Should a break in a program be severely penalized?

[Skittl1321]

YES !
Sport is sport, and must not permit a stop during the routine.

Except head to head races, almsot every sport I've ever watched allows stoppage. So I don't think the 'sport is sport' arguement works here.

[gkelly]

In the past no one ever stop during a routine. Now everyone !

That is not true. There have been plenty of stops in the past, for various reasons. And rules have differed over the years how to handle them.

Do you want examples?

[luenatic]

Except head to head races, almsot every sport I've ever watched allows stoppage. So I don't think the 'sport is sport' arguement works here.

I don't watch gymnastics enough to say for sure. But does it allows stoppage in the middle of the floor exercise? Let just say in the middle of the tumbling pass, the pants/outfit rip apart (aka wardrobe malfunction). Can the gymnast stop the routine, change pants/outfit, restart the music (for female), and restart from the beginning of the tumbling pass? Can they do all these without penalty?

[BigB08822]

Except head to head races, almsot every sport I've ever watched allows stoppage. So I don't think the 'sport is sport' arguement works here.

You are referring to judged sports where athletes compete one at a time? If you stop in gymnastics on beam or bars then it is a fall which is 1 point or you end up going over time and having giant deductions anyway.

What about diving? Once you leave the board I don't think there is any going back. You can't just abort mid air and get a redo.

The only sports with breaks are team sports where a break affects both teams so no one team gets to take advantage or individual sports where the athletes compete against each other like tennis and again both players get a break.

Are there any good examples of individual sports where athletes compete one at a time with allowed breaks?

[Skittl1321]

But does it allows stoppage in the middle of the floor exercise?

No, I think you are right that gymnastics does not allow stoppage. But there are MANY sports that allow stops. I did say -almost- every sport I've watched, not every. I was merely refuting "sport is sport". If "sport is sport" that includes team sports as well.

The rulebook is very dificult to search though It does say that after taking a penalty elements after the time limit are still recognized by the D panel and scored by the E panel. It doesn't really address HOW long over the time limit one can go. For females, it says the routine must end with the music, so that would seem to be the limit, but not sure how that would work for men. (I've read in a few places that if the music stops you have a choice to start over, start from the point of the stop, or keep going without music. I don't know if the ref can stop the music on purpose though.)

ETA: The men's rulebook contains this:

The gymnast is guaranteed the right to: Repeat their entire exercise, if the exercise has been interrupted
for reasons beyond his control or responsibility with
permission of the Superior Jury. such a request not be unreasonably denied with permission
from the Chair of the Superior Jury.

So it appears there are some situations in which case a 'redo' of the entire routine is allowed. Like stopping in skating, it seems like this would be very rare. Since most of the men's routines are so short, this makes more sense than a pause in the middle (redoing an entire long program would be more of a penalty for most skaters!)

If you stop in gymnastics on beam or bars then it is a fall which is 1 point or you end up going over time and having giant deductions anyway.

A fall on beam you get 10 seconds, bars 30 seconds . You are allowed to "rest and recuperate"(according to the rulebook), rechalk and confer with your coach during this time. If the timer is doing their job, this is NOT counted against the time of the program.

What about diving? Once you leave the board I don't think there is any going back. You can't just abort mid air and get a redo.

There are definetly instances where dives can be redone. Tom Daley was given a redive due to camera flashes. I would bet the rulebook has other reasons that a redive can be granted as well.

If the swimmers stop because of circumstances beyond their control, the Referee will allow the routine to be re-swum during the session.

Found this about synchro swimming. Can't find anything in their rulebook though.


Reading all these rules, I don't think a cramp is a reason for stopping. Within these sports, I'm not sure what might be (streaker running through the apparatus? Ceiling falling? They don't have to worry about crystals on the ice.) I think figure skating needs to re-write the rule to make it clear the intent. I don't think a stop should be granted for any of the reasons the three ice dancers took it this season, but I do think Didier deserved the pause + restart when she crashed into the walls so severely she couldn't get right back up. (Floor exercise doesn't have walls. What do they do if they trip and fall off the podium entirely?)

[luenatic]

but I do think Didier deserved the pause + restart when she crashed into the walls so severely she couldn't get right back up.

Who caused that crash? Did someone throw a dodge ball at her and caused the crash? IMHO, a deduction in this example is clearly needed.

[Skittl1321]

Who caused that crash? Did someone throw a dodge ball at her and caused the crash? IMHO, a deduction in this example is clearly needed.

Well, she caused the fall. But the ice likely caused the crash due to its slippery nature.

She did get a deduction- at that time the rules required for a -2 interuption in excess (http://www.isuresults.com/results/wc..._FS_Scores.pdf). And she was deducted for the fall. Plus she lost points on GOE on a really bad jump. And took a huge hit in PCS (though the program after the fall was a pretty big mess.)

The stop didn't exactly give her an unfair advantage, I don't think. If there was no injury "time-out" she would have likely just withdrawn. The "time out"gave her a chance to qualify her country a spot at the Olympics (due to invalid elements, she didn't- she was probably too disoriented to skate, and if it weren't for the Olympic qualifying- I bet her coaches wouldn't have had her continue). Since it is written in the rules that it is allowed, any competitor in a similar situation could have done the same thing.

It does seem though that now there is not a penalty for it, and perhaps skaters are being made more aware of the rule, maybe it is being taken advantage of? In the past, maybe both Alex and Tessa would have skated through the pain? Injuries that are not visible are difficult to make decisiosn about- we know Tessa is capable of skating through great pain for instance. She's a hard worker, I doubt she'd be faking it. In fact, I'd be shocked to hear of any skating who hasn't skated through pain/injury. So how does the ref decide what to allow and what not to allow?

[rvi5]

No, I think you are right that gymnastics does not allow stoppage.

In Gymnastics womens vault, the athlete is permitted one abort of their run down the ramp, and a restart. This actually happened at the London summer games. I don't believe the athlete is required to provide a valid reason. In the London games case, it appeared the athlete just didn't feel prepared during the run, and aborted/restarted.

[luenatic]

She did get a deduction- at that time the rules required for a -2 interuption in excess (http://www.isuresults.com/results/wc..._FS_Scores.pdf). And she was deducted for the fall. Plus she lost points on GOE on a really bad jump.

The stop didn't exactly give her an unfair advantage. The reason she likely wanted to continue was to attempt to qualify her country a place in the Olympics. If there was no injury "time-out" she would have likely just withdrawn, which takes that chance to qualify away completely. It wasn't the kind of into the boards fall that most skaters just get up from. She was clearly disoriented, and the 3 minutes allowed her and her coaches to evaluate whether she could continue.

Guess what. Competition is tough. She fell and got hurt. If she didn't qualify her country for a spot at the Olympics, oh well, better luck next time. Every skater fell on the ice (without resting/restarting the program) got the same fall deduction (-1) and the lower GOE.

[MacMadame]

I think we can agree that if skaters stop their music, give them a minus 3.0, and they can't repeat elements.

Actually, I think it's pretty clear from the length of this thread and the various comments that we DON'T agree. (And probably aren't going to.)

I would have prefered if judges asked them to skate again.

As was mentioned upthread, they were asked to reskate. They decided not to knowing they'd be disqualified. (IIRC they felt they were too tired and wouldn't be able to skate as well a second time and do declined the restate.)

In the past, maybe both Alex and Tessa would have skated through the pain?

You can't skate through a cramp because you can't control your muscles when they cramp. If they had skated through, there would most likely have been a fall.

Since The Shibs were the first instance of this happening in a long time, I don't think they were seeing other people do it "without penalty" and decided to do it too. Maybe Tessa and Scott were thinking of the Shibs when they stopped but most likely there were just thinking "crap, we can't win now". But I'd bet good money that the ref who suggested to the Jr. Worlds team to take a break instead of withdrawing was thinking of what happened to the Shibs and Virtue/Moir.

I also suspect it was this incident, with a ref offering this as an option to an injured team, that push a lot of people over the edge. It seemed the exact opposite of how you run a sport to me. It seemed a lot more like t-ball in Little League where you don't keep score!

[DORISPULASKI]

But I'd bet good money that the ref who suggested to the Jr. Worlds team to take a break instead of withdrawing was thinking of what happened to the Shibs and Virtue/Moir.

I also suspect it was this incident, with a ref offering this as an option to an injured team, that push a lot of people over the edge. It seemed the exact opposite of how you run a sport to me. It seemed a lot more like t-ball in Little League where you don't keep score!

That, and that it happened with 2 couples at a single Jr. Worlds.

I think that's why this thread now, after Jr. Worlds, not after 4CCs, and not after Rostelecom Cup.

Having a couple of teams take a mulligan in a competition is starting to look like the new normal, instead of something extraordinary that might happen once every couple of years.

I think it was quite enough to ask the ISU to think through whether this is really how things ought to work in a sport, and what happens if stopping without penalty spreads to singles & pairs (with the late program bonus).

[Asli]

You can't skate through a cramp because you can't control your muscles when they cramp. If they had skated through, there would most likely have been a fall.

BTW I was so impressed by how Moir understood and reacted to Virtue's situation in a split second. Another couple might have found themselves in an awkward position, with him starting the lift. Amazing.

[BigB08822]

I am sorry, but your arguments still don't hold skittl. You have yet to give an example of a sport that allows stoppage where the sport has athletes compete ONE AT A TIME. I don't care if a thousand other sports allow stoppage when those stops benefit both teams equally, such as in football, tennis, basketball, etc.

When I mentioned going over time on beam I was not meaning after a fall. I mentioned a fall AND going over time because in my mind I could see two situations. One, you stop your routine for whatever reason and hop off to take a break. That is a fall. Or you stop your routine and just stand there for a while, that is not a fall but would likely take too much time and result in going over time.

The example of Daley's vault is not really appropriate as the cause of his mishap was a flash, or in other words, something completely out of his control. I don't think anyone on here thinks that a skater should be penalized if someone throws something on the ice or decides to streak in the middle of someone's routine. Clearly a stop would be warranted and the athlete should not be punished. The example of getting one baulk on the vault isn't really valid either as the run is not part of the vault, it is not judged in any way, and therefore the vault has not been initiated until the horse is touched. If the horse is touched, then the athlete must finish or take a zero (this happened to Russia at the 2008 Olympics). The equivalent in diving would be someone starting their dive but stopping before leaving the board. I don't know about spring board rules but high divers would be allowed to walk back, regroup and then try again. The dive had not been initiated.

There are simply NO EXAMPLES of sports where athletes compete one at a time where they are allowed to stop (unless it is something completely out of their control). If I am wrong, please enlighten me.

[Leeedward]

When a skater is allowed a stop/start-over for any reason--without a significant penalty--in a one-at-a-time (or a one-team-at-a-time) sport, it is unfair to all other participants. One must realize that it takes almost superhuman talent and fitness for skaters to compete at the national and international levels. It is not for the faint-of-heart-mind-or-body!

[TheIronLady]

Skating is a bit special.

The incident that irritated me was Zhang/Zhang in 2006 in Turin. They stopped because of their failure on a risky element (which incidentally was a crap-shoot to begin with). Instead of losing their standing, the press praised them for bravery, and they won a silver medal. It was the last time I took pairs seriously for a couple of years. If you attempt a dangerous move and fail (a Hail Mary pass), the scoring should give you some credit for trying, but the judging should not tolerate breaks in the program to regroup from failures-- no matter how unfortunate and painful. The "components" imply there is a whole program to judge. A stop after a bad fall, a pep talk, and then a restart after wind is regained, is a lot of interruption. This would be appropriate in boxing, but it is not acceptable in skating.

Zhang & Zhang 2006 FS

[kwanfan1818]

Once they've stopped a program that didn't need to be stopped, it's too late to correct it -- the skater has already lost momentum on top of whatever the problem was to begin with.

If a referee stops the program incorrectly, there is no way to eliminate the damage to the skater/team; however, the referee can, effectively reverse the decision and allow a restart without penalty, instead of making it worse. The skaters cannot get back that original momentum -- here I'm willing to assume that the skaters weren't struggling and won't necessarily do better with a restart -- and the initial emotional reactions -- confusion, anger, other -- can't be undone, but an apology/acknowledgement that the referee was wrong and/or that the skater/team was heard shouldn't be underestimated in their ability to help salvage a situation.

In the immediate aftermath of the injury, the referee's first thought will probably be something like "This skater may not be able to continue. I should get ready to have the music person stop the music and to call for medical attention if necessary." But then give it a few seconds and see what the skater does next..

That might be an excellent general guideline, but waiting a few more seconds could also mean that the ice is splattered with blood, that a skater endangers him or herself, or that one partner endangers the other by trying to move, support, or help the partner physically, and a mandatory amount of waiting could be the wrong decision.

But if they're just trying to determine whether they can go on, give them 10 or 15 seconds to make that decision, don't blow the whistle immediately and offer them a 3-minute break.

It's ultimately the referee's judgement call. If a skater is moving and clearly breathing, this can be the referees call, and if the music stops only after the skater/team goes to the referee or the referee makes the call, then if the skater takes 10 or 15 seconds to make the decision, the skater loses that much time from the program if it resumed, assuming the responsibility of the stoppage is with the skater/team.

I don't think the ref should have a hair trigger to blow the whistle -- give it 5 seconds or so. First make sure that the problem really does present a danger and that the skater is not aware (or is aware and is in the process of stopping) and then blow the whistle and stop the music.

Again, good guidelines for many situations, but either the referee has ultimately responsibility for anything visible or not.

That's why I say that whether there's a deduction or not should be based on the source of the problem (skater's responsibility or organizers'/venue's responsibility), not based on who stopped the program.

I've never argued otherwise. I think there should be no penalty if it's not the skaters' responsibility or misjudgement -- i.e., injury, equipment, costumes, thinks s/he sees a pile of beads in the corner when it's just ice chips -- and I think if it's not the skater's responsibility, the skater/team should be able to restart the program.

There will also almost always be additional penalties related to the initial problem itself that would be reflected in the skating and in the scores. They're already having a bad day. No need to pile insult on injury with punitive severe deductions.

What data supports that? If you look at the PCS that Papadakis/Cizeron got for their FD, they are almost identical to the scores they got in the SD, and within a point of their best performances and several points better than several other performances this season. There's no transparency in the process.

I think it's highly unfair to the other skaters to allow an interrupted program to go unpenalized, if it is the responsibility of the skaters. PCS are supposed to judge characteristics over the entire program, and when unity/continuity is broken, it's asking the judges to compare apples to oranges.

[DORISPULASKI]

Lest anyone think that it is only high profile skaters who suffer no penalty in PCS, Here's Yang & Wu's PCS. They did not do any JGP's this year, so there's no really comparable scores for this season.

	Yang & Wu
	SD	FD
SS	4.82	4.93
Link f/2	4.43	4.61
Perf	4.75	4.75
Choreo	4.64	4.93
Interp	4.57	4.79

[Proustable]

I think a break, at the very least, should obviate any back-half bonuses. I'd also assert that if the break happens during or immediately preceding an element, that the skater(s) shouldn't be allowed to perform the element again.

[gingercat]

I think a break, at the very least, should obviate any back-half bonuses. I'd also assert that if the break happens during or immediately preceding an element, that the skater(s) shouldn't be allowed to perform the element again.

Great Idea!

[luenatic]

I think there should be no penalty if it's not the skaters' responsibility or misjudgement -- i.e., injury, equipment, costumes, thinks s/he sees a pile of beads in the corner when it's just ice chips -- and I think if it's not the skater's responsibility, the skater/team should be able to restart the program.

In general I agree with you with the exception of equipment and costume failure. If the skater's equipment and costume caused the problem, the skater needs to take the responsibility for the failure. I know car racing is not the same as skating (and car racing is head to head competition), but I'm going to use that as an example to illustrate my point regarding equipment failure. If the car got a flat tire during the race, should the clock stops for the tire replacement? Let's take marathon as another example. If the racer's shoes fell apart during the race and the racer needs to change into another pair of shoes, should the clock stops for that also?