"We could not help getting the impression that the officials taking care of the positioning of the measurement instrument, were doing this as if this was about long jump. When the shot rolled or jumped backwards, they measured from the point which was nearest the ring when the shot finally came to a stand still".
- and not only that. I attach a mail from one of the members of the jury who dealt with the protest, which reads in English:
"---However, I also understand the judges. They must measure (from) the last mark. Otherwise there would have been even more chaos".
So, not only the judges, but also the members of the Jury of Appeal, had got this all wrong!!
However strange this may seem, if all you do is reading the text in Rule 187.20(a):
"---shall be made from the nearest mark made by the fall of the shot",
it may not be crystal clear what is actually meant - and what constitutes actually a "fall"? It certainly was painfully obvious that it was not crystal clear to the people involved in Gothenburg, so why not make it crystal clear - that is what the Rules should be all about.
In this relation it is also interesting to note that in the now proposed text from the TC for the Manual is used the term: "The initial fall of the implement" - same thing, but different wording. However "initial fall" indicates that there may be other types of "fall", so I will still place my money on "first impact".
My compilation of photos and videos from the shot put final, to illustrate the abovementioned, can be studied at this link: www.123hjemmeside.dk/facius
When studying these issues, I have stumbled upon other discrepancies related to the world of shot put. In 188.8.131.52 in the Manual is stated that the stop board shall be 1.22m +/- 0.01m long on the inside, whereas in that same Manual it is displayed in Fig 184.108.40.206 that the length shall be 1.14 - 1.16m, and in the Handbook, in Rule 188.3, it is stated that it shall have a "cord" (a strange word in this connection, I think) of 1.21m +/-0.01m. It all becomes even more confusing with the fact, that it is unfortunately not marked in the present Handbook that a change has been made in Rule 188.3, which therefore is unknown to many, and among those who have somehow spotted it, many are uncertain as to whether "the old" stop board may no longer be used.
As for the width of the board it is stated in Rule 188.3 that "The board shall measure 11.2cm to 30cm wide", while in the Manual is stated, in 220.127.116.11: "The width is 0.112m +/-0.002" - also not coherent with Fig 18.104.22.168, and in 6.3.1 in the Manual is stated: "The board shall be at least 0.112m wide" - period, which obviously is not coherent with any of the above, and, on top of that, in 6.3.1 there is nothing about the length of the board - really confusing.
I am sure that you will agree with me, that wording and designations, and of course facts, should be the same all over, where relevant, be it in the Handbook or in the Manual.
I would be grateful for your feedback concerning the above.