4.2.1 SUPERIOR JURY
- To supervise the competition and to deal with any breaches of discipline or any extraordinary circumstances affecting the running of the competition.
- Where there is a grave error of judgement on the part of one, or several judges, such action as they consider necessary will be taken.
- Continually, to review the marks awarded by the judges and to issue a warning to any judge whose work is considered to be unsatisfactory or showing partiality.
- Following the unsatisfactory result of any warning, to remove where necessary the offending judge.
- The athlete representative is a member of the Technical Committee but is not part of the Superior Jury
The Executive Committee has the authority to decide on the rules for the Superior Jury and the specific roles of the Technical Committee members during a competition.
Refer to the Appendix for the details and “Duties for Superior Jury and Supervisor”
The President of the SJ MUST: |
Method of Intervention: |
Monitor all scores for deviation from tolerance, and for impossible scores |
Approve or advise action of SJ Members |
Monitor all scores for judging bias and take appropriate action
|
During competition: Give verbal warning and should it occur a second time, replace judge and follow-up with written warning After competition : Assessment made after the event which shows bias will result in a letter of warning or sanction, which must be sent to the federation within six months after the competition
|
Arbitrate when SJ member, CJP and DJs cannot reach a decision |
Refers to IRCOS or video as necessary and makes a final decision after consultation with the members of the SJ |
Assure discipline of all persons, coaches, athletes, judges, superior jury, organisers, and volunteers in the competition arena. Deals with unacceptable behaviour (at any time and any where) of competitors, coaches, judges, organisers or volunteers during the event.
|
Initial approach normally is a verbal warning A second incident or serious first incident will result in a written warning to the Head of Delegation and thereafter the federation and may result in a sanction in accordance with the Disciplinary Code.
|
Receive inquiries in writing with appropriate fee |
Within 4 minutes of appeal. This is given to the President of the Superior Jury who will respond through a written statement after the analysis. |
Receive inquiries in writing with appropriate fee |
Through the Expert or CJP, and in exceptional cases, a particular judge All approaches are recorded and may result in warnings, if found that there is improper judging after analysis
|
Respect for the office held and expertise in the area of responsibility to assure the just application of rules and regulations.
The Superior Jury MUST:
|
Method: |
he Superior Jury MUST intervene: |
|
when: A Line judge has not seen a fault or for an impossible score | |
when: an inquiry has been submitted |
By placement of inquiry/accreditation card and verbal statement of problem |
Difficulty | If a judge chooses not to adjust a mark when requested to do so, the SJ may act to ensure the final mark awarded is correct. |
4.2.2 JUDGES PANEL
- Respect for the expertise of office
- To receive pre-competition intensive preparation for judging with the Superior Jury and CJPs
BEFORE COMPETITION MUST: Attend all seminars, instructions and meetings at the times scheduled before, during and after the competition.
BEFORE COMPETITION MAY :Consult with the Superior Jury Difficulty Experts for help in resolving issues
DURING COMPETITION MUST: |
DURING COMPETITION MAY: |
• Be on time for march in led by the CJP to places and stay seated in places until the end of the whole round of competition
|
Take allocated breaks after a signal by the President of Superior Jury or following special request of the President (or CJP) Be absent only with permission
|
Make independent judgements about the execution or artistry of an exercise according to the rules, without reference to books, previous scores, cell phone communication or talking to other judges
|
When a mistake is made, the judge must stand and wait for further instruction |
Not engage in discussions with other judges while on the podium or discuss scores during breaks
|
Consult with the CJP if cannot resolve the Difficulty Score |
Authority and Accountability
Authority and Accountability |
||
Authority |
Timing |
Consequence |
The Superior Jury holds corporate responsibility for the justice of scores given for performances |
The SJ President will give the SJ Members the right to intervene if a CJP has not observed the deviation rule, has not applied penalties correctly or cannot agree the Difficulty score with the DJs |
Whenever the SJ is involved, the SJ is accountable for the score |
CJP helps DJs |
To resolve disagreement |
DJs take responsibility if have not requested help of CJP and the score is incorrect |
|
|
Once the CJP is consulted, all 3 take responsibility if a score is incorrect. |
President gives warnings to judges (after personal judgement or after consideration of the advice of on SJ members)
|
Immediate verbal as soon as the matter comes to notice In writing if serious or repeat of warnings, this is made with the agreement of the SJ (TC) |
SJ takes joint responsibility |
President gives warning to SJ member |
Verbal first |
President of Jury takes ultimate responsibility |