View previous topic | View next topic |
Author |
Message |
UkrainianGymnasticsFan
Joined: 09 Nov 2004 Posts: 148 Location: Now in Australia
|
Posted: Sun, 29-Jul-2007 1:55 Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone has Bessonovas ribbon? _________________ You haven't failed until you quit trying...
Sacrifice is giving up something good for something better. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Little Question
Joined: 26 Oct 2003 Posts: 312 Location: Canada
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
staz13
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 Posts: 317 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Tue, 31-Jul-2007 5:07 Post subject: |
|
|
I really don't understand this. When I heard the news I assumed that the swivel broke at the very beginning with her illusion throw. IMO she should have gotten points for the beginning of the routine..it was truly flawless and her pirouettes have improved ( if thats possible!) The zero was harsh and the red flag that marisa speaks about should have been raised, does anyone know if this is used in international competitions? I actually cried when I heard. I think this is going to be a lesson to everyone...but also a true display of strength. If i were her i would've been crying and off of that carpet as soon as possible. She did look worried but wow was she strong. _________________ ~Stacey~
Alexandra Orlando: 2008 Olympian! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gabs
Joined: 23 Apr 2006 Posts: 223
|
Posted: Wed, 1-Aug-2007 5:29 Post subject: |
|
|
The code is clear about this... if the apparatus breaks you stop the routine or receive zero, Bessonova knew this. I think its awful and unfair that Orlando's ribbon broke, such bad timing and so unfortunate, but I don't think it's unfair that she received a zero. Those are the rules. Of course I feel horrible for her, but in the future she will know to stop the routine and not to continue on, as possibly she should have known in the first place. I don't think it's the responsibility of the judges to stop her, either. I hope other international gymnasts will learn from this, and have spare equipment ready or know to stop if they don't, and we don't have this sad situation happen again in the future! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
staz13
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 Posts: 317 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Wed, 1-Aug-2007 7:20 Post subject: |
|
|
ah, I am not the familiar with the rules. It is still very unfortunate though _________________ ~Stacey~
Alexandra Orlando: 2008 Olympian! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Anna Kull
Joined: 27 Oct 2003 Posts: 5153 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Wed, 1-Aug-2007 9:04 Post subject: |
|
|
Gabs wrote: | The code is clear about this... if the apparatus breaks you stop the routine or receive zero, Bessonova knew this. I think its awful and unfair that Orlando's ribbon broke, such bad timing and so unfortunate, but I don't think it's unfair that she received a zero. Those are the rules. Of course I feel horrible for her, but in the future she will know to stop the routine and not to continue on, as possibly she should have known in the first place. I don't think it's the responsibility of the judges to stop her, either. I hope other international gymnasts will learn from this, and have spare equipment ready or know to stop if they don't, and we don't have this sad situation happen again in the future! |
I agree. We should not mix hard for the gymnast with unfair. As long as the rules are applicated to all competitiors in the same way a competition is fair but it my be hard for a particular gymnasts due to such rules as the one we are disussing about. _________________ RG is the true reason to go on in my life! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aldami5
Joined: 12 Feb 2004 Posts: 428
|
Posted: Wed, 1-Aug-2007 9:36 Post subject: |
|
|
MarisaO wrote: | Here in Canada, our head judge will put up a red flag for the gymnast to stop.
Does this not apply internationally?Also, I have to wonder if this had been anyone other than Alexandra would this have happened? We Canadians again are too nice. |
Is this in the COP
JR wrote: | mmm...If not mistaken in Wch Budapest 2003, in AA groups,,, Greece broken one hoop 10 seconds before finish the routine and the penalty was minimum... nodoby remeber this? Or was a dream? |
I commented this topic to my friend who is judge and coach...
Does anybody mention the time each exercises had when the stick broke ?
Bessonova, the stick brokes :1,03 time after she started her routine
Orlando, the stick brokes : 0,45 time after she started her routine
Could this detail have an influence in the judges decision when to give or not pontuation to the gymnasts?
Any comments, please? _________________ If God brings you to it - He will bring you through it
If we act as if we're confident, we become so. At least for a little while.
www.dvillena.com/index.php |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sery
Joined: 26 Oct 2003 Posts: 497
|
Posted: Wed, 1-Aug-2007 15:32 Post subject: |
|
|
if my memory is correct, Bessonova also should have gotten 0, no?
because the COP, again if my memory correct,
tells that if a gymnast breaks an apparatus, then - 0.
if she (or he ) has a 2nd apparatus by the carpet, she (or he) can
take it and go on excercise, but reaceives a penalty for using a second
apparatus.
and it's not forbidden to continue exercise with a broken apparatus.
so it's so unlucky that Orlando didn't have a 2nd ribbon... _________________ Go Alina, you are the Olympic Champion 2008!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Little Question
Joined: 26 Oct 2003 Posts: 312 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Wed, 1-Aug-2007 20:26 Post subject: |
|
|
Sery wrote: | if my memory is correct, Bessonova also should have gotten 0, no?
because the COP, again if my memory correct,
tells that if a gymnast breaks an apparatus, then - 0.
if she (or he ) has a 2nd apparatus by the carpet, she (or he) can
take it and go on excercise, but reaceives a penalty for using a second
apparatus.
and it's not forbidden to continue exercise with a broken apparatus.
so it's so unlucky that Orlando didn't have a 2nd ribbon... |
I am not agree that it is not forbidden to continue the exercise with a broken apparatus as the rule says:
Concerning the rule
5.4.1. If the apparatus breaks during an exercise or gets caught in the small beams of the ceiling, the gymnast or the group will not be authorized to start the exercise over.
5.4.3. In such a case, the gymnast or the group may:
either stop the exercise
or continue the exercise with a replacement apparatus.
Note: No gymnast or group is not allowed to continue an exercise with a broken apparatus. If the exercise is continued, it will not be evaluated (0.00 pt).
----------------------------
and Bessonova got her score: 17.550 ( http://www.ffgym.asso.fr/res_gr/03_corbeil_sommaire.html# )
and yes, it was unluckely that Alex didn't bring a replacement apparatus. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sery
Joined: 26 Oct 2003 Posts: 497
|
Posted: Thu, 2-Aug-2007 0:03 Post subject: |
|
|
Little Question wrote: | Sery wrote: | if my memory is correct, Bessonova also should have gotten 0, no?
because the COP, again if my memory correct,
tells that if a gymnast breaks an apparatus, then - 0.
if she (or he ) has a 2nd apparatus by the carpet, she (or he) can
take it and go on excercise, but reaceives a penalty for using a second
apparatus.
and it's not forbidden to continue exercise with a broken apparatus.
so it's so unlucky that Orlando didn't have a 2nd ribbon... |
I am not agree that it is not forbidden to continue the exercise with a broken apparatus as the rule says:
Concerning the rule
5.4.1. If the apparatus breaks during an exercise or gets caught in the small beams of the ceiling, the gymnast or the group will not be authorized to start the exercise over.
5.4.3. In such a case, the gymnast or the group may:
either stop the exercise
or continue the exercise with a replacement apparatus.
Note: No gymnast or group is not allowed to continue an exercise with a broken apparatus. If the exercise is continued, it will not be evaluated (0.00 pt).
----------------------------
and Bessonova got her score: 17.550 ( http://www.ffgym.asso.fr/res_gr/03_corbeil_sommaire.html# )
and yes, it was unluckely that Alex didn't bring a replacement apparatus. |
ooops, but more in the COP:
Note if the gymnast or the group stops the exercise, the exercise will not be evaluated.
so in both cases - 0.
btw, this rule has appeared in 2005 _________________ Go Alina, you are the Olympic Champion 2008!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Little Question
Joined: 26 Oct 2003 Posts: 312 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Thu, 2-Aug-2007 2:10 Post subject: |
|
|
Sery wrote: "btw, this rule has appeared in 2005"
What was the old one? Someone explained somewhere that the score could be depended of the time in which the break appeared. Maybe that explained why Bessonova got her score but I doubt it.
The second point I would like to discuss is about the expression of the sentence:
5.4.1. If the apparatus breaks during an exercise or gets caught in the small beams of the ceiling, the gymnast or the group will not be authorized to start the exercise over.
Who exactly get the authority to stop it? The gymnast or the judge? it is not clear at all if it belongs to the gymnast when you consider the general rule forbidding to the gymnast to stop exercise by herself.
I think that, as many law's principes, the particular rule comes over the general one when 2 opposite rules are confronted. The coordinator judge has the duty to authorize or stop an exercise. But in this matter, to who the duty gets over the duty of the other one? What is your opinion about it? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tahnee RSG.net Moderator
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 3296 Location: Perth, Australia
|
Posted: Thu, 2-Aug-2007 3:30 Post subject: |
|
|
Just watched the video...she was so brave to continue, but her face at the end.....no words... _________________ http://www.youtube.com/Tahnee2612 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gabs
Joined: 23 Apr 2006 Posts: 223
|
Posted: Fri, 3-Aug-2007 7:36 Post subject: |
|
|
Little Question wrote: |
The second point I would like to discuss is about the expression of the sentence:
5.4.1. If the apparatus breaks during an exercise or gets caught in the small beams of the ceiling, the gymnast or the group will not be authorized to start the exercise over.
Who exactly get the authority to stop it? The gymnast or the judge? it is not clear at all if it belongs to the gymnast when you consider the general rule forbidding to the gymnast to stop exercise by herself.
I think that, as many law's principles, the particular rule comes over the general one when 2 opposite rules are confronted. The coordinator judge has the duty to authorize or stop an exercise. But in this matter, to who the duty gets over the duty of the other one? What is your opinion about it? |
What is the general rule forbidding the gymnast from stopping the exercise?
I think it is the gymnast's responsibility to stop - the prospect of a zero should be enough incentive for the gymnast to stop the exercise of her own free will should her apparatus break.
"5.4.1. If the apparatus breaks during an exercise or gets caught in the small beams of the ceiling, the gymnast or the group will not be authorized to start the exercise over. This sentence is perfectly clear to me and has nothing to do with stopping the exercise but instead the fact that the gymnast/group will not be allowed to repeat the exercise again. That's my interpretation, anyway. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sak
Joined: 02 Aug 2006 Posts: 153 Location: Italy
|
Posted: Sat, 11-Aug-2007 9:03 Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with you Gabs.
IMO "To be not authorized" means that the gymnast and the group have to know all the Cop and therefore have to konw that it isn't possible to start the exercise over although they asked it to the judge.
I think that the problem of Alexandra is that she continued the exercise with broken apparatus, so she get 0. The score colud be different if she stopped and go out of the carpet
But...
The cop in the 5.4.1 point continues with
"Penalties:
If the gymnast or the group stops the exercise, the exercise will not be evaluated.
If the gymnast or the group resumes the exercise with a replacement apparatus, the
penalties will be the same as for loss of the apparatus and use of a replacement
apparatus (see Paragraphs 5.2.2. and 5.2.3. above)."
and I would like to know what do you think about it... Isn't natural for a gymanst to stop the exercise if she noticed that she has for examples deflated ball or broked club? The time to realize the event...
If Alexandra had the replacement apparatus she probabily stopped for a moment.
Thus, both with replacement apparatus and without replacement apparatus the gymnast or the group that stops the exercise get 0.
In short if Alexandra stopped the exercise she get 0 equally?
(N.B.: Sorry for my mistakes... My english isn't very well, I hope to do best in the future... ) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ptitecιcile
Joined: 22 Aug 2006 Posts: 76 Location: Paris, France
|
Posted: Wed, 29-Aug-2007 19:57 Post subject: |
|
|
So I have a question : why some gymnasts (like bessonova and orlando here) don't have a replacement apparatus?? The COP authorize this and I think it's really strange to don't put a replacement apparatus near the carpet, it is careless especially in the AA... I don't understand,someone have an explanation? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|