One For Clerks Of Courses

[bikespace]

Well I'll be saying you should have listened to me yesterday, and adjusted his marks

But....at this point you have

[laser1]

I think you made the correct decision. The unhappy riders should send there letters to the biased observer who "purposely" mucked things up in the 1st place.

[dan williams]

Right, I haave now scrubbed the section and amended the results. This now makes rider 'B' the winner and also the 2008 Champion. Rider 'A' is reduced to 2nd place but is now 4th in the championship and all other riders drop down 1 position.

Next day (still within the time limit) I receive 33 letter with protests. Was it thier fault that there was a problem between rider 'B' and the observer??. Why should rider 'A' be dropped to 2nd and the other 32 riders drop down 1 position. What do I do now???

Evaluate each protest on its individual merits but if the basis for those protests is throwing out the section then the decision has already been made that the observer and hence the section is invalid. The point about making your decisision and sticking to it is important. Eliminating the section might offend some people but it will get the point across that if someone plays with the rules for a personal vendetta the whole sport suffers. If incidences like this aren't dealt with immediately with a defensable and solid logic then life is just going to get more difficult for the next trialsmaster.

As for the why should A be dropped to second the answer is simple. Rider B beat him. That's why we score isn't it? To have a fair and equitable system to compete with. Maybe B is unpopular but if he's not treated equally there's no point in having rules.

[scorpa3]

Right, I haave now scrubbed the section and amended the results. This now makes rider 'B' the winner and also the 2008 Champion. Rider 'A' is reduced to 2nd place but is now 4th in the championship and all other riders drop down 1 position.

Next day (still within the time limit) I receive 33 letter with protests. Was it thier fault that there was a problem between rider 'B' and the observer??. Why should rider 'A' be dropped to 2nd and the other 32 riders drop down 1 position. What do I do now???

Personally I feel that you've done the correct thing. The observer has put you in an awful position, perhaps it is worth writing to every rider and explaining the grounds for this difficult decision which you've been forced to make.

Remember as Clerk of the Course you can't alter the observers score but you are perfectly entitled to scrub a section, especially as you have reasonable grounds to do so.

You're the C of C & made your ruling, stick by it.

I agree, anyone who still feels that this is unfair can escalate their protest if they wish.

This whole business is an awful mess and I hope the observer in question reads this thread and is pleased with themselves for causing so many problems for you and the other riders by being so immature and petty.

[phb]

personally i think that the Observer in question should be named and shamed for there actions, and hopefully they wont bother to HELP out again, or should i say HINDER !!!! at any trials again, No CoC should ever be put in this position by a offical at any level of trials, and i for one certainly woudn't want this observer helping out at any trials when im the CoC at any of our trials.

Edited August 29, 2008 by PHB

[steveo]

I feel you have done the right thing with your decision to invalidate the section.

With the frank admission from the appointed observer that he purposly omitted scoring rider B because of a prior indiscresion / incident. This observer would be well aware of the out come of his actions when it has been pointed out rider B still came second with a 20 point handicap, so he must have been aware it was a two horse final decider.

Keeping this in mind it is most probably fortunate that the section he was marking had a 97% clean riders participation. If he was marking a section where most riders where losing points his actions to enhance rider A scores could have gone unnoticed by anyone except rider A.

This would have achieved a victory for him (the marker) and made rider B completely unaware of being cheated out of his rightful win.

[dan williams]

I would be leery of the public shame route. That could backfire and scare off other checkers. Just eliminate the section and the word will get around who the observer was. Let's face it we're like a small town and everybody knows the neighbor's business anyway.

[bdmc]

Update:

Naming and shaming is not going to sort out the results.

Just recieved a phone call from rider 'A'. He has evidence (verble )from specatators that rider 'B' dropped a 1 on the 1st lap and a 2 on the 2nd lap.

Rider 'B' will appeal against the CoC for scrubbing the results of the said section. This now involves the stewards of the trial.

If you were the steward of the trial what would you do.

[manx2day]

Not being a clerk of the course, i found this thread quite interesting. In my opinion, reading the evidence, i would scrub the section.

You cannot trust what the rider says (no offence to anyone) but if the observer has a problem, don't bring it up every time he observes, don't observe the same trial as the man is riding or kiss and make up!!!

So with no real truthful outcome to it...scrub the section. It keeps people happy and gives a truer result to the trial.

[john collins]

I was determined not to get involved in this - but it is quite interesting - so I have succumbed.

As Dan Williams and a few others have said - and BDMC certainly knows - bad situation with no real winners - but that's life.

Only solution in my opinion is to scrub section.

Obviously not good from other riders who have done nowt wrong - but C/Course I do not think has much choice.

The C/Course has ultimate responsibility - and in this case the Observer has ( for whatever reason) been unable to complete the job the C/Course assumed he would do.

Of course other riders have lost a section - not fair to someone who had a brilliant ride - and cleaned it both times - but - as the rider concerned was not marked - and this was confirmed by Observer - and also confirmed that he did not miss it etc through his own fault - what he actually scored may be open to debate/argument. The fact that he was not punched - after riding it - is not open to, debate - and so the section - for him is null and void.

If we take an easier example - ( not so controversial) If half way through first lap an Observer feels faint - or is taken ill - or is chased off by a bull - or captured by aliens - those arriving after this - finding no-one there - will after a while just miss it and go to next one? Not fair to penalise them - so section must be scrubbed. Not fair to those who rode before - and specially those who cleaned it (one might have been having ride of his life!) - But the fact is the section cannot be

[atomant]

The irony of this is the observer who had a dislike for Rider 'B', has in fact helped him to become the 2008 Champion. If rider 'B' had dropped the 3 over two laps (as stated above) and he had recorded it, Rider 'A' would have won.

Talk about rubbing salt into the wounds for the disgruntled observer.

[ishy]

Rider A cannot say what B got or did not get, nor can he protest B's score, but "O" didn't like B, and A thought he had beat B, only to find out B, only beat A, because of O, was this on the A line or the B line

Or, did B, and O, pull a fast one after B had lost some dabs at O's section, knowing A, would beat him, if the section was scrubbed, then B, would have less points, this would P, A, off, and O along with B, could of got away with a sharp F, up.

BDMC, C O C, & O,A, B, ACU, + TC, are trying to decipher the code.

Edited August 29, 2008 by ishy

[perce]

Right, I haave now scrubbed the section and amended the results. This now makes rider 'B' the winner and also the 2008 Champion. Rider 'A' is reduced to 2nd place but is now 4th in the championship and all other riders drop down 1 position.

Next day (still within the time limit) I receive 33 letter with protests. Was it thier fault that there was a problem between rider 'B' and the observer??. Why should rider 'A' be dropped to 2nd and the other 32 riders drop down 1 position. What do I do now???

I'm actually stunned by this, I don't know 33 trials riders that can read, never mind write.

[1st gear steve]

i was aware of a similar issue a few years ago with a certain rider that a regular observer refused to mark. Luckily he was never at the right end of the results & was given an average, however your dilema is different.

As perc says as COC you can make THE decision, but then must stick by it, iam am sure all your club colleagues will support you whatever the decision is, for me as the data for this particular section is not accuarate i would be inclined to scrub the section. For the observer - even though they are a dying breed, they would have to be prohibited from officiating at any event , who knows who they may take a dislike to next week?

[dan williams]

Update:

Naming and shaming is not going to sort out the results.

Just recieved a phone call from rider 'A'. He has evidence (verble )from specatators that rider 'B' dropped a 1 on the 1st lap and a 2 on the 2nd lap.

Rider 'B' will appeal against the CoC for scrubbing the results of the said section. This now involves the stewards of the trial.

If you were the steward of the trial what would you do.

The NETA rules are clearly stated that a rider cannot protest another rider's score. Also an observer can only score on direct observation. Yes somebody is gonna get away with a point or two but that's part of the game. I don't know if there are analogues in the ACU rules but there needs to be. As far as calls from rider A, why in grid's name are you accepting them? He has NO say in the matter and letting him think he does is asking for trouble. Sometimes you have to be the daddy. The kids aren't going to like it but it's for their own good.

Any decision other then eliminating the section is going to be worse in the long run. You're only starting to see the problems that are coming down the pike if you waffle on this.