Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Tue, 24 Aug 2004 05:57:56 GMT

Once I received a ticket for a series of moving violations that should have been written for another driver. In short, the cop pulled over the wrong guy (me) and I was able to definitively prove it to the court. But rather than say that the cop made a mistake pulling over the wrong guy, they saved face by dismissing the ticket for some obscure technicality in the way that the cop wrote the ticket. I think the olympic judge simply made a mistake in DQing Piersol. (But I do find interesting the notion of the same guy from the breaststroke event paying him back.) And the "technicality" that overruled the DQ was just a face-saving way to straighten it out.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 16:38:45 GMT

From where the official is standing I imagine it would be very hard to see his hands as they finished through the final pull with a faint sculling motion. His arms and hands at that point were under his body, and the only motion that was evident from a poolside view was the foot fluttering. Even though there was a little hang time before he flipped, the video clearly shows that there was a slight hand jive left in the continuous turning motion. But then again, "judge not, lest ye be judged" might be Aaron's lesson.:)

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 16:36:29 GMT

Can someone confirm this guy lane judge Denis Cadon of France was also to guy who allowed Kitajima to cheat in the 100 ***. "Marculescu confirmed that lane judge Denis Cadon of France signaled a violation and that chief officer Felix Mikhailov of Russia and referee Woon Sui Kut of Singapore signed off on the blank report. “Normally, they would write what violation was made,” Marculescu said. Peirsol wins gold after DQ overturned Marculescu said Woon, who was in charge on the pool deck, speaks fluent English; the working languages of FINA are English and French. Woon could be banned for not following procedure. “Unfortunately, he signed the report with nothing written on it. It’s really strange,” Marculescu said. “Probably, the FINA bureau will look at him in the coming days.” What sort of skullduggery is going on here? Putting in a blank sheet, come on!!!!!!! I personally have never been DQd for a stroke violation, but I have seen that dreaded DQ sheet come out many times, there is always an explanation.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 16:08:24 GMT

Now here's a rare bit. According to MSNBC the reason FINA overturned Piersol's DQ was not so much the explanation was not written in English. It was because the judge failed to provide any written explanation at all: www.msnbc.msn.com/.../ I imagine some folks will recall that I have stood up for an unpopular stroke judge's decision recently, but this is beyond the pale. It's the freaking Olympics. You've just DQ'ed the guy who won the finals by a ton; he's set a new Olympic record, and you can't be bothered to actually write down (or see that someone who can communicate in the official language writes down) what you saw?! You've got to be kidding me! Who did you say the stroke judge was? Kafka? But, the bottom line on this one is that, once again, the process worked. The bogus decision was overturned, and the right guy got the win. Matt

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 11:40:10 GMT

This is the fina's rule: SW 6.4 During the turn the shoulders may be turned over the vertical to the *** after which a continuous single arm pull or a continuous simultaneous double arm pull may be used to initiate the turn. Once the body has left the position on the back, any kick or arm pull must be part of the continuous turning action. The swimmer must have returned to the position on the back upon leaving the wall. When executing the turn there must be a touch of the wall with some part of the swimmer’s body. I looked at the competition 4 times. Peirsol had to be squalified.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 09:16:11 GMT

Originally posted by susanehr I replayed it myself several times. His arm/hand was still moving. I am a bit confused about the the term "continuous kick." What, are you supposed to take a huge, spread your legs two feet apart, kick going into the turn to make the "continuous kick"? Maybe this silly rule should be changed or more clarification. P.S. I'm not an official either, I've just been backstroking for 25 years and trying to keep up with all the crazy rules the stroke/start/turns have had over the years. There is nothing in the rules about a "continuous kick". What the rules say is that: "During the turn the shoulders may be turned over the vertical to the *** after which a continuous single arm pull or a continuous simultaneous double arm pull may be used to initiate the turn. Once the body has left the position on the back, any kick or arm pull must be part of the continuous turning action. The swimmer must have returned to the position on the back upon leaving the wall. When executing the turn there must be a touch of the wall with some part of the swimmer’s body." So the only requirements concerning kicking is that any kick "must be part of the continuous turning action." In practice, this has been interpreted to mean that any kick that occurs during the continuous turning action is okay. So as long as the arm pull begins immediately after the swimmer has rolled past the vertical toward the *** and as long as it proceeds continuously into the turn, any kicks will be considered "part of the continuous turning action."

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 05:05:30 GMT

Originally posted by valhallan From where the official is standing I imagine it would be very hard to see his hands as they finished through the final pull with a faint sculling motion. His arms and hands at that point were under his body, and the only motion that was evident from a poolside view was the foot fluttering. Even though there was a little hang time before he flipped, the video clearly shows that there was a slight hand jive left in the continuous turning motion. But then again, "judge not, lest ye be judged" might be Aaron's lesson.:) So going on just what the official most likely could have seen, which would just be the kick, then Peirsol shouldn't be DQed. If the judge can't see the hand/arm, then the benefit of the doubt has to go to the swimmer. In order to disqualify you have to see the hand stopped and the kick continuing. Its not enough to say "I saw a kick, but I have no idea what the hand was doing"

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

knelson — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 04:11:15 GMT

Does this judge switch to figure skating in the winter? :) That last turn wasn't great by Peirsol, but it sure didn't look like a DQ, either.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:43:16 GMT

NBC coverage was very good, they had the turn above and below water. I am not an expert on backstroke turns but my knowledge of the rules it looked legal. Shown many times in slow motion. As Bob states, it was easy to see his hand was still moving before and after the turn was being made. His hands made sculling motions throughout the turn.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:10:32 GMT

As one of my first posts.....I would like to input that due to Peirson's hottness factor....he should still get the gold medal. That said...I missed his swims and can't contribute to anything technical :(

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 15:12:10 GMT

Just for the record while the British team may be officially contesting the DQ reversal; the British swimmer, Goddard, who was briefly awarded the bronze, during the disqualification, is happy with the result. He feels that he came 4th, did not swim good enough for 3rd and does not want to see Piersol DQ'd. Funny, I remember 1-2 years ago Matt Welsh causing controversey and being boo-ed at swim meets because he continued to kick through the turn, after his last arm entry. Most observers felt at the time that this was cheating, although all swum into the turn in that way in this 200m race. In swimming, the goal posts do move from time to time, that is mostly where the stroke changes come from.:)

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:07:36 GMT

THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING! Odd....?

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:57:21 GMT

I think Peirsol was close and he may have had additional thrust after turning onto his stomach but you would have to DQ the other 63 people who swam if you were going to call Peirsol on his turn. The judge DQ’ed Peirsol because of things Peirsol said about Japan’s breaststroker and his dolphin kick. I find it more then coincidental that the same judge was working both lanes in question, on both nights in question. The moron judge should be thrown off the pool deck. This is akin to the officials in the ice skating fiasco in the winter Olympics. And, for what it is worth...ever single swimmer I have talked to see this as I see it above.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

swimr4life — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:10:53 GMT

I recorded the event tonight and have watched the turn very closely. His hand was still moving when he was gliding into the turn. It was a legal turn in my opinion! BUT... I'm not a FINA judge.;)

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:38:39 GMT

Austrian and British Appeal Aaron Peirsol's Reinstatement -- August 19, 2004 By Stephen J. Thomas ATHENS, August 19. FOLLOWING the reinstatement of the gold medal in the 200 backstroke to American Aaron Peirsol, FINA received a written protest from the Amateur Swimming Federation of Great Britain (ASFGB) and the Austrian Swimming Federation (VOS) regarding the reinstatement of Peirsol. The Jury of Appeal heard the Referee and the FINA Technical Swimming Commission, after which the Jury of Appeal unanimously decided to reject the protest of ASFGB and VOS as the report of the referee did not show any violation of the FINA Swimming Rules by Peirsol. Late tonight it appears that the British Olympic Committee were considering an apeal to CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport) and would announce their decision tomorrow morning. The British swimmer James Goddard finished fourth in the 200 backstroke 2.81 seconds behind Peirsol. A story will be posted as soon as a decision is confirmed.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:32:31 GMT

i don't get the "non-continuos" part of the rule-if you are gliding into a turn aren't you going slower than if you were swimming, thereby only hurting yourself and not gaining any advantage over the field like Kitajima did. Also I would like to know what country the judge who dq'd him was from.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

aquageek — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:02:29 GMT

Tom - are you saying this judge also worked the 100 *** finals in the same lane as Katijima? If that's the case, then that's pretty much the end of this story.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

aquageek — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:19:28 GMT

We still don't know the reason for the DQ initially or the subsequent reversal, other than the judge can't write English or keep his infraction story straight.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

susanehr — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:03:31 GMT

I replayed it myself several times. His arm/hand was still moving. I am a bit confused about the the term "continuous kick." What, are you supposed to take a huge, spread your legs two feet apart, kick going into the turn to make the "continuous kick"? Maybe this silly rule should be changed or more clarification. P.S. I'm not an official either, I've just been backstroking for 25 years and trying to keep up with all the crazy rules the stroke/start/turns have had over the years.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

aquageek — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:48:00 GMT

I watched this turn in regular, slow and frame by frame motion and have yet to see any infraction. It was pretty obvious what Kitajima did but I can't see anything wrong with Peirsol's turn. If Fritz Lehman is lurking maybe he can weigh in.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Thu, 19 Aug 2004 06:43:14 GMT

[I saw the turn and it looked a bit hesitant, I was suprised because he raised his head to look at the wall before turning and he did seem to glide too long. I would have Dq'd for that turn if i was the judge. On what basis? Raising your head to look at the wall is not illegal but it is slow. Also gliding is o.k. AS LONG AS YOU HAVE SOME OTHER PART OF YOUR BODY MOVING INTO A TURNING POSITION FOR EXAMPLE THE HANDS. Technically speaking as long as your hands are engaged in the turning movement, including a long slow walk down to your hips, you can otherwise glide until the paint drys. You say the tape, and I'm envious, but did his hands stop at his hips while he was gliding? If so then I'd call it too. Again, the hesitation and then reversal is unusual and a more forthcoming explanation would make us all feel better about the process since I support the idea that officials must be supported 100% if they can clearly state the infraction.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Thu, 19 Aug 2004 06:29:45 GMT

Question - is the official language of Fina French or English ? Why have a judge that cannot speak the official language ? The explanation for the reversal stinks ! I saw the turn and it looked a bit hesitant, I was suprised because he raised his head to look at the wall before turning and he did seem to glide too long. I would have Dq'd for that turn if i was the judge. If this is the treatment that officials get then why should they take the risk of calling a DQ on a swimmer.:mad: BTW: Piersol is plainly the best backstroker in the world but he did cross the line on that turn.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Thu, 19 Aug 2004 06:07:45 GMT

Actuallly the explanation from Eurosport (www.eurosport.com) is: "The disqualification of Peirsol seems to have been overturned, according to an official statement, because the explanation of the judge was deemed "insufficient and was not in the working language of FINA." For d.q. to stand the stroke official must clearly state what he say and sight the exact details of the infraction....e.g. swimmer in lane 3 at the third turn, turned over onto his stomach, did a two arm pull, arms stopped at the hips with no movement, did not initiate the turning action and flutter kicked for several meters before iniatiting the turn"....if any of these details are wrong or the description is too vague the benefit of doubt always goes to the swimmer. Still....why the D.Q. in the beginning...would think the deck referee would have done this inquiry and killed it before it was flashed on the board....interesting.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Thu, 19 Aug 2004 05:57:05 GMT

A few of us actually noted his turns were approaching questionable in the semifinals last night. Did anyone else notice that prior to this controversy? Yes, I was thinking about his turns but didn't see an obvious infraction. Then again, turns are my "hobby" so to speak. Can't wait to see the tape tonight and hear the explanation for the timing. I assume the stroke official called it right away so why the delay and then reversal. If this keeps up swimming will start to become more like ice skating.

RE: Spoiler--Men's 200 backstroke

Former Member — Thu, 19 Aug 2004 05:32:47 GMT

Originally posted by Mary This is the quote from Eurosport: It would seem that Peirsol spent too long on his front and kicked as he went into the wall...that's a disqualification. But, they are also saying he was re-instated as gold medalist. Who knows? No it would not be the 15 meter rule violation. That is another judges call. This call would be the "non-continuos" turn rule, that is, he "kicked" into the wall. This judgement can be protested and overruled by the meet referee. What is unusual is that typically such stroke/turn officials make it right away. At that point, one of the deck referees will confer to ensure that the "story" is consistent. Based on the reports there seem to be some kind of delay. In any case, it will be ruled on by the meet referee if there is a protest. I find it nearly impossible to believe this would be "payback" for comments that he has made re Kitajima.