Proposal 85: What supporting evidence for a protest is valid [ Revision 1 ]
Committee: Track and FieldSubmitted on 2017-01-15
Status: Set-Aside (Reviewed from January 16, 2017 to January 20, 2017)
Background
See Body.
Proposal
OLD RULE:
1C.10 Protests
Private videos are generally forbidden as a means of verification in case of a protest. The host can decide to make an official video of some competitions (for example at the 5- meter-line of the 50 m one-foot race), which has to be announced before the competition to let the competitors know about their option to protest through this video.
PROPOSED RULE:
1C.10 Protests
The host can decide to make an official video of some competitions (for example at the 5-meter-line of the 50 m one-foot race), which has to be announced before the competition to let the competitors know about their option to protest through this video.
Regardless of whether official video is available, all possible sources of evidence are generally allowed as a means of verification in case of a protest, including (but not limited to) private photos/videos and eye-witness reports. The Chief Judge or Referee decides which evidence he will consider. The objective is that all riders will be judged as fairly as possible.
Body
In 1C.10 Protests, private video is explicitly forbidden as a means of verification in case of a protest. All other sources of evidence are implicitly allowed.
In the discussion, some people argued that every available information that can lead to finding the 'truth' should be allowed to use.How can we forbid a judge to use the information if he wants to use it in order to make a fair decision?
Others maintained that using private video can lead to biased verdicts: one rider might be DQ'd because a private video showed his late foot-lifting in wheel walk, while another got away with it because no footage was available (or shared). Another argument is that with the growing availability of smartphones and other devices that can record video, judges might be swamped in video footage.
My proposal tries to satisfy both lines of argument. It allows the use of private videos, but explicitly states that the judges decide whether they want to use it, and also that the objective is to judge all riders as fairly as possible. This implies that if using private video would decrease the fairness of judging, it should not be used. This decision rests with the Referee/Judge.