BigDawgs finals delay and protest - chronology

[ToddL]

I agree with Rossi in that the delay is what really impacted the scenario and took it from unique to unfortunate. As I said in the "Letter" thread, delays were too long.

 

If we assume that the re-ride request had merit and the judges made the right call, then the question becomes how long should the two skiers have to wait before the matchup continues? Should there be a time limit? When that limit is exceeded, then what? The re-ride and protest process needs to be considered fully in our sport. We need to have clear thought about how to handle significant delays. Our rules don't handle delays as thoroughly as they should. The negative impacts often aren't the rules, but the delays in interpretation and application of the rules.

 

Ultimately, the 1 hour delay to address the protests was the most significant factor impacting spectator's impression of the event. I've never seen a delay that long due to officiating in any other sport anywhere. That is the primary issue that needs to be addressed.

 

Even the delay between the re-ride request and the continuation of the Miller/Rodgers bracket was an issue. I understand that Dave Miller requested a warm-up pass once he learned about Jeff getting the -39 re-ride. Dave had been sitting in the water for more than 10 minutes (if I recall correctly) between his original, successful -39 and when he had to continue at -41. That's almost like taking -41 off the dock. Granted Jeff Rodgers nearly had the same situation with a significant delay before taking his -39 re-ride. Still, it is not the same. In a head to head situation, the nature of the competition is different than any normal Class C/E/L; the skiers should be skiing the same passes right after each other.

[skidawg]

I have skied the Big Dawg since turning 35, never made the show under the lights until this one, I've never heard of the un written rule that ALL big dawgs know about, guess u have to make the finals before you find that out. I am also pretty sure Jeff (being new to this venue) knew nothing about it either. The chief judge made the call, good/bad/whatever, time to learn from this and move on to next year so we can grow this event and make it even bigger and better.

[Ghibli]

The whole idea of a re-ride is suspect when it turns into a "free play." No one ever asks for a re-ride if the pass is completed. If you want a re-ride because of rollers into two, you shouldn't get a free pull into three to see what happens. Give me flashing lights every time. I'll ski until i complete the pass.

[gmut]

I agree with what @skidawg said!!!!!!

[Horton]

@Ghibli‌ what?

[Razorskier1]

@skidawg nailed it.

[David Miller]

We need a rule for those that don't know. if you want to ski in a Big Dawg under the lights expect camera flash's, Vehicle lights etc. No re-rides period they just ruin the event. I'm all for moving on but lets not ruin the event by allowing re-rides that cause delays and up set competitors. I love all the Cameras and lights its awesome its what makes the Big Dawg. I sure don't want to see it change!!!

[klindy]

 

Couple that with Dave Millers comments about not being able to continue if you win your bracket and it just doesn't make sense to attempt to run the competition as a record tournament. Sure run the prelims as a record in the day time but not the night portion.

 

So if you run it as a lower class tournament you have a lot more options to put into (or out of) play various ideas and rules which allow things to flow well, scores to be better (?), and so forth. Discuss it all at the skier meeting and let the show begin.

 

In my mind I don't see anything really wrong with the reride request, granting the reride, the protest or even the end result. Still think a three way finals would have been a cool solution but so be it. The major flaw was the delay in the action which totally lost the crowd.

 

 

[mwetskier]

@Zman -it depends on what level the ' complaining ' rose or fell to. i've seen many a coach ejected from basketball and baseball games for crossing the line with a referee or umpire.

[mwetskier]

a thought just occurred to me that hasnt be brought up yet. suppose the large number of big dawg skiers who ski on goode skis -call them ' team goode ' -had prevailed in their mass protest. suppose the powers that be saw them marching up with their pitchforks and torches led by mr goode himself and said ' oh oh we better not rile up this mob any more than they already are ' -so they reversed the judges final decision and declared miller the winner of the match up.

 

would things be any better today? the result would still be controversial maybe even more so since it would probably be the first time ever a record capability tournament had a final judges decision over ruled by a sponsor. miller wouldnt have vented his spleen here and dave goode would have made a new promotional video on youtube but would our sport be any better for it? i think not.

 

in the end we live and die by our judges decisions. any thing we can do to make their job easier and help them always make the right call will be a good thing but no matter what we have to respect their final decisions -that is the nature of this sport.

[Ghibli]

The delay seems to have overshadowed whether or not the judge's decision was a good one. There has been a lot of discussion about controversial calls involving buoy count at other tournaments where "everyone" on shore knew the correct score. Is this a similar case? Was there a consensus on shore regarding the claim of distracting lights? The judge was asked to make a decision that could have a huge effect on the event and did. That's why there are judges I guess. Do skiers sometimes just request a re-ride to see if it sticks knowing their chances are slim, similar to a basketball or football player begging for a flag? Rodgers was definitely petitioning while he was still floating in the water after his fall. The video shows him emphatically pointing to shore.

 

Here is the link to the ride in question. Click "Final 4 Women & Mens Elite 8" and the pass in question starts at the 1:22:31 mark. I wonder if there are other angles available. Reminds me of the Monday morning after a controversial Super Bowl call or non-call. Everybody is talking about it at the office and the lines are usually drawn based on loyalties.

 

nautiquebigdawg.com/finals-webcast-2014/

[scott thompson]

Gee m nee....I leave the sport for a bit and it turns into nascar!! Haha! Just kidding of course...so sorry to see this happen. Sorry for Jeff and Dave and all involved. Won't be long and it will be all forgotten.

[Stevie Boy]

Yes, @Skidawg, nailed it.

The only comment I would like to add, is what happens in a football game when the officials take one hour to make a call ?

 

[David Miller]

Here is an un written rule for you all! "Do unto others as you would want done to yourself". As I have said before the judge made the wrong call. Jeff never should have asked for a re-ride and I doubt it will ever happen again. I agree not a good idea to reverse the call after it was approved the point here is to make sure it never happens again. I have fallen or lost my balance in the finals before due to lighting or flashes. It definitely effects your skiing and balance. I feel the effects on every pass. I have lost due to flashes of light etc. I would never want to beat one of my fellow Big Dawgs by asking for a re-ride due to lights cause they would all laugh at me!!!!And say are you kidding me!!!. It would put sour taste in all of their mouths because as I said we all have similar conditions and much distraction. Could you imagine what would happen if we approved a rule like this. It would be a complete disaster and ruin the event for everyone. Rule (No re-rides due to lights or flashes of any kind)

[mshaw200]

@oneski - The top see gets to pick whether he wants to go first or second, ultimately he does get to choose his driver but usually it's just for the tie-break advantage. With Miller being the higher seed, he got to choose.

 

 

I didn't see what Jeff saw but as someone that has skied under the lights, I know firsthand that there are distractions. In 09 there was someone on one of the trick judging towers in Okeeheelee with a flash reflector the size of a basketball. On every pass I could see it going off, not to mention the cars pulling into the area by the main road. I don't fault Jeff for asking for the re-ride, I just don't think the CJ should have granted it.

 

I also know that while not every agrees with everything that transpired, there is a protest process when something arises that an affected skier doesn't agree with. I was in the main crowd and have no idea what occurred at the starting dock area. If half of what I heard is true it's not good and should never have occurred.

 

I don't know if he was or was not informed of the situation but I think it was a mistake for Tyler not to inform an educated audience that there was a protest issue and the officials were working to resolve it. In my opinion it would have made a big difference to the Webcast and on shore audience to know that it was being worked on.

 

[T-fromTO]

I strongly agree with @mshaw200‌ I was acutely embarrassed for the announcer having to ramble on for an hour about "getting things just right for the skiers". The audience on shore and at home deserved better then that and should have been informed of what was really going on behind the scenes instead of sitting there like idiots.

[slow]

Digging a deep hole.

[markchilcutt]

Blah blah blah. Why arent the OM and OW skiing on a friday night under the lights instead of us old slow guys?

I was hopeful to compete in a Big Dawg someday but after all the bullshit i read lately i have no desire to be a part of it.

No one on the shore or dock had any rights to interveen that night! Give Jeff his re ride shut up and ski already!!!! Just my 2 cents

[ctsmith]

Sounds like good rivalries brewing if you ask me. Lessons learned (hopefully), put it in the rear view mirror, and lets get it on!

[Klundell]

@markchilcutt I hope you plan on never participating in a sport of any kind ever again. If there is competition there will always be controversy. There will always be poor sportsmanship because these guys are some of the fiercest competitors in the world (You don't get to that level without it). I love the controversy. It exists in all sports and is part of why we love it, they aren't always fair. Dave certainly got the raw end of a bad deal and it sounds like he took it pretty well, hell I yell at the umpires endlessly in old man softball if I feel like I got the bad end of a call. For what it's worth I've got 4 years until I get to slow down and I am even more excited about joining in on the big dawg fun. Bottom line is in professional sports, with professional referees, with centuries of history judgement calls still come up that make us say, "I've never seen that before." We will never get it right all the time and that is part of the beauty of it.

[markchilcutt]

@Klundell glad i hit someones hot button even better that its yours lmao

BTW @Klundell i really enjoy competing and will never stop due to a judgment call. Another reason i enjoy cross country MTN bike racing just me racing the clock for the most part.

[wtrskior]

@markchilcutt‌ I agree, why aren't the OM and OW Slalom and Jumpers out there?

 

I'd like to see RD and the nightmare fly 200+ feet in the dark, and Nate walk through 41 in the dark like he's got a 6th sense. No wonder there weren't many OM skiers at nationals..

[MattP]

@wtrskior‌ Ryan is from Canada...

The US Open needs a comeback at Nationals with a Night final.

[wtrskior]

@MattP‌ I know he is, and Mapple is a brit. Was referring to a Pro event vs big dawg.

 

Ryan didn't ski at Canadian Nat's either, dont know why.

 

US open would be great. I loved the night jump events that were being held more and more a few years ago.

 

There were a lot of big om skiers missing from nationals, were there not? I dont know why but I assume this is a reason for some.

 

Why are Jason McClintock and Nate Smith in the nautique 200 ad during the BD and not some big dawg skiers? Why does CC run 1 pro event and 5 big dawgs, yet uses pros to market their product?

 

Its off topic slightly and I love the BD, but I love the pros more.

[wtrskior]

@ob there hasn't been money in the competition for some time, We all know that. Is the reason the BD is bigger than the pro tour because there isn't a $25000 purse?

I honestly dont know. There is a large cost to putting on the BD and I have been a fan for years but not at the expense of seeing the best skiers ski vs overagers.

 

For a pro skier the money is in promoting their ski school IMO or should be. A select few in some sponsorship money. For Nate Smith the cash purse, yet 20 other guys tend to show up to pro events... :)

[ToddL]

I think the reason BD is more closely followed than the Pro Tour is that BD ski the same speed as M3-6, W1-4, OW, B2, G3, and MM. When you look at the numbers of competing skiers in total, these divisions are likely 80+% of the total. We watch these guys push 39/41 off and realize that they are skiing the same boat speeds as we are. They are the "what is possible if" of our own pipe dreams. I watch OW just like BD and realize that they all kick butt.

[wtrskior]

@OB I don't doubt that, but its only the last 2-3 years that the number of pro tournaments has decreased. As we are in a year with no worlds (no cash prize either), it is even more noticeable IMO. There aren't the international comps like we've seen in the past either, ie. Princes, France, Dubna, etc.

 

Something has to change in this sport, and its more than just rule changes, but I'll tell you that the kids out there at tournaments aren't looking up to Jeff Rogers and David Miller, they're looking up to guys like Nate Smith and Jon Travers.

 

@ToddL‌ it "may be" more closely followed because its an actual "tour", there is no pro tour anymore, so not much to follow... The Masters and Malibu open are large events, larger than most of the BD stops, no?

 

I have a lot of respect for BD skiers, and I ski at 34, which means I have even more respect for Pro skiers at 36. Here's an interesting question: Would Nate Smith beat Andy Mapple in a head to head under the lights - he's at 36, Andy at 34? Has anyone ever considered the idea of opening the BD to the real big dawgs of the sport?

 

 

[LeonL]

Other than prize money, I'm largely ignorant of the "large cost to put on the BD". As an event held in conjunction with the nationals, boats are there, judges are there, drivers are there, the site is ready and surveyed, you just need lights and some have suggested to forsake that. 40 skiers at what? $200 entry fee? That helps a bit. How much does it cost Nautique and O,Brien? As one skier said in another post the BD's feed. Nautique, not the other way around.

[ToddL]

@wtrskior - "The Masters and Malibu open are large events, larger than most of the BD stops, no?"

 

Yeah, probably so.

[Nando]

Wish and others make good points about the need for water skiing to put on a good show. Also that there will be lights at a night event. Maybe what's needed for the "unwritten rules" is something like baseball does with ground rules at each site- "Guys, there are no rerides for lights", before the event might have been all that was needed. Jeff has never been one to rock the boat and a quick mention of the protocol might have bee all that was needed.

[Ed_Johnson]

It was mentioned that the lights flashing distracted the driver and his ability to maintain the boat path. If that is true and brought to the attention of the CJ, then it would seem a reride would be in order....It is one thing for the skier to complain about "Lights" and the unwritten rule, but if it effects the Driver and his boat path, that is a completely different issue.

 

Also, who was it that protested the Judges Decision and the reason for that, causing the lengthy delay?

 

 

[Marco]

@Ed_Johnson - It was someone who does not make Mapple skis...

[Ed_Johnson]

@ Marco....THX Marco, now I have a "goode idea" who it was.

[eleeski]

If the driver screwed anything up or something affected any responsibilities of the boat or judging, an immediate reride is in order. I've offered many rerides for adverse conditions I noticed without any asking from the skier. Boat path problems are not optional as are many other factors that give an advantage or disadvantage to a skier. Almost every skier generated reride I approved had some previous acknowledgement of the problem by the officials. This sort of reride happens quickly and is obvious to the spectators.

 

Some sites with random factors (like rollers from passing boats on public water) have an unwritten rules (that only one reride will be granted for rollers no matter what). But that is more among the judges regarding approval of rerides. (Or having the boat spin back to the skier immediately after the first roller generated miss.)

 

Why the tournament officials didn't get the skiing going right away is curious. Bad calls happen, move on regardless.

 

Eric

[theinvisiblesoul]

either way....second is the first looser...doesn't matter...keep skiing and do your best...

[Wish]

Little off topic @eleeski mentioned something along these lines and I'm curious. Is there boat path filming for night skiing??

[jcamp]

@Marco and @Ed_Johnson but it was someone who does makes Mapple skis that did pack up his bags and leave on his little scooter before the event was over that lead to a long part of the delay. Nautique officials had to track him down and beg him to come back to the site before the finals could start.

 

[Wish]

.

[LeonL]

@Wish, depends on what class they run it. It's my understanding that they run BD as "L". If so there must be end course video. Takes a pretty good camera to provide a usable end course signal at night I would think.

[Marco]

@jcamp Andy left because he was accosted by a person who was not a BD skier, nor a sponsor of the event in question. Were you witness to something different?

[Marco]

Meant to say "BD Finalist"

[Horton]

The level of civility as not what I had hoped for but I was not very surprised either. I am pretty sure that everyone who could be insulted or slandered has been insulted or slandered.

 

You guys can continue to talk about the event all you but if I think it is unfriendly I am going to suspend your account for a few days.

[ToddL]

Interesting? Andy is not listed on the Big Dawg Bio page...

http://nautiquebigdawg.com/big-dawgs/bios/

 

Also, not listed are Jeremy Newby-Ricci and Jason Seels.

[eleeski]

@Horton‌ Trick skiers would have handled the situation better - we have more practice with interesting judgements. Can I get a Panda before you suspend me?

Eric

[Horton]

@eleeski not ridiculous enough for a Panda. Not offencive so not suspend. Keep trying.

[jcamp]

@Marco I guess everyone is entitled to their own definition of "accost," but whatever.

[skidawg]

Verbally accost is more accurate, I witnessed the altercation first hand. it was uncalled for and way out of line! I will not go into details, but it left a bad taste in my mouth.

[Marco]

@jcamp - here is the definition of accost. It is the word I meant to use. @skidawg further clarifies that it was a verbal, not physical confrontation.

 

ac·cost verb \ə-ˈkȯst, -ˈkäst\

: to approach and speak to (someone) often in an angry, aggressive, or unwanted way

[jcamp]

@marco What I witnessed (and from the sounds of it, you did not) was not enough to put an entire event in jeopardy. Tensions were high all around and packing up and quitting didn't seem at all warranted. As a fan of the sport I'm happy Nautique was able to cajole him back though, it would have been a terrible black eye for water skiing if the event was just called and everyone sent home.

[ntx]

I am pretty sure that Nautique had a ton of leverage with Andy returning to ski. After all, Nautique writes Andy a check as a consultant and I am sure Andy works with the Nautique new product development team. Watch any Nautique ad, Andy is all over it.