Finals - New Attempt After Hindrance or Interference?
This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.Comments about this discussion:
Started
I got the question about repeating a final race, for example because a single rider was obstructed.
Basically, I would say the IUF rules are clear here, in terms of final races being subject to the same rules as age group races. However, I see a certain difference in the final races, because it is primarily about the direct comparison between the eight best riders. So repeating the race for a single rider is a bit difficult and contrary to the actual purpose of a final race. On the other hand, it would also be unfair to generally not repeat a final race. All in all, I think it's an extremely difficult question for the referee whether to repeat a final race or not - for me, this raises the question of whether our rules take sufficient account of this circumstance, or whether we need to make adjustments here.
What do you think?
Comment
Very difficult. I see the final race as a one-off. The riders will give their very best. Suppose that the winner and their best competitor were not involved in any obstruction, then the winner is world champion. If the whole final race is done again because of an obstruction between others, another rider might become world champion. What a nightmare!
On the other hand, if some rider was obstructed to such a degree that he would be allowed to race again in a non-final race, it would be quite unfair to deny him this chance. Maybe he thinks his possible championship was stolen.
Another consideration: if obstruction occurs in a normal (non-final) race, riders can choose not to ride again, in which case their earlier result remains valid. I think that this should not be allowed for a final race, because it is supposed to be a direct comparison. I feel we can't tolerate that someone who wins the re-run final race, is not the champion because someone else had a faster time in the first final. Of course riders could still decide not to ride in the "second final", but then they can't become champion. Their result could still be valid for a (world) record, though.
With this condition I now tend to think that running the whole race again is the best way to go. But I'm curious to hear what others think.
Comment
I can very well understand your thoughts and it fits very well with what I was thinking.
I would also tend to repeat final races only in really extreme cases and then only as a whole race and not for individual riders - which then inevitably goes hand in hand with the fact that as a referee you have to weigh up very well how big the advantages and disadvantages are for individual riders and whether the repetition is really justified.
> Their result could still be valid for a (world) record, though.
I would say that this should also be the case for repetitions of non-final races. The performance is a valid performance, regardless of whether a rider decides to repeat the run or not. After all, world records could also be set in an additional attempt outside the official competition (or did we decide in the World Record Committee to delete this option?).
Comment
I agree with all above. To repeat a Finals race is a big decision, and should only be necessary if what occurred in the previous attempt clearly changed the outcome for riders that experienced interference (or other possible problems such as wind blown objects, surprisingly loud noises or other things that are not expected).
Comment
I think then we also agree that this circumstance should be considered in the rules. Later on, I will try to formulate a proposal that will do that.
Comment
I have tried to include the considerations regarding repeating a final in the rules, but to be honest, I am not completely satisfied. The additions to the existing rule are in italics.
What do you think about the proposal?
Also note, that I moved the first sentence of paragraph 2 into a Note of paragraph 1, because I think this sentence is more like an additional explanation than a real rule.
2B.X New Attempt After Obstruction
1. If a rider is obstructed due to the actions of another rider, or outside interference during a run, they may request to make a new attempt. The Referee decides if the request is granted. A new attempt must not be granted to a rider who is disquali ed based on something that happened before they were hindered.
Note: No complete de nition of obstruction can be given, but it does include cases where a rider swerves, hesitates and/or decelerates because this is arguably necessary in order to avoid a crash or potential crash.
2. If the request is granted, the rider will be given a new attempt in technical disciplines. In the case of racing diciplines, the Referee has the two options acording to 2.1 and 2.2 for an age group race, in case of an final race, the Referee has the option 2.3.
2.1: Re-run the whole heat in question.
In general, this option is preferred only if the heat includes the fastest riders within an age group. For the other riders in the heat, riding again is optional. If they decide to ride again, they agree to discard their previous result. If they don't ride again, their previous result stands. If none of the other riders want to ride again, the Referee reverts to option 2.2.
2.2: Do any of (a), (b) or (c), depending on the conditions.
In general, this option is preferred if the heat in question did not include the fastest riders within an age group:
(a) If possible, the rider is added to an upcoming heat in his own age group; or
(b) If possible, the rider is added to an upcoming heat in another age group; or
(c) If none of the above is possible, the rider does his new attempt in a dedicated heat.
In option 2.2 (c), the rider decides whether or not to have company. They can pick the riders, but cannot hold up the proceedings to wait for them if other riders are available. The Referee has the final say as to which extra riders are allowed to participate in such a heat. It must be stated clearly to any accompanying riders that their result is not offi cial.
2.3 Re-run the whole final.
In the case of a final race the entire final must be re-run. This means that the initial run will be fully cancelled and only the new run will count for all riders of the final. Since a re-run of the entire final is a serious decision, the referee may only grant a re-run if there is a cause so serious to the entire final that a re-run of the race is justified.
3. In all cases, if the obstructed rider is allowed to do a new attempt and decides to do so, the fi rst run is canceled and only the new run counts regardless of the result. In the case where a new attempt was incorrectly granted, for example when the rider was disquali ed based on something that happened before the obstruction in question occurred, the result of the new attempt for that rider does not count and the result from the fi rst run stands.
4. In non-lane-bound races, if a rider is forced to dismount due to a fall by the rider immediately in front, it is considered part of the race not a reason to grant a new attempt and all riders involved may remount and continue. The Referee can override this rule if intentional obstruction is observed.
Comment
Any comments or suggestions for improving the proposal?
Comment
Looks good. Only possible sticky point is #4, dismounting due to a rider in front. Sometimes this is the cause for a re-run, and it may have been the reason why the person is granted a re-run. But I'm not sure how to make a clear definition of when this is worthy of a re-run or not. Usually in the past, I've let a rider repeat the race when someone dismounted in front of them and they were trapped; without a path to avoid the other rider without obstructing others. If this occurs in a re-run where the rider in question has asked for company (2.2c), it should not be re-run, and this should be explained as part of 2.2c (and to those riders before running such a repeated heat).
Based on that, I think such a statement should be added to 2.2©, and for #4, that if the other riders are also racing, circumstances could lead to another re-run. I don't remember any such situation coming up in my Referee experience, but it definitely could happen.
For the rest, I'm good with the current version of this proposal.
Comment
I honestly don't really get what point you want to add/adjust and how exactly.
Currently, paragraph 4 is very clear in respect that in a non-lane-bound races, a rerun due to a dismount of a rider in front is only possible if the referee classifies it as an intentional obstruction. In all other cases, there is no rerun.
Overall, it can of course always happen that a rider is obstructed again in a rerun - but I see no reason why we would have to deviate from the normal rules in this case?
Comment
Any comments on whether we should add something to the rules for the case someone gets obstructed in a rerun?
Comment
Why would an obstruction in a rerun be treated differently than in a regular run? And if they would be treated the same, would we need anything in the rule at all, or would the usual treatment of obstruction cases automatically apply to a rerun as well?
Comment
> Why would an obstruction in a rerun be treated differently than in a regular run? And if they would be treated the same, would we need anything in the rule at all, or would the usual treatment of obstruction cases automatically apply to a rerun as well?
That is exactly what I mean.
From my point of view, there is nothing that speaks against treating a obstruction in a rerun in the same way as an obstruction in a regular run. And I think the rules already cover this and therefore no further addition is necessary.
However, I got the impression from John's comment that he disagrees and he would like to do some adjustment on the rule.
Comment
John's comment about this was unclear to me. John, please clarify.
Comment
If we add anything about obstructions in reruns, it should just say something to the effect of "the same rules apply as in the original race/heat".
Comment
> John's comment about this was unclear to me. John, please clarify.
I think I will clarify by saying "ignore that post". We are essentially agreeing that a rerun of a heat follows the same rules regardless.
Comment
Okay, then I think we can put that proposal to a vote as well once the review time is over.
Comment
Just to clarify it explicitly once: Do you guys think we need to add something to say that the same rules apply to a rerun as to a regular run? For me that would have been self-evident, since there is nothing contradictory in the rules.
Comment
>Do you guys think we need to add something to say that the same rules apply to a rerun as to a regular run?
No, I don't think so. The regular rules about unicycle class, false starts etc do also apply in a rerun. We don't have to make all of that explicit.
Comment
I'm a little concerned some judges may think the same thing can't happen in a rerun, but "common sense" should tell them that the same rules apply. :-)
Comment
Oaky, perfect - then we agree on not adding something in this regard to the rules and I will put the proposal to a vote as far as the review time is over.