IJOC Case 1.
Jump-off (when chrono back-up system fails)
- CSI2* event. You are judging a ranking class (30.000 Euro prize money, chart of 25% and additional prices are 75 euro), running at article 238.2.2
- 9 combinations are qualified for the jump-off out of the 60 combinations that started.
- The first 8 combinations in the jump-off (time allowed = 50 seconds) have the following results :
|
Name |
Penalty | Time | Name | Penalty | Time |
|
A |
0 |
43.67 |
E | 8 | 42.79 |
|
B |
0 |
46.84 |
F | 5 | 50.02 |
| C |
0 |
41.22 |
G |
10 |
51.32 |
| D | 4 | 41.22 | H | EL |
- When rider 9 (name = I) crosses the finish, the chrono is not stopping. None of the judges has a manual time (back-up process did not work). Nobody has any idea of the time that the last combination had. The only certainty is that he had one pole down (and thus 4 faults).
- Make the final ranking of this ranking class and distribute the prize money.
IJOC Case 2.
Jump-off in the masters without a time for an athlete
- You are judging a class “Masters” (art 261.4) and the 10 combinations participating have following results :
|
Name |
Initial Round |
Jump-off 1 |
Jump-off 2 |
Jump-off 3 |
|
A |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Fault at fence 4 and stopped in the round |
|
B |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Fault at fence 3 and stopped in the round |
|
C |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Retired after jumping fence 1 |
|
D |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Did not start in Jump-off 3 (horse lame in warm-up) |
|
E |
0 |
0 |
Fault/stopped |
|
|
F |
0 |
Fault/stopped |
||
| G |
0 |
Fault/stopped |
||
|
H |
4 |
|||
|
I |
8 |
|||
|
J |
4 |
- Do we have a fourth jump-off ?
- If yes, who is participating in that jump-off ?
IJOC Case 3.
Table A 238.2.1.
The athlete, number 35 in the start list, comes in the arena. Trots and canters around the fences while waiting for the previous rider to finish his round. Now it’s his turn. The bell is rung, and the countdown begins. However, the rider suddenly stops, raises his hand, and the countdown is stopped.
The athlete then talks to an arena staff, and asks her to give him back a shoe lost by his horse.
Consequently, he leaves the arena. Few seconds later, the chief steward asks the GJ through the radio to give a later start number for this rider as he lost a shoe during his waiting period inside the main arena.
What is the decision of the GJ in this case, and would the decision be any different had it been a Nations Cup or a championship ?
IJOC Case 4.
CSI2* 2 phase normal. Obstacles in first phase (1-8), second phase (9-13)
Before the start of the competition, the course designer sees a time-keeping staff walking with the optic start-finish line machines in his hand. The last fence of the first phase (no 8) and the last fence of the second phase (no 13) are next to each other, and there is one finish line there…the judges and riders are walking the course.
The CD thinks that he still has time for lunch and does not notice that the class started already. He sees (from where he is seated) 3 riders and 2 already have time-fault in phase 1. He then runs to the jury box and asks if the time is too short, and requests from the GJ to change the time.
The jury says it’s too late as the 5th horse is starting, and adds that the time is fine. Just that the first groups of riders were a bit slow. The CD says it still feels short, but it’s too late so the class resumes. When there are 5 riders left for the class to finish, (total of 25 starters), the CD goes again to the jury box for checking the results, and notices that 6 riders had time faults in the first phase.
While watching the last riders, the CD suddenly realises that finish line (for the first phase) is standing after obstacle number 9, instead of after 8. Riders jump until fence number 9 in the first phase and no one stops after no 8. So it’s not so strange that the time is short.
The course plan in front of the judges says clearly 1-8 & 9-13 and the lines are right. Also the plan on internet is correct. No rider, no trainer, no judges have noticed it. What action would you take as GJ ? Only 3 riders left in the class.
IJOC Case 5.
You are jury member at a CSI3* and you hear from some athletes that there are three horses with fever in the stable area.
One of the athletes that you know comes and tells you the following. A horse (that was here at the same venue 2 weeks ago for a CSI) is diagnosed with rhino (Rhinopneumonitis, equine herpes virus). You inform the Président but het knows nothing about the case. Furthermore, he takes no action.
Later, by chance you come accross the FEI Vet and ask him if there are horses with fever in the stables. He responds that there are some horses with fever but that the matter is under control.
You inform the President of the GJ and the FJ, but there is no response.
What is your response?
IJOC Case 6.
After the first round of a Nations Cup competition, the results are announced and the ranking of the teams published on the video screens.
Five minutes before the start of the second round a chef d’equipe saw on the screen at the warm-up that the result of his team (and the team ranking) was changed. The team’s ranking is now lower. An athlete who had 4 pp at the first round is now shown with 8 pp. At the venue there is a very good sound system but this change of result was not announced.
The Chef d’equipe goes into the jury box and asks the PGJ why the result was changed. PGJ answers him to go talk to FJ as he was the one who changed the results. FJ was also the president of that class. When asked, the FJ provides the following explanation. The chef d’equipe of another team came and showed him a photo. The chef d’equipe who presented the photo claims that this photo showed a pole not in the cup and that this is a knockdown. The chef d’equipe of the team for which the result was changed states that this photo is not legitimate evidence because nobody can confirm when the photo was taken, and after which athlete. The chef d’equipe refuses to see the photo. The fence was built the previous night and was at the arena all day long without any change in terms of position and dimension.
The other judges tell the chef d’equipe that they did not agree with the decision of the FJ but he still changed the result without discussion and agreement of the other judges. Attached is the photo.
The chef d’equipe declared that he will protest the process of taking the decision, as it is not possible to appeal against a knockdown decision.
The PGJ answer to him that this is not necessary because they do not have a decision. Chef d’equipe stated that obviously they have decision because the result on the screen was changed.
If you were the Foreign Judge of the event (as well as the judge at the bell of this class) what would be your action ?
