ngx [.info]

Just another WordPress site

Regeländerungen im Short Track (englisch)

Author: Redaktion Tuesday, October 22nd, 2002 No Commented Under: Eisschnelllauf, Short Track

I N T E R N A T I O N A L S K A T I N G U N I O N

Communication no. 1184

“The 49th Congress of the ISU held in Kyoto, Japan in June, 2002 enacted certain changes in Rule 123 of the General Regulations. Rule 123 generally deals with “Protests” of various kinds which may be lodged with the Referee. Of particular importance was the addition to paragraph 8. of Rule 123 shown as underlined in the text below:

“8. The Referee decides upon all protests. There is no appeal from his decisions except according to Rule 124. In Short Track Speed Skating and Speed Skating, in deciding a protest, the Referee is authorized to review relevant video replay of the incident under consideration, if readily available. The Congress also authorized an amendment to Special Regulation Rule 291, a new paragraph i), which confirms the authority of the Referee to view video replay on his/her own initiative (even without a protest) when “in doubt concerning a possible infraction.

The Council interprets these Amendments to Rules 123 and 291 as authorizing review of video or digital replay only in real-time speed (as seen by the human eye) and not in slow-motion. Only instant replay of an ISU designated source or of the authorized TV broadcaster may be reviewed. It is clear that General Regulation 123 permits protests of all kinds to be lodged with the Referee, and that the Kyoto Congress’ amendment to Rule 123 foresees “consideration” of such protests by the Referee when the protest involves an “incident” of the type that might be viewed in a video replay. Typically such incidents take place during a race and may involve infringements of the racing rules. The Congress, however, did not modify Short Track Speed Skating Special Regulation Rule 292, paragraph 5 d) which states:

d) Protests against any decisions concerning infringements of the racing rules will not be accepted.

Article 17. paragraph 1. I) of the ISU Constitution requires the Council to give priority of importance to the General Regulations over the Special Regulations. In discharging its interpretation responsibility respecting a possible conflict between a General and a Special Regulation, the Council must give effect to the intention of the Congress, and reconcile and give meaning, insofar as possible, to both Regulations.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne (CAS) has defined “field of play” decisions as those made on the playing field by judges, referees, and other officials (e.g. umpires), who are responsible for applying the rules or laws governing the particular sport competition. With respect to the ISU sports, the competition ice is the “field of play”. The CAS has consistently refused to review “field of play” decisions.

In the present case, the Council recognizes that the purpose of Short Track Speed Skating Special Regulation 292, paragraph 5 d), is to solidly proclaim that the “field of play judgment” of the Referee (assisted by the Assistant Referees) with respect to infringement, or the lack of infringement, of a racing rule is not open to question or argument; that such “field of play” decisions by the Referee are final and notsubject to appeal. The only possible exception to this principle would be clear evidence of misconduct or corruption on the part of the relevant official(s) amounting to a breach of duty (as regulated by other ISU 2 Rules). The CAS has declared proof of a claim of breach of duty to be a high hurdle to be cleared by any applicant seeking to change a field of play decision.

The sport policy reasons for: (1) the chief “field-of-play” official to have final authority, and (2) the need for immediate finality to avoid endless polemics, seem obvious.

However, the Council is aware that Referees in Short Track Speed Skating in the past have refused to receive and consider written protests concerning infringements of the racing rules. The Referees have understandably based such past refusals on Special Regulation 292, paragraph 5 d) as preventing them from “accepting ” such protests. This point was involved in protests lodged with the Short Track Referee at the 2002 OWG in Salt Lake City.

The Congress action in amending Rule 123, paragraph 8 now clearly requires the Referee to consider and decide all protests tendered by authorized parties. All ISU Short Track Speed Skating Referees are expected to abide by this requirement.

All Members are hereby requested to instruct their Short Track Speed Skating team personnel who may be authorized to file a protest, that protests filed respecting infringements of the racing rules will be considered, but will be denied if the Referee in a final decision confirms the “field of play judgment” involved. Further, such final decision by the Referee is not subject to appeal to the ISU Council under Rule 124 for the reasons hereafter stated.

The Council interprets the language of Rule 124 allowing appeals to the Council respecting ââ?¬Ë?determination of the result” as referring only to the calculation of points and the classification of competitors in Short Track Speed Skating competit ions under the provisions of Rule 282 and excluding any and all appeals which directly concern, or indirectly implicate, a final judgment decision of the Referee respecting a protest concerning an infringement, or claimed infringement, of the racing rules.

The Council considers that any other interpretation of Rule 124 would violate, to the detriment of the sport, the “field of play judgment” principle which underlies (unchanged) Special Regulation 292, paragraph 5 d). The ISU Council, accordingly, will not review a final “field of play” decision of a Short Track Speed Skating Referee respecting an infringement, or claimed infringement, of the racing rules.

Milano, Ottavio Cinquanta, President
October 4, 2002
Lausanne, Fredi Schmid, General Secretary

Quelle: https://www.isu.org/news/1184.pdf

Comments are closed.