Observation

[nhuskys]

4 hours ago, b40rt said:

Can anyone name another sport where competitors and officials make-up the rules as they go along, and still have an overall winner at the conclusion ?

MotoGP!

[trapezeartist]

15 hours ago, Intotrials said:

Being a rider myself I tend to give most riders the benefit of the doubt, I'm quite lenient if the section is a tough one (maybe I'm wrong to do that).    

With my very short time back in the sport I'm not really qualified to say, but I'll stick my neck out and say you are wrong. For me, "benefit of the doubt" is something to be applied when the observer has a genuine doubt. (Did he dab, or just wave his leg in the air? Did he stop or just about keep rolling?)

Being lenient implies that you are not following the marking system laid down by the ACU. If they wanted to, the ACU could define  a fail as stopping for 1 second or more, but they don't. No doubt my scores would become even more stratospheric than they already are, but at least you would know what to expect in every section.

[Intotrials]

8 hours ago, trapezeartist said:

With my very short time back in the sport I'm not really qualified to say, but I'll stick my neck out and say you are wrong. For me, "benefit of the doubt" is something to be applied when the observer has a genuine doubt. (Did he dab, or just wave his leg in the air? Did he stop or just about keep rolling?)

Being lenient implies that you are not following the marking system laid down by the ACU. If they wanted to, the ACU could define  a fail as stopping for 1 second or more, but they don't. No doubt my scores would become even more stratospheric than they already are, but at least you would know what to expect in every section.

When I said benefit of the doubt, that's what I meant. With modern trials it can be difficult to define what a "stop" is exactly. Years back it was quite simple you just watched for the wheels to stop turning. These days a bike can be still on the move with both wheels stopped. What I try and look for is a lack of forward motion, but even then this can be erroneous. 

You are quite correct, if its no stop then to be strict to the rules, any pause of forward movement regardless how brief is a fail.  Try observing like this at a championship event, you'd be lynched. 

[wizardofos]

Intotrials is right. Some parts of the bike can still be moving forward whilst the wheels are momentarily stationary. Try holding the front brake on in the garage, press down on the bars, and the body of the bike moves forwards. Rotation of the front wheel would not work if that became the criteria - it could easily stop turning when clear of the ground, attacking a step, for example.

Every time the referee blows the whistle at a football match there are contrary opinions as to whether the decision was good. Observers are instructed to be consistent at the pre-SSDT briefing. However, they, like football referees will all see things with a slightly different pair of eyes, so consistency between observers (referees etc) is more difficult to achieve.

Regarding an earlier point about not revealing your scores when asked - this is impossible because the rider (or a friend) simply looks over your shoulder when you are writing the next score down.

Regarding another earlier point, rearranging sections is not on. It's the same people all the time, so at least you know when to be on high alert!