Keen WSL viewers will recall that once upon a time head judge, Richie Porta, was invited on to the webcast to explain some of the nuances of the judging process. However, the short-lived experiment was ultimately done away with, more than likely because it made Porta the target of hateful commentary. At the time this didn’t really bode well for a fledgling WSL that was trying to project a bright and shiny, positive image.
Back in 2013 head judge, Richie Porta, discusses the nuances of the air reverse, claiming, perfect tens and accusations of favouritism. A great insight. Be good to see more.
In the wake of the controversy surrounding several of the heats at Trestles it seems like there are some good reasons to reintroduce the practice of putting a judging representative in front of the camera.
The first one is education. The fans should know exactly why the judges are reaching certain conclusions, what they are rewarding and what they are punishing. We can all make inferences about this when we watch the surfing and see the scores but it becomes much clearer what the judges are actually looking for if someone articulates it verbally. Joe Turpel can talk for ten minutes on a single score but he’s not really the person most qualified to comment.
Secondly, speaking to the fans gives the judges an opportunity to set the tone for reasonable discussion. Silence is the best fuel for the kinds of vitriol, rumours and conspiracy theories that were bandied about in relation to Trestles.
The judges spend their lives evaluating the merit of a given wave, discerning between rides that look very similar and determining if two very different approaches might ultimately warrant the same kind of score. They watch waves live, on video and in post-contest conferences. Amongst themselves they will go back and dissect a particular score at the end of a day’s surfing. Given their dedication to the task it is probable that they see nuances and distinctions that the layman doesn’t. This is however irrelevant if they can’t occasionally explain and articulate those finer points to the public. Sure, there may be teething problems at first if a judging rep’ appears on the webcast, but in the long run the judges will be more respected and the fans better informed.
Thirdly, we want an insight into the bigger picture of the judging process. Contrary to what you may believe the judges don’t reach a consensus on what ‘good surfing’ is, on their own. They understand the sport is constantly evolving and they sit down with the surfers collectively to get their insights on what they think should and shouldn’t be rewarded. As a fan it would be great to know some of the outcomes of these discussions, so that before that itchy finger gets ready to fire off an angry, facebook spray you are at least commenting from a more informed perspective.
Fourthly, there is no doubt that the judges are dedicated to their jobs and don’t deserve some of the vitriol that has been thrown their way in the recent weeks, but if they know they have to make a public account of their decisions it will likely sharpen their focus. It’s about improving the model and if you know you have to explain yourself in a public forum then it tends to keep you on your toes. Putting a real person on camera is ideal but even a statement read by a commentator would suffice in certain circumstances.
The WSL may argue that public explanations of decisions are not made in other sports so why should they re-introduce them in surfing. Following this logic would be missing an opportunity to make pro surfing more engaging and sophisticated. While pursuing the status of more recognised sports, surfing must also strive to preserve what makes it unique. Why not embrace the inherent complexity of judging surfing and deal with it in an open fashion. Hearing from the judges once an event seems like a reasonable commitment.
Cast your mind back to the Pipe Masters last year when Medina boosted high to kill Mick Fanning’s title hopes. Some couldn’t believe Gabriel was granted the score for an air while competing at the spiritual home of the barrel. Many others felt it was fair enough. Amongst the online melee, which resulted wouldn’t it have been nice to hear the judges explain why they gave the decision?
Medina crushes Fanning's title hopes with an air at Pipe – 8 min 30 mark in this clip.
