Yes, the marking will never be perfect, and like bad penalty decisions in the Premier League, decisions against you are supposed to even themselves out with those you get away with. But they don't always.

Could be argued though that one rider, the trial leader, was indeed favoured over another, the second place man, who did all he could by cleaning the same section and found himself three marks adrift at the end of the day instead of just one.

Lads, lads, (& lassies!), this topic is just going round in circles!

The Observer made a decision based on seeing the action from one angle in real time. Maybe the event / the rider / the conditions had an influence, maybe not. But the records say it was a three. End of.

The armchair observer has the benefit of multiple angles, pause, slow motion, rewind & replay. Hence the debate!

The officials are volunteers and you probably won't get them again if you continue to criticise in this way. Perhaps you should try it yourself, instead of complaining!

Lets look at it another way. Had Dougie been given a 5 (an extra 2 marks) that would take his total for the week up to 8 marks lost. However he would still be in the lead of the trial, with Haslam on 9, Brown, Connor & Dabill on 14.

In the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter if it was a 3 or a 5, it makes no difference to the overall scores.

I wasn't there, I didn't see it, so I'm happy for it to be a three.

cant believe how anyone would give anything but a 5, but hopefully said observer will prob give everyone the same leniency (spelling) . Inconsistency in observing is a bigger crime in my opinion.

Once again this highlights how difficult observing is under the no stop rules .

Clearly he stopped , clearly he went backwards .

Observer will get criticised whatever the decision .

Not at all good for the sport.

No Stop and Bad Observing Decisions are ruining trials .

I know my opinion isn't worth a ****e to anyone but I will say this, there used to be a rule about making a 'bona fida' attempt at a section and not just giving up at the first sign of difficulty....which has been witnessed a lot and to me that is down to the rider.

Also all trials riders out there should learn a lesson from this that every mark is worth fighting for, it is very easy to accept defeat when the going gets tough but DONT, said rider had no idea what score he was going to get given but he fought like hell and got that bike out of a position that looked nigh on impossible to me.

The observer gave him what he thought, and as such that is where it ends.

Don't point fingers at him or her, they are out there in all weather doing a job many people wouldn't be paid to do. They are volunteers and should be commended not criticised.

Long live the Scottish 6 Days,

Absolute stone wall 5 ! ,on a trial this important there can be no room for 'benefit of the doubt' The observer has probably crumbled because of who it was , id say any other rider doing the same would have been 5'd Definately , I hope if he does win he wins by more than 2 marks because if he doesn't who ever finishes second will have been robbed , poor decision

There are a 179 more sections in this trial. Most of them not on video for us all to pore over. All this does is point out the difficult yet brilliant job the observers do. Let's get to Saturday afternoon, ask who hasn't throughout the week been lucky or received the benefit of the doubt on some occasion and consider the result in this context.

Will the rider on least marks deserve to be the winner? Almost certainly.

Will all of the observers & other officials deserve a huge thank you for their voluntary efforts? Most definitely.

Right let me get something straight. We go round and record this event on video and it's a great privilege, don't get me wrong. Over the years we've seen and published many riders including top ten ones taking a stop without ultimately getting a 5 or having a dab(s) missed.

This video appears to have kicked up a lot of fuss but I believe it's for no reason. Obviously we could have chosen not to include that clip but it's not often you catch the top few making errors and it COULD affect the outcome (looks unlikely now) so obviously it makes the cut for the day. Not to stir up debate but because it's interesting to most of us clubmen.

I've spoke to the observer (who shares our hotel) and he's confirmed that all he did was be consistent. If he was giving Joe Blogs a 3 for making a real effort then he has to do the same with Dougie Lampkin surely. The observers here have a really tough job, try concentrating and looking through crowds of spectators for up to seven hours at a time and still catch every tiny thing. The sad thing about all this debate is the fact that the guy observing probably feels really bad now, not because of his scoring but because of the debate that's going on here.

Hmm reacted on this last night when watching the vid..

Definitely a five all days in the week. At least 2-3 secs of non-forward.

Ok it's sort of fair if the observer judges all the riders the same.

The problem is that you don't know which rules applies to the section you're riding.

Personally when observing I tried to observe by the rules when I was young but as all others were leaner than me (and observing has become leaner through the years) I had to adapt; nowadays I'm almost ashamed of what I let through...

And remember that even if you do a good job you will always do at least 2-5 mistakes on a day.

However we don't have nostop in Sweden but still a good rule is less than a few dm (1 foot or so) backwards on first attempt is ok and a dm or so when balancing uphill on bike. However multiple tries or planned reversing is 5.

For non stop 0.5 s rider caused or 1s obstacle caused would be ok...

Remembered Hawkstone Park 98 not only for the best lap in WCH history by Dougie (2nd lap of 4 in mud).

On 2 occasions Dougie got away with half meter backwards roll after jumping the bike round a corner. Colomer on one occasion in the rocksection weighed over backwards on the bashplate round the gravity axis of the bike and was docked a 5 instead of a 1 (old non stop rules). Think he lost the trial on that... However this was prolly a case of difference between observers and not having the guts to give a star a five.

Seems like Bou has this advantage now. And French local riders. I've seen Laia Sanz laing down in the section and getting away with a 1 and Krämer being docked a 2 for waiving the leg twice close to a stream wall in the next section.

Cheers TJ

Hmm reacted on this last night when watching the vid..

Definitely a five all days in the week. At least 2-3 secs of non-forward.

Ok it's sort of fair if the observer judges all the riders the same.

The problem is that you don't know which rules applies to the section you're riding.

Personally when observing I tried to observe by the rules when I was young but as all others were leaner than me (and observing has become leaner through the years) I had to adapt; nowadays I'm almost ashamed of what I let through...

And remember that even if you do a good job you will always do at least 2-5 mistakes on a day.

However we don't have nostop in Sweden but still a good rule is less than a few dm (1 foot or so) backwards on first attempt is ok and a dm or so when balancing uphill on bike. However multiple tries or planned reversing is 5.

For non stop 0.5 s rider caused or 1s obstacle caused would be ok...

Remembered Hawkstone Park 98 not only for the best lap in WCH history by Dougie (2nd lap of 4 in mud).

On 2 occasions Dougie got away with half meter backwards roll after jumping the bike round a corner. Colomer on one occasion in the rocksection weighed over backwards on the bashplate round the gravity axis of the bike and was docked a 5 instead of a 1 (old non stop rules). Think he lost the trial on that... However this was prolly a case of difference between observers and not having the guts to give a star a five.

Seems like Bou has this advantage now. And French local riders. I've seen Laia Sanz laing down in the section and getting away with a 1 and Krämer being docked a 2 for waiving the leg twice close to a stream wall in the next section.

Cheers TJ

Sorry bigfoot wrote post before yours were posted.

No blame on the observer just inconsistency inbetween sections.

And btw Jack Shep also had a 5...

However road Inversanda one year with 1-2 foot water getting stuck 2-3 times for 0.5s and got a 5; equally hard section thought I was worth I 3 myself....

/TJ

The main point in this discussion is consistency in marking, when I observe, I treat everyone the same, I may or may not observe slightly different to the observer on the next section, but what counts is that each observer treats everyone the same, with no favouritism.

As Bigfoot has confirmed, the observer was consistent with all who rode his section, we can argue as much as we like, he was the man on the job and he observed it as a 3. We may all have our opinions, but there's no vote, the only decision is the observers on that section and he doesn't have to justify it to anyone. Observing is not easy, I enjoy it sometimes, but dread it other times, it can be confrontational sometimes, a thankless task other times, but mostly a joy, to watch people enjoying themselves, whilst putting something back into the sport.

We can all have our opinions, but let's not turn this into a witch hunt, just think what might happen, if all the voluntary observers stay at home.........

I've spoke to the observer (who shares our hotel) and he's confirmed that all he did was be consistent. If he was giving Joe Blogs a 3 for making a real effort then he has to do the same with Dougie Lampkin surely.

Thats all that can be asked of any observer

I've spoke to the observer (who shares our hotel) and he's confirmed that all he did was be consistent. If he was giving Joe Blogs a 3 for making a real effort then he has to do the same with Dougie Lampkin surely. The observers here have a really tough job, try concentrating and looking through crowds of spectators for up to seven hours at a time and still catch every tiny thing. The sad thing about all this debate is the fact that the guy observing probably feels really bad now, not because of his scoring but because of the debate that's going on here.

My level of Joe Bloggs used to have 8 / 10 of these moments every day & I always was never too chuffed about getting a 5, having said that most times I'd get a 3. I think the Observers at the Scottish tend to give the benefit of the doubt most of the time, it may not beneficial to the lads who clean the sections but it does mean a lot to the lads that give everything a go, it certainly separates them from the tourists who go round asking for 5's.

Right let me get something straight. We go round and record this event on video and it's a great privilege, don't get me wrong. Over the years we've seen and published many riders including top ten ones taking a stop without ultimately getting a 5 or having a dab(s) missed.

This video appears to have kicked up a lot of fuss but I believe it's for no reason. Obviously we could have chosen not to include that clip but it's not often you catch the top few making errors and it COULD affect the outcome (looks unlikely now) so obviously it makes the cut for the day. Not to stir up debate but because it's interesting to most of us clubmen.

I've spoke to the observer (who shares our hotel) and he's confirmed that all he did was be consistent. If he was giving Joe Blogs a 3 for making a real effort then he has to do the same with Dougie Lampkin surely. The observers here have a really tough job, try concentrating and looking through crowds of spectators for up to seven hours at a time and still catch every tiny thing. The sad thing about all this debate is the fact that the guy observing probably feels really bad now, not because of his scoring but because of the debate that's going on here.

I don't think being consistent is the issue here . The trial is being run under No Stop rules , these rules should be enforced to the letter , otherwise they are open to abuse . This is a National Trial , arguably the Biggest Trial in the World . We need to stick to the RULES !

I have a massive respect for all observers , it's just a shame that the no stop rule is so hard to enforce and observe .

We are scaring observers away from our sport since no stop was re-introduced , and if this continues no-one will want to observe and we will have no sport.

I don't think being consistent is the issue here . The trial is being run under No Stop rules , these rules should be enforced to the letter , otherwise they are open to abuse . This is a National Trial , arguably the Biggest Trial in the World . We need to stick to the RULES !

I have a massive respect for all observers , it's just a shame that the no stop rule is so hard to enforce and observe .

We are scaring observers away from our sport since no stop was re-introduced , and if this continues no-one will want to observe and we will have no sport.

It's an International Event & the rules have been No Stop for the best part of twenty years.

I'm sure what you don't grasp is this, make calls like this into a 5 & 2/3 of the entry will 5 20 out of the 30 sections a day.

Edited May 8, 201412 yr by perce