Forums Menu

User: 
Pass:  

Curling Scores

M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M5 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 7:00pm CT
Fitzgerald Final
Guentzel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Cenzalli Final
Rose (10) Watch Live Curling!
Church Final
Lannoye (10) Watch Live Curling!
Hebert Final
Brenden (9) Watch Live Curling!
W: New Holland Canadian Junior Championships
Fort McMurray, AB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 10 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 2:00pm MT
ON (Acres) Final
MB (Hayward) (10)
NO (Dubinsky) Final
NS (MacNutt) (9)
QC (Fortin) Final
MB (Terrick) (8)
PEI (Lenentine) Final
SK (Pomedli) (10)
NO (Toner) Final
NB (Forsythe) (10)
NT (Skauge) Final
AB (Deschiffart) (8)
ON (Markle) Final
AB (Beaudry) (10)
NL (Locke) Final
NS (Blades) (10)
W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W4 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 2:00pm CT
Scheel Final
Berg (9) Watch Live Curling!
Pekowitz Final
Berg (9) Watch Live Curling!
Schapman Final
Johnson (10) Watch Live Curling!
Giroux 12  Final
Viau (9) Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  
Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.
Page 7 of 11 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   Post A Reply
02-18-18 04:04PM
alex is offline Click Here to See the Profile for alex Click here to Send alex a Private Message Find more posts by alex Add alex to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
alex
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Quesnel
Posts: 420

I think she released it cleanly. Hard to fathom why light didn't work. On the other hand Sweden still had a fairly easy shot even if Eve's rock left it play. Must have been distracting for Anna H.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 04:31PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

quote:
Originally posted by IN-OFF-FOR-2
What about the players that throw with their gloves on? It must be just touch sensors.

You are not allowed to throw with a glove

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 04:33PM
Buzzzardd is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Buzzzardd Click here to Send Buzzzardd a Private Message Find more posts by Buzzzardd Add Buzzzardd to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Buzzzardd
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Kitchener
Posts: 14

Regarding Team Holman hogged rock against Denmark, I am surprised nobody mentioned these incidents. Denmark would not have been at the Olympics if they had not been called. Quote is from worldcurling.org website.

Denmark became the final women’s team to qualify for the PyeongChang 2018 Olympic Winter Games when they beat Italy by 5-4 in the extra end of the last women’s qualification game at the Olympic Qualification Event 2017 taking place in Pilsen, Czech Republic.

This was an extraordinary game with Italian stones being taken off in two ends because they had been accidentally touched by their sweepers when in play.

Italy held a 2-1 lead as the teams played the seventh end, and their skip Diana Gaspari had looked to extend that lead by two more points in this end. She drew her last stone into the house thinking she had scored the two points, only to have one of her stones removed because it had been touched. Italy scored just one point taking the score to 3-1.

A similar incident happened in the next end and this time, the last Italian stone of the end was discounted and a Danish stone replaced, allowing Denmark’s skip Madeleine Dupont to draw for two points and level the game at 3-3.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 05:08PM
Deliverer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Deliverer Click here to Send Deliverer a Private Message Find more posts by Deliverer Add Deliverer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Deliverer
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Nov 2016
Location:
Posts: 471

quote:
Originally posted by Observer
Here’s the video https://youtu.be/_w0vfc18PfI

Looks to me that she’s released it and the handle has started rotating away from her hand by the time it crosses the hog line.



EYE ON THE HOG

After reviewing the video, it appears to me that M'H did remove her hand from the handle of the rock before the rock reached the hog line.

BUT, it also appears that at the very last fraction of a second, ( I believe the game time was 2:57:38) she reached out and touched the rock with her index finger - just as the rock reached the line - thereby causing the violation.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 05:51PM
IN-OFF-FOR-2 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for IN-OFF-FOR-2 Find more posts by IN-OFF-FOR-2 Add IN-OFF-FOR-2 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
IN-OFF-FOR-2
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Mar 2013
Location:
Posts: 1875

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13

You are not allowed to throw with a glove



It must be an unwritten rule then regarding the sensor rocks. Nowhere in the rules either CC or WCF does it state you must throw bare handed. If that's how the sensors work then I understand.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 05:57PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

Except the eye on the hog only registers a touch on the handle. You could slide all the way down the ice with your hand on the stone and not trigger it. So that would not cause the lights.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 06:47PM
milobloom is offline Click Here to See the Profile for milobloom Click here to Send milobloom a Private Message Visit milobloom's homepage! Find more posts by milobloom Add milobloom to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
milobloom
Administrator

 

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: St. Albert
Posts: 839

This is one of the best explanations I’ve seen. If you want my take (which is similar), you can listen to my recent Curling Legends Podcast with Pal Trulsen.


quote:
Originally posted by toeslider
While Ajay’s post was eloquent, it was not an accurate reflection of the history or evolution of the rule. For many, many years the rule was very simple - if a moving stone was touched by a player of the team that threw it, or any of their equipment (including cigarette packages or lighters falling from their pocket) the stone was considered “burned” and was to be removed immediately. The sportsmanship was to be exhibited by a player calling his own infraction without considering whether the infraction would have caused any difference in the outcome of the shot being attempted or whether the other team noticed, and in being willing to accept the penalty.

Somewhere along the way, the powers that be decided that the rule might be taken advantage of if a stone had been thrown poorly and the attempted shot was not going to be made (and maybe even cause a bad outcome for the delivering team) then a player could accidentally on purpose burn the stone and remove the rock. In order to prevent this, the rule was changed to allow the stone to continue its course if it was touched inside the hogline and then the non-offending team could decide the appropriate penalty.

It seems that, somehow, it has now been decided that it is inconvenient for a team that causes an infraction of the rules to be expected to suffer a penalty for the infraction, and that the non-offending team is being “unsportsmanlike” if they decide to apply a penalty to the team that has broken the rule. Remember, the rule says that a moving stone should not be touched - it does not say that a moving stone should not be caused to have a change in trajectory or speed. If a stone in motion is touched, a rule has been broken and a penalty should be administered. The offending team should exhibit good sportsmanship by calling attention to the infraction and by willingly submitting to the penalty imposed.

Last edited by milobloom on 02-18-18 at 06:54PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 06:54PM
southerncurler is offline Click Here to See the Profile for southerncurler Find more posts by southerncurler Add southerncurler to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
southerncurler
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Jan 2015
Location:
Posts: 234

WCF Rule 10d2 (only applies when sensor handles are in use)

“A glove or mitt must not be worn on the delivery hand during the delivery of a stone.”

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 07:57PM
JB42 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for JB42 Click here to Send JB42 a Private Message Find more posts by JB42 Add JB42 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
JB42
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Nov 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 621

This curling is terrible. The women's game seems to be going in reverse as compared to the men's game. Back a few years ago when Team Homan curled 90% for the whole Scotties, and were throwing runbacks as good as the men I thought that we were going to see something truly amazing. I.e. A sport where the women closed the gap to almost nothing as compared to the men's game.

But watching this Olympics and this Scotties there hasn't been progress as much as regress. Befuddling.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 09:00PM
IN-OFF-FOR-2 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for IN-OFF-FOR-2 Find more posts by IN-OFF-FOR-2 Add IN-OFF-FOR-2 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
IN-OFF-FOR-2
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Mar 2013
Location:
Posts: 1875

Welcome back Kotter....er Homan

And please give Rachel's husband a break and let him have a few cold ones in peace.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 10:26PM
nelski is offline Click Here to See the Profile for nelski Find more posts by nelski Add nelski to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
nelski
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Twin Snowbanks
Posts: 2068

I am very keen to see Korea succeed. Their win over Sweden was critical. Three games left and a good chance to make the playoffs. (USA, OAR, DEN) Of course I want CDA in there too so, #goKORgo #goCDAgo Many of my Korean friends have guffawed when I said their country has a great team. Now, they are beginning to see the possibility.

__________________
Lots of major youth (<21) events. Nice for Murdoch... and us :-D.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-18-18 10:57PM
EPMD is offline Click Here to See the Profile for EPMD Find more posts by EPMD Add EPMD to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
EPMD
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Jan 2017
Location:
Posts: 202

quote:
Originally posted by IN-OFF-FOR-2
And please give Rachel's husband a break and let him have a few cold ones in peace.

The camera following him around in the stands was really odd. I feel it is in poor taste to candidly show family at sporting events because they don't know if/when the camera is on them.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 01:32AM
On The Nose is offline Click Here to See the Profile for On The Nose Find more posts by On The Nose Add On The Nose to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
On The Nose
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608

quote:
Originally posted by toeslider


While Ajay’s post was eloquent, it was not an accurate reflection of the history or evolution of the rule. For many, many years the rule was very simple - if a moving stone was touched by a player of the team that threw it, or any of their equipment (including cigarette packages or lighters falling from their pocket) the stone was considered “burned” and was to be removed immediately. The sportsmanship was to be exhibited by a player calling his own infraction without considering whether the infraction would have caused any difference in the outcome of the shot being attempted or whether the other team noticed, and in being willing to accept the penalty.

Somewhere along the way, the powers that be decided that the rule might be taken advantage of if a stone had been thrown poorly and the attempted shot was not going to be made (and maybe even cause a bad outcome for the delivering team) then a player could accidentally on purpose burn the stone and remove the rock. In order to prevent this, the rule was changed to allow the stone to continue its course if it was touched inside the hogline and then the non-offending team could decide the appropriate penalty.

It seems that, somehow, it has now been decided that it is inconvenient for a team that causes an infraction of the rules to be expected to suffer a penalty for the infraction, and that the non-offending team is being “unsportsmanlike” if they decide to apply a penalty to the team that has broken the rule. Remember, the rule says that a moving stone should not be touched - it does not say that a moving stone should not be caused to have a change in trajectory or speed. If a stone in motion is touched, a rule has been broken and a penalty should be administered. The offending team should exhibit good sportsmanship by calling attention to the infraction and by willingly submitting to the penalty imposed.


The problem with your explanation, of course, is that you ignore the elements of sportsmanship, fair play and common sense.
Because the rule allows for the non-offending team to choose how to respond to the touching of a rock with a broom, employing fair play and common sense is a valid option. One would hope that when the rock's momentum or trajectory is not impeded by a negligible touch, the non-offending team would respond fairly and justly, employing honesty and common sense, realizing that the broom touch had no consequence, and allow the rock to remain where it came to rest.

Again, that choice - choosing to employ common sense and fair play - was completely available to Homan as a viable option. Please don't tell me that Homan thought that the rock - which was barely moving when touched - was significantly, or visibly, or noticeably affected by the touch. She knew very well that the touch had no consequence. Yet she took it upon herself to impose the most severe consequence she could. This is the definition of poor sportsmanship.

What many of us are saying is that the fact that she chose the most severe penalty - which was very obviously very out of proportion with the offence -, and never for an instant even considered any other option - such as the option to employ common sense and fair play - the fact that she chose the most severe consequence for a negligible touch was a blatant display of poor sportsmanship, lack of fair play, and an embarrassment to Canada on the world stage.

__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Last edited by On The Nose on 02-19-18 at 01:36AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 02:15AM
toeslider is offline Click Here to See the Profile for toeslider Click here to Send toeslider a Private Message Find more posts by toeslider Add toeslider to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
toeslider
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: Alberta
Posts: 18

My explanation does not fail to take into account any of those things. To me, it is common sense that fair play means that both teams should play by the rules. The rule, as it currently stands, is that a rock in motion should not be touched by any player on the delivering team or any of their equipment. If you believe that the rule is wrong or should be written or interpreted in another way then I would suggest that you get involved with your curling organization and set in motion the procedure to accomplish such a change.

Where I see a failure of common sense, a severe lack of sportsmanship and a total disregard for fair play is in the current apparent belief that there exists such a thing as a rubber rule - a rule that is applied only in the situation that it is not going to hurt the feelings of the team that caused the infraction. If a rule is wrong, then change it; if a rule should be interpreted differently, then provide a clearer interpretation. If a rule exists it should not be ignored, or what is the purpose in having rules in the first place.

To apply the same logic to the other current controversy - maybe it should always be okay to not release a rock a foot or so past the hog line because, seriously, how much of an effect can that possibly have 93 feet later?

The purpose of rules is to ensure fair play, to require both teams to abide by the same set of circumstances. How fair is it if one team follows the rule while the other team causes an infraction but expects that there should not be a consequence?

Last edited by toeslider on 02-19-18 at 02:19AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 02:30AM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by On The Nose

It's interesting (and rather humorous) that this guy (jamcan) constantly and perpetually and desperately tries to rationalize that his view/perspective is 'right' (and that all those who disagree are a**holes, of course).
It's so very predictable from him. To call him Narcissistic would be an understatement.

I once felt that he might be somewhat intelligent - usually wrong, but somewhat intelligent. But then, if he truly were, he would surely possess the capacity to recognize that his posts, much more often than not, simply reveal him as being quite insecure and lacking in maturity - and so desperate for attention that he'll not only accept negative attention, but will openly ask for it, as it's much easier to acquire than is positive attention.



Omg. I'm so busy laughing my head off at this idiot that I literally have almost nothing to say.

You sir, epitomize the problem with the internet. You sit on a self appointed throne and throw darts. You call me names because I take issue-appropriately and correctly-with your poorly written and incorrect interpretations about rules and sportsmanship.

You are no better than Manitoba Legend. And any time or place you wish to go head to head, or face to face with a discussion of this topic I would gladly be there.

But, I suspect, just like ML, you would never have the courage to back up your words with who you are-while I have done so before and will do so any time.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 02:39AM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by On The Nose

The problem with your explanation, of course, is that you ignore the elements of sportsmanship, fair play and common sense.
Because the rule allows for the non-offending team to choose how to respond to the touching of a rock with a broom, employing fair play and common sense is a valid option. One would hope that when the rock's momentum or trajectory is not impeded by a negligible touch, the non-offending team would respond fairly and justly, employing honesty and common sense, realizing that the broom touch had no consequence, and allow the rock to remain where it came to rest.

Again, that choice - choosing to employ common sense and fair play - was completely available to Homan as a viable option. Please don't tell me that Homan thought that the rock - which was barely moving when touched - was significantly, or visibly, or noticeably affected by the touch. She knew very well that the touch had no consequence. Yet she took it upon herself to impose the most severe consequence she could. This is the definition of poor sportsmanship.

What many of us are saying is that the fact that she chose the most severe penalty - which was very obviously very out of proportion with the offence -, and never for an instant even considered any other option - such as the option to employ common sense and fair play - the fact that she chose the most severe consequence for a negligible touch was a blatant display of poor sportsmanship, lack of fair play, and an embarrassment to Canada on the world stage.



Another self righteous, hypocritical snob who would've pulled the rock, same as Homan--if they were any good and not just another armchair ahole scarfing down Cheetos

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 02:50AM
On The Nose is offline Click Here to See the Profile for On The Nose Find more posts by On The Nose Add On The Nose to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
On The Nose
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608

quote:
Originally posted by toeslider
My explanation does not fail to take into account any of those things. To me, it is common sense that fair play means that both teams should play by the rules. The rule, as it currently stands, is that a rock in motion should not be touched by any player on the delivering team or any of their equipment. If you believe that the rule is wrong or should be written or interpreted in another way then I would suggest that you get involved with your curling organization and set in motion the procedure to accomplish such a change.

Where I see a failure of common sense, a severe lack of sportsmanship and a total disregard for fair play is in the current apparent belief that there exists such a thing as a rubber rule - a rule that is applied only in the situation that it is not going to hurt the feelings of the team that caused the infraction. If a rule is wrong, then change it; if a rule should be interpreted differently, then provide a clearer interpretation. If a rule exists it should not be ignored, or what is the purpose in having rules in the first place.

To apply the same logic to the other current controversy - maybe it should always be okay to not release a rock a foot or so past the hog line because, seriously, how much of an effect can that possibly have 93 feet later?

The purpose of rules is to ensure fair play, to require both teams to abide by the same set of circumstances. How fair is it if one team follows the rule while the other team causes an infraction but expects that there should not be a consequence?


Your argument holds no water, as the intention of rules is to punish offences with a consequence which is proportional to the offence. This is also the definition of striving toward fair play.
In other sports, it is the discretion and judgment of the officials which determines the consequence for the offence. In curling - regrettably - it is the non-offending team which determines the consequence. I say 'regrettably' because this very obviously leaves room for the self-serving abuse of the rule - i.e. to impose a consequence which is not at all in proportion to the offence.
As someone else commented in this thread: Just because something can be done legally in no way means that it is the right thing to do. Something can be legal and wrong at once. Context is very, very important here.

If a third party - an objective and unbiased official - would have had the responsibility of imposing a fitting/proportional consequence/penalty to the Danish team for their negligible offence (in the exact same circumstance), and had the very same options as Homan had - that is, to A) leave the rocks as they were when they came to rest, B) move the rock(s) to where he/she felt they would have been had the broom touch not occurred, or C) remove the rock... and if the official would have chosen to remove the rock, 99% of people would view the official as being corrupt and biased in favour of Canada. And rightly so. And that official would very likely be out of work immediately afterward. For, imposing such a huge penalty for such a negligible offence is the equivalent of a hockey player being given a game misconduct match penalty for clearing the puck over the glass in his own zone.

Homan had the opportunity to have the punishment fit the crime. She very consciously chose not to, and instead chose the self-serving option which was of greatest benefit to her team. Doing so was inexcusable and shameful, and disrespectful to their opponents, the sport of curling, and, because of the environment and world stage, an embarrassment to Canada.

I was a fan of Homan before this. I loved her intensity, and I defended it many times to people who took it for arrogance. I am no longer a fan. Perhaps those seeing arrogance in her were correct, after all.

__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Last edited by On The Nose on 02-19-18 at 03:09AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 02:57AM
On The Nose is offline Click Here to See the Profile for On The Nose Find more posts by On The Nose Add On The Nose to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
On The Nose
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan


Another self righteous, hypocritical snob who would've pulled the rock, same as Homan--if they were any good and not just another armchair ahole scarfing down Cheetos


Now you claim to know what I'd do? This is simply further proof that you know no limits when it comes to trying to 'prove' yourself right. You're clearly a very desperate man.
Of course there is nothing in such a situation which would have me remove the rock. Unlike you, I possess no respect for unfair play. You not only respect it, but you insist upon it.

Come on, dude... you've already revealed your character (and numerous defects thereof) dozens upon dozens of times on this board.
Why insist on repeating yourself?

I've just now seen your post previous to the one I quoted above...
quote:
Originally posted by jamcan
Omg. I'm so busy laughing my head off at this idiot that I literally have almost nothing to say.

^ A typical 13 year old today would write the same thing as you did above.

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan
You sir, epitomize the problem with the internet. You sit on a self appointed throne and throw darts.

^ You have just accurately described precisely what you do in these Forums.

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan
You call me names because I take issue-appropriately and correctly-with your poorly written and incorrect interpretations about rules and sportsmanship.

^ Firstly, I don't call you names at all - that's rather blatantly YOUR modus operandi. I merely mentioned that you are insecure and immature - elements which you yourself have confirmed you possess long before I ever mentioned them in relation to you.
Secondly, I mentioned your immaturity and insecurity before you 'took issue' with anything I wrote. I was commenting on your general attitude on these Forums, which resembles that of a 13 year old child.
Lastly, If you believe my comments are "poorly written" (which I know you don't truly believe - but I'm playing along...), then please feel very free to correct any 'poor' grammar, spelling, punctuation, sentence structure, etc. that you see in my comments.

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan
You are no better than Manitoba Legend. And any time or place you wish to go head to head, or face to face with a discussion of this topic I would gladly be there.

^ Your comment here possesses obvious similarities to adolescent threats...
As to your "gladly being there" - I confess as to not quite understanding. I am present in this thread, as are my comments, which reveal - in some detail - my perspective on this topic. If you wish to debate me on this, then by all means do so. Instead, I see you simply resorting to your usual adolescent 'bullying' techniques.
You are incredibly predictable...

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan
But, I suspect, just like ML, you would never have the courage to back up your words with who you are-while I have done so before and will do so any time.

^ This, too, is straight out of a 13 year old's 'reasoning'.
If you can explain to me, in honest fashion, how revealing my name would make my comments any more or any less relevant, important, or factual, go right ahead. My name, and your name, and anyone's name, is as relevant to the substance of my comments as is the colour of shoes I'm currently wearing.
Besides, I have good reason to not reveal my identity, as there are rather immature and unstable people on this internet thing - a fact with which I'm sure you're rather directly aware.

__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Last edited by On The Nose on 02-20-18 at 01:33AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 08:04AM
Observer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Observer Find more posts by Observer Add Observer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Observer
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Apr 2016
Location: River Falls, WI, USA
Posts: 445

Another Hog on the Eye malfunction

There's just been another malfunction of the eye on the hog in the USA vs. China match.

China was down 10-3, and they were throwing their first stone of the 8th end. Like we saw yesterday, the thrower had seemed to let go of the stone before the hog line, and yet the red lights went off. They brought the officials out to investigate the stone, and again they started testing on the opposite hog line (why?!?), but this time the test confirmed that it's a malfunctioning stone as they were able to replicate the error. They've continued to play with it but have an official watching the hog line when it's thrown.

This was the red stone 2 on Sheet B. The one that gave Eve Muirhead trouble yesterday was also red, also on Sheet B, but it was stone 3.

Last edited by Observer on 02-19-18 at 09:33AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 08:42AM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

Or just put a human back on the hog...not like there aren't plenty of volunteers for the Olympics...

The tech behind the EotH seems like it should be simple, but because curling stones are engaged in a lot of collisions, keeping electronic things working right is not at all easy.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 08:53AM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

The problem with hogline cameras is that they are very often blocked out by sweepers legs at the split second when the rock touches the line. As for the touched running stone rule there is a reason there are three options available instead of a straight up single option. It gives a team the chance make a decision based on the severity of the infraction. Sometimes the best employment of a rule is the acknowledgment that punishment is not required.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 09:37AM
misty1 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for misty1 Click here to Send misty1 a Private Message Find more posts by misty1 Add misty1 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
misty1
Supreme Champion!

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 6002

so homan is coming back just like i thought she would. i think the biggest threat to her for another loss at this point is great britain. 3 losses will probably be the cutoff , could be 4. but if it is 3 then that game against canada and great britain could end up deciding who is the final team to qualify. japan, korea and sweden should be safely in at this point.

denmark, switzerland and russia are the first 3 teams to be likely eliminated and china is standing on it's last legs.

switzerland..i don't know what it is with tirinzoni. she can win tons of matches on tour, she is consistently one of the top teams in the world. however she just can't get it done for her country. in 3 appearances at world championships she hasn't made the playoffs. in her (shockingly) one appearance at europeans she finished 4th.
now here she's missed the playoffs but she will also register switzerland's worst ever performance at the olympics. up until this switzerland women had never finished outside the top 4.

it's an interesting story. my question would be why can't tirinzoni get it done when representing switzerland?. why is her international record so mediocre compared to her career on the cash tour

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 10:37AM
Deliverer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Deliverer Click here to Send Deliverer a Private Message Find more posts by Deliverer Add Deliverer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Deliverer
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Nov 2016
Location:
Posts: 471

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
Except the eye on the hog only registers a touch on the handle. You could slide all the way down the ice with your hand on the stone and not trigger it. So that would not cause the lights.


I agree. Previously I was convinced when M'H. touched the rock with her index finger, when the rock was at the line, that alone was the reason the violation light come on. But after reading the specs. and the manual published by the developer of the system, the Starco Engineering Ltd., and after watching the so- called 'violation' this morning, I have concluded it was a malfunction in the system itself which cause the problem. Can only hope now this so-called 'violation' will not ruin GB's chances of making the playoffs.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 10:40AM
Deliverer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Deliverer Click here to Send Deliverer a Private Message Find more posts by Deliverer Add Deliverer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Deliverer
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Nov 2016
Location:
Posts: 471

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
Except the eye on the hog only registers a touch on the handle. You could slide all the way down the ice with your hand on the stone and not trigger it. So that would not cause the lights.


I agree. Previously I was convinced when M'H. touched the rock with her index finger, when the rock was at the line, that alone was the reason the violation light come on. But after reading the specs. and the manual published by the developer of the system, the Startco Engineering Ltd., and after watching the so- called 'violation' this morning, I have concluded it was a malfunction in the system itself which cause the problem. Can only hope now this so-called 'violation' will not ruin GB's chances of making the playoffs.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-19-18 01:53PM
FollowingAlong is offline Click Here to See the Profile for FollowingAlong Click here to Send FollowingAlong a Private Message Find more posts by FollowingAlong Add FollowingAlong to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
FollowingAlong
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Mar 2006
Location:
Posts: 459

quote:
Originally posted by On The Nose

Your argument holds no water, as the intention of rules is to punish offences with a consequence which is proportional to the offence. This is also the definition of striving toward fair play.
In other sports, it is the discretion and judgment of the officials which determines the consequence for the offence. In curling - regrettably - it is the non-offending team which determines the consequence. I say 'regrettably' because this very obviously leaves room for the self-serving abuse of the rule - i.e. to impose a consequence which is not at all in proportion to the offence.
As someone else commented in this thread: Just because something can be done legally in no way means that it is the right thing to do. Something can be legal and wrong at once. Context is very, very important here.



You say " the intention of rules is to punish offences with a consequence which is proportional to the offence." If there is a hogline violation by 1/8", is pulling the rock immediately "a consequence which is proportional to the offence?" I understand the hogline rule totally and agree with it, but if we are to agree with your statement of consequence proportional to the offence, then this is not a proportional consequence.

Rules are put in place to protect the non-offending team. It seems like teams are roasted when doing nothing more than taking an option that is available to them in the rules. For those that claim that the sweeping or the contact on the rock had no affect, if that was the case, why was the offending team still sweeping? They clearly felt that sweeping more would have some affect.

The only reason the rule is not worded such that the rock is immediately removed from play after the hogline where play is happening, is to protect the non-offending team from a situation where the offending team realizes that if they let the rock continue, it will adversely affect their current situation so they "inadvertently" burn it. This gives the non-offending team the option to place the rocks where they feel they would have ended up without outside intervention.

If the burned rock violation had occurred just as the running rock was passing by the tight guard, what should Team Canada have done?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

All times are GMT. The time now is . Post New Thread   Post A Reply
Page 7 of 11 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to thisThread

Forum Jump:
Rate This Thread:

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
 

Curling Scores

M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M5 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 7:00pm CT
Fitzgerald Final
Guentzel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Cenzalli Final
Rose (10) Watch Live Curling!
Church Final
Lannoye (10) Watch Live Curling!
Hebert Final
Brenden (9) Watch Live Curling!
W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W4 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 2:00pm CT
Scheel Final
Berg (9) Watch Live Curling!
Pekowitz Final
Berg (9) Watch Live Curling!
Schapman Final
Johnson (10) Watch Live Curling!
Giroux 12  Final
Viau (9) Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

Recent News

Recent
Homan Brings Home Gold

Homan Brings Home Gold

Sydney, Canada - In front of a full house with over 4,000 spectators, Canada (photo: Stephen Fisher, World Curling) beat Switzerland by 7-5 to take gold at the BKT Tires World Women's Curling Championship 2024.

Curling Photos

Recent

Curling Blogs

Facebook Feed

Twitter Feed

To top ↑