rulings on them 'on the fly'.

I agree that the jury should rule, firmly, at the time of the event, on the day, and decide the results stand or not. No further appeal, except in extremely exceptional circumstances (clarification needed!).

BTW.... anyone want the job of being on the jury????

[Oldman]

I agree that the jury should rule, firmly, at the time of the event, on the day, and decide the results stand or not. No further appeal, except in extremely exceptional circumstances (clarification needed!).

This is getting us close to a more sensible solution where at least the final decision is taken on the day of the event, not months afterwards in a Committee room. However, I would hope that juries would be guided that where a control is absolutely not in the right place and that any competitors were disadvantaged by that, then voiding the course must be done (assuming that leg removal using splits is not to be countenanced).

[DIDSCO]

Instead of the big debate on when to void a course or not perhaps it's more important to work out why so many British races, including major events, have controls placed in the wrong place.

I've not experienced one single misplaced control at an official race in the last 9 years I've lived in Sweden. However it was a regular accurance when I lived in Britain.

My theory is that many controllers of British events are not always good enough technical orienteers themselves to be capable of making sure the controls are in the right place.

The best solution for a major race like the British Championships would be to employ (yes perhaps even pay) one or two former high quality elite athletes to run round all the controls on the morning of the race and double check the planner/and controller have placed the controls correctly.

[johnloguk]

This is just another of those interminable arguments that orienteering (and Nope?) seem to have more than any other sport. There are two polarised positions as I see them, and I suspect that no amount of debate will convince anyone to swap sides.

On the one hand we have the "fundamentalists" who simply say "if it wasn't right then void the lot". They see no grey areas and no mitigating factors. Like all fundamentalists they firmly believe that they are right and can call up any number of quotes from their rulebook to support their position.

Then there are the "liberals", who can always see a reason to bend any rule and who get extremely uncomfortable with simple black and white solutions. Rather than stick rigidly to the rules the "liberals" look to find new angles and evidence to support their assumption that on this occasion the rules can be bent for the "greater good".

Personally I'm a woolly headed old hippy liberal and I hate fundamentalist positions. But sometimes I think I might feel a bit more comfortable if I was able to see things as clear cut as they do.

[distracted]

It will always rely on a competitor feeling agrieved at some point in their run to lodge a protest after they have finished. The jury can only find out about a problem if it has been identified.

What do you mean by "protest"? Procedure says the first line of action is a "complaint" to the organiser, and protests only occur if the competitor disagrees with the organiser's decision. I have on occasions mentioned problems to a results team when downloading, whether it be the SI unit not working or a control which is missing/misplaced. This is often greeted with a response of "we know already" but therefore has generally been enough to get through to the organiser, and a solution forthcoming.

Reading through the current rules provision for complaints, protests etc and the whole system seems unsatisfactory for a situation such as a misplaced control. Even if the organiser agrees with the complaint lodged, or the controller with a protest, they do not have to convene the jury and can make a decision themselves. Convening the jury only seems necessary if the controller/organiser disagrees with the complaint and subsequent protest. This seems the wrong way of doing things when the integrity of a course has been significantly affected - and after all, for what other reasons would you protest? So I'm in the same camp as awk - a complaint/protest should be lodged with the jury, bypassing the controller/organiser and hence bypassing what seems to be at least three unnecessary stages in the current procedure.

[distracted]

My theory is that many controllers of British events are not always good enough technical orienteers themselves to be capable of making sure the controls are in the right place.

Or maybe the majority of controllers in the UK are M/W50+ and therefore would struggle to get round and check every control is in the right place once put out on the morning of the event, leaving it to the planner/planner's helpers to do so...

[Axel]

I've never read so much waffle in all my life, typically British all piffle and soft and fluffy round the edges. From all sides of Brit Oing no one can make a decision, you don't see this situation in European or Scandinavian events let alone thier Championships.

We have officialdom over here that doesn't like to hurt peoples feelings so never make a firm decision. If a control is misplaced in whatever circumstances then the course should voided end of story.

If you want an option and you must have a winner then use another event later in the calendar and deem that as the championships for that class. If its a two day event like the JK then take the result from the day that did not have any problems.

Make life simple for christ sake and stop beating about the bush.

As for not checking all the controls are correctly placed before an event then British Champs or not it just shows how unprofessional we are in this sport. An area takes on an event then that area should provide prerunners to check course before the start. Now don't start waffling about oh but he would then miss the Brit Champs and so and so, I'm afraid we have to make sacrifices if we want to get it right!!!

We can't make up for past mistake but we can put it right for the future so get a grip whoever makes the decisions for our major events start planning to get it right as especially with the Scottish Six Days looming.

[Gnitworp]

I agree wholeheartedly with Axel

Minimum requirement:

Make absolutely certain that all the elite controls are in the right place, and then man them all for the duration of the competition so that at least the only 'real' British Championship has a guaranteed undisputed champion every year.

If we can't ensure these few controls are in the right place, I think I'll go and top meself. Get the mapper to check them if necessary.

[awk]

I've not experienced one single misplaced control at an official race in the last 9 years I've lived in Sweden. However it was a regular accurance when I lived in Britain.

Well I can certainly remember a Nordic Champs relay being voided, and World Cup races having similar trouble. Maybe not often, but it does happen.

However, your point about professional controllers is an interesting one - I do remember (admittedly some years ago) talking to the French controller to a multiday, who was one of a team employed by the French federation to do just that.

Whilst I suspect that professional controllers are beyond the usual financial means of the sport (we already see plenty of complaints about cost), it does beg the question of what sort of professional support our major races might require. Certainly, the all too often misplacing of controls at British/JK is somewhat embarrassing, and doesn't do our image anywhere any good at all.

[Red Adder]

Can't help thinking that we have used a vast amount of time and effort developing SI and Emit but a large number of people are fervently against using it two circumstances when it would help sort out problems by either removing the legs round a dodgy control site or proving whether somebody really did visit a site. Perhaps we should go back to pin punching so there is no option to exclude legs (though we can still have long arguments about whether one pin prick being out of the appropriate box should lead to disqualification).

[note : in motor rallying they quite happily void a stage if circumstances dictate and still declare an overall winner]

[Oldman]

so that at least the only 'real' British Championship has a guaranteed undisputed champion every year.

I suppose someone has to rise to the bait, so it might as well be me!

Please can you clarify your comment, Gnitworp? Are you saying (as you seem to be) that the e.g. M40 or W50 British Championships are not "real"? If so, I think it is a dreadful slur. You will (unless you're unlucky) also be too old one day to run with the elites. That doesn't mean to say you can't have meaningful competition with people your own age. And what about people who join the sport when already too old to compete at elite elevel?

I find your comment rather offensive in these non-ageist days - unless of course I've read too much into what you said?

[Gnitworp]

I find your comment rather offensive in these non-ageist days - unless of course I've read too much into what you said?

You have.

Just trying to prioritize.

(I haven't run Elite since 1986)

JEP M60

[Oldman]

OK, Gnitworp, if you're saying the Elite British Championships are the highest priority ones, I agree.

If you'd said the winners were entitled to use "British Champion" without age/class qualification, I would have agreed.

I can't agree to "real" though, but let's leave it at that.

[NeilC]

A couple of other real examples:

BEOC2006: As planner I was confident that all the controls were in the right place. However I (and my controller and the map adviser and others) missed a mapping ambiguity. Some competitors were disadvantaged.

BEOC sprint at Sandhurst: One control had two codes visible, those competitors that approached from one direction saw the wrong code first and were disadvantaged (albeit by only a few seconds).

Awk's proactive jury, following the fundamentalist principles promoted in this thread, would have had no option but to void.

What actually happened was that no-one complained, most if not all people thought that the result was valid and that the winner was a worthy champion so the results stood. I personally disagree with those that would claim that this was a travesty and brought our sport into disrepute. I actually wonder what the reaction of other sports would be to a decision to void a national championships because one competitor, who was way off the pace, was disadvantaged because one of their controls was vandalised. One might have to wait until they stopped laughing before asking them though. The Smash robots come to mind.

Of course there are problems that shouldn't be happening and addressing these is more important than dealing with them afterwards. To start with we need more controllers so please encourage your club mates to consider becoming one. The bigger the pyramid base the more opportunities there will be for those at the top to concentrate on getting the big events right.