-
Welcome to the DeeperBlue.com Forums, the largest online community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing. To gain full access to the DeeperBlue.com Forums you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
- Join over 47,943+ fellow diving enthusiasts from around the world on this forum
- Participate in and browse from over 531,990+ posts.
- Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
- Post your own photos or view from 7,455+ user submitted images.
- All this and much more...
You can gain access to all this absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
Molchanova 101 CWT World record removed from books
- Thread starter Jorg
- Start date
Thread Status: Hello
, There was no answer in this thread for more than 90 days.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
Just to expand a little on what Bjorn has said about Australia, we are a very small freediving population with possibly more AIDA Judges than most countries, and in some years more AIDA Judges than actual Australian freedivers competing (we have something like 8 Australian Judges plus about 4 non-Aussie judges living here).
As a result we have to be very cautious about conflicts of interest and who can judge particular events because it's a very small community.
One of the things I try and point out is that yes, you do have all the reasons mentioned here why conflicts of interest are a bad thing, but the Judge/Organiser (s) have to realise that they themselves will taint the performance of the athlete by operating under a perceived conflict of interest.
The key word here is perceived. There may or may not be a conflict of interest - you might have decided after weighing the pros and cons that there isn't - but if it looks like a conflict of interest then you've just tainted the athlete's performance. If your athlete breaks a WR but people believe that something dodgy was going on because the Judge was mates or coach or ex-lover or something, then forever after people will doubt that performance. And this is not fair to the athlete.
The Judge or Organiser should always ask themself beforehand - by my involvement in this record attempt, is there any reason why the common person would have reason to doubt whether the athlete performed legitimately?
Ben
As a result we have to be very cautious about conflicts of interest and who can judge particular events because it's a very small community.
One of the things I try and point out is that yes, you do have all the reasons mentioned here why conflicts of interest are a bad thing, but the Judge/Organiser (s) have to realise that they themselves will taint the performance of the athlete by operating under a perceived conflict of interest.
The key word here is perceived. There may or may not be a conflict of interest - you might have decided after weighing the pros and cons that there isn't - but if it looks like a conflict of interest then you've just tainted the athlete's performance. If your athlete breaks a WR but people believe that something dodgy was going on because the Judge was mates or coach or ex-lover or something, then forever after people will doubt that performance. And this is not fair to the athlete.
The Judge or Organiser should always ask themself beforehand - by my involvement in this record attempt, is there any reason why the common person would have reason to doubt whether the athlete performed legitimately?
Ben
everyone who participates in the aida community must be able to rely on the fact that they will be held to the same standards & rules universally, around the globe, and that those standards will be upheld and applied evenly and uniformly.
it's a tough pill to swallow for the athlete in this instance but i agree with the action. take out names and people and just view the scenario:
a PAID coach is the judge and there are insufficient back-up/level B judges at the record attempt = this is not proper protocol, a conflict of interest = it doesn't count and someone gets penalized.
kp
it's a tough pill to swallow for the athlete in this instance but i agree with the action. take out names and people and just view the scenario:
a PAID coach is the judge and there are insufficient back-up/level B judges at the record attempt = this is not proper protocol, a conflict of interest = it doesn't count and someone gets penalized.
kp
Sara,
I received reimbursement for my expenses, traveling and accommodation costs.
Then there was no trial, no hearing and no chance to defend ourself.
This did not even happen at the Nuremberg Trials where you had all the top Nazis on the accused bench.
The verdict came directly after the confidential investigation. (!!!)
/B
I received reimbursement for my expenses, traveling and accommodation costs.
Then there was no trial, no hearing and no chance to defend ourself.
This did not even happen at the Nuremberg Trials where you had all the top Nazis on the accused bench.
The verdict came directly after the confidential investigation. (!!!)
/B
Ehm, wait, let me get this straight:
So Bill, you're comparing this very unfortunate ordeal to the second World War, and your part in it to that of the Nazis?
You probably did make quite a mess of things, from the look of it, but you ain't no Hitler, sir.
Take it easy, huh?
Daan
So Bill, you're comparing this very unfortunate ordeal to the second World War, and your part in it to that of the Nazis?
You probably did make quite a mess of things, from the look of it, but you ain't no Hitler, sir.
Take it easy, huh?
Daan
I really find it disappointing that new AIDA did NOT follow a proper, fair and transparent procedure.
I wonder who initiated and failed to do a proper investigation and procedure?
I also wonder who consented to this.
It's never too late for an apology. Not only to Strömberg and Molchanova but also to all the paying members world wide, and yourselves.
To repeat a famous quote:
So please AIDA board, think careful about the fragile trust you enjoy from your members, and prey you to have the courage to do the right thing.
Love, Courage and Water,
Kars
I wonder who initiated and failed to do a proper investigation and procedure?
I also wonder who consented to this.
It's never too late for an apology. Not only to Strömberg and Molchanova but also to all the paying members world wide, and yourselves.
It's my wish our AIDA board nullifies their current 'verdict' and starts to lead by example and start a new PROPER PROCEDURE.
To repeat a famous quote:
"It is better that a hundred man remain free than one innocent man is send to jail"
So please AIDA board, think careful about the fragile trust you enjoy from your members, and prey you to have the courage to do the right thing.
Love, Courage and Water,
Kars
Bill i think what they are asking was if you were PAID for coaching/training what ever you would like to call it Natalia AND Judgied her record attempt.
Kars normally you and I agree on most things but this one we dont it would seem.
i agree it probably could have been handled better. NOBODY i dont think is doubting Natalias ability or saying SHE cheated the issue is that Bill HER coach judged her record attempt and this can not be allowed. there is no reason to apologise to Natalia i dont believe because nobody (AFAIK) is accusing her of anything. its unfortunate that she is the athlete in this case that is in the middle.
Apologising to Bill i dont think is necessary either.... i'm 99% sure he knew what he was doing. ANYBODY even a level E judge would know not to judge there taining partner or student for a record attempt. yet some how a JUDGE instructor forgot......
so yeah sure things could have been more transparent, however i still think the correct penalties apply, and in some casess are quite light really. as i've said before in many sports if this occured you would be stripped of your ability to judge permanently at that level. and in some countries you'd get shot!
i'm curious Bill did you consider this issue before opting to judge the event? do you really believe it is correct to have your coach judge you for a world record?
i understand that you didnt get the chance to voice your opinion to the board originally but you can to the people and maybe let us in on your thinking behind being at, judging etc the event, particularly when Dahab and other location quite close have alot of judges that could have judged the attempt. yes i have been negative about this only because i feel quite strongly about it however i am still interested to hear both sides.
just your honest opinion on your actions.
DD
Kars normally you and I agree on most things but this one we dont it would seem.
i agree it probably could have been handled better. NOBODY i dont think is doubting Natalias ability or saying SHE cheated the issue is that Bill HER coach judged her record attempt and this can not be allowed. there is no reason to apologise to Natalia i dont believe because nobody (AFAIK) is accusing her of anything. its unfortunate that she is the athlete in this case that is in the middle.
Apologising to Bill i dont think is necessary either.... i'm 99% sure he knew what he was doing. ANYBODY even a level E judge would know not to judge there taining partner or student for a record attempt. yet some how a JUDGE instructor forgot......
so yeah sure things could have been more transparent, however i still think the correct penalties apply, and in some casess are quite light really. as i've said before in many sports if this occured you would be stripped of your ability to judge permanently at that level. and in some countries you'd get shot!
i'm curious Bill did you consider this issue before opting to judge the event? do you really believe it is correct to have your coach judge you for a world record?
i understand that you didnt get the chance to voice your opinion to the board originally but you can to the people and maybe let us in on your thinking behind being at, judging etc the event, particularly when Dahab and other location quite close have alot of judges that could have judged the attempt. yes i have been negative about this only because i feel quite strongly about it however i am still interested to hear both sides.
just your honest opinion on your actions.
DD
Last edited:
Similar to what Trux said I think there were also issues as to how this competition was announced and approved by “AIDA”. From what I understand after the board dissolved, Bill was the only one keeping AIDA going. This was generally a really great thing and meant competitions could still go ahead versus everything grinding to a halt. Now I could be wrong and Bill or someone else that knows the facts feel free to jump in:- My guess is this competition was announced to Bill, and the format, judges and everything was then approved by Bill. If it was approved by a third party why wasn’t there an objection to Bill being the senior and only A Judge ?
If you look at the last case where a World Record was revoked it came down to setting precedents and having the same rules apply to everyone. Ie Martins case where his CNF dive was done without a tag. Either you have to make it ok for everyone to do CNF dives without a tag, or the dive should be made invalid. It was extremely harsh to do this after the event is finished, money paid for etc. Even worse in this case when it’s more then a half year later. (I think in Martins case a LOT of people would have preferred the dive was a valid World record and that it set a precedent that you don’t need to use tags for CNF dives from then on.)
This would be over simplifying a bit but if you apply this to the current case, either you let everyone have a senior judge for a world record dive that is also your coach, or the dives should be declared invalid. I personally see both decisions to be very poor outcomes :-(
Wether or not you are a “paid” coach vs an unpaid coach I don’t think it makes that much difference, you could still be very emotionally invested in the results in either case. Having said that it is extremely difficult(nearly impossible) in this sport to have %100 objective judges when it’s only a small sport and almost everyone knows each other.
Cheers,
Wal
If you look at the last case where a World Record was revoked it came down to setting precedents and having the same rules apply to everyone. Ie Martins case where his CNF dive was done without a tag. Either you have to make it ok for everyone to do CNF dives without a tag, or the dive should be made invalid. It was extremely harsh to do this after the event is finished, money paid for etc. Even worse in this case when it’s more then a half year later. (I think in Martins case a LOT of people would have preferred the dive was a valid World record and that it set a precedent that you don’t need to use tags for CNF dives from then on.)
This would be over simplifying a bit but if you apply this to the current case, either you let everyone have a senior judge for a world record dive that is also your coach, or the dives should be declared invalid. I personally see both decisions to be very poor outcomes :-(
Wether or not you are a “paid” coach vs an unpaid coach I don’t think it makes that much difference, you could still be very emotionally invested in the results in either case. Having said that it is extremely difficult(nearly impossible) in this sport to have %100 objective judges when it’s only a small sport and almost everyone knows each other.
Cheers,
Wal
Last edited:
Freediving as a sport is growing. We are still learning, shaping our rules and our organization.
Not all situations are covered by rules.
Even though a procedure/behaviour is not forbidden in the rules it does not mean it is OK.
The task of a board is to act when rules/policies does not cover a situation.
This special investigation group was formed by The AIDA president, feeling he had to deal with this unusual situation.
The reason it has taken time is because, first, we had no board until 2010, secondly the investigation group wanted to work slow and check all details.
Weighing all factors together the group found the report the right response. One might pick out one detail or the other and argue that there are things that is not so good about the report, but this is the conclusion when taking in the whole picture.
We all know our organization is struggling to find forms of handling all situations in our growing sort. The best solution, may sometimes not be perfect.
In a situation where the Board was dismissed by the assembly members of our organization (2009), this Sharm competition was organized (put together) by the dismissed president (also acting head judge in the competition).
He was in control of the administrative part of the record announcing (totally controlling the AIDA webpage), choosing the other judges, and he was head judge. At the same time he was paid coach/advisor to the athlete he awarded two world records.
There where other lower level judges present, but Bill Stromberg was
in charge.
He claims he was not paid, but he has publicly on discussion forums
and in media interviews told about his work for the athlete (using words such as coach, trainer, consultant).
He was advised by another senior judge not to judge this athlete.
He also claimed he "kept a low profile" during the competition. A clear indication that he felt he should not really be judging this athlete. The reason we demand a senior judge present at world records is to have this person in full control, and not step back.
Even though AIDA does not doubt the athletes sportmanship, the board feels that AIDA out of respect for passed and future record holders in the discipline can not approve these records due to the coach-judge situation.
Again I would like to stress, we do not doubt the performance, but we have to draw the line somewhere. A former president of the organization and an active senior judge, and administrator of the organizations web page e t c, must choose side.
If in a long term advisory/coaching relationship with a world record athlete that from time to time pays for ones services (beyond judge expenses e t c), then one can not be head judge for the same athlete.
At regional and even national level this is a common situation (conflict of interest) that most judges tries to avoid, but not always
succeed fully.
But at world record level we have to have zero tolerance.
We have to take ourselves and our sport seriously.
Bill Stromberg is not just any judge. He is judge instructor and the most senior judge in the organisation. His actions has in the past been seen as policy making and setting presidency. His authority is large. Some of the judges present had been "made" by him.
The AIDA board is very sorry that one of our most respected athletes have to suffer because of this decision.
If she feel she has been dealt with unfairly, she may want to blame her advisor for the situation.
The much abused term "benefit of doubt" goes to former record holder.
The integrity and honour of AIDA as a sport federation is a priority.
Sebastian Naslund
AIDA Media/PR
Not all situations are covered by rules.
Even though a procedure/behaviour is not forbidden in the rules it does not mean it is OK.
The task of a board is to act when rules/policies does not cover a situation.
This special investigation group was formed by The AIDA president, feeling he had to deal with this unusual situation.
The reason it has taken time is because, first, we had no board until 2010, secondly the investigation group wanted to work slow and check all details.
Weighing all factors together the group found the report the right response. One might pick out one detail or the other and argue that there are things that is not so good about the report, but this is the conclusion when taking in the whole picture.
We all know our organization is struggling to find forms of handling all situations in our growing sort. The best solution, may sometimes not be perfect.
In a situation where the Board was dismissed by the assembly members of our organization (2009), this Sharm competition was organized (put together) by the dismissed president (also acting head judge in the competition).
He was in control of the administrative part of the record announcing (totally controlling the AIDA webpage), choosing the other judges, and he was head judge. At the same time he was paid coach/advisor to the athlete he awarded two world records.
There where other lower level judges present, but Bill Stromberg was
in charge.
He claims he was not paid, but he has publicly on discussion forums
and in media interviews told about his work for the athlete (using words such as coach, trainer, consultant).
He was advised by another senior judge not to judge this athlete.
He also claimed he "kept a low profile" during the competition. A clear indication that he felt he should not really be judging this athlete. The reason we demand a senior judge present at world records is to have this person in full control, and not step back.
Even though AIDA does not doubt the athletes sportmanship, the board feels that AIDA out of respect for passed and future record holders in the discipline can not approve these records due to the coach-judge situation.
Again I would like to stress, we do not doubt the performance, but we have to draw the line somewhere. A former president of the organization and an active senior judge, and administrator of the organizations web page e t c, must choose side.
If in a long term advisory/coaching relationship with a world record athlete that from time to time pays for ones services (beyond judge expenses e t c), then one can not be head judge for the same athlete.
At regional and even national level this is a common situation (conflict of interest) that most judges tries to avoid, but not always
succeed fully.
But at world record level we have to have zero tolerance.
We have to take ourselves and our sport seriously.
Bill Stromberg is not just any judge. He is judge instructor and the most senior judge in the organisation. His actions has in the past been seen as policy making and setting presidency. His authority is large. Some of the judges present had been "made" by him.
The AIDA board is very sorry that one of our most respected athletes have to suffer because of this decision.
If she feel she has been dealt with unfairly, she may want to blame her advisor for the situation.
The much abused term "benefit of doubt" goes to former record holder.
The integrity and honour of AIDA as a sport federation is a priority.
Sebastian Naslund
AIDA Media/PR
Last edited:
So Sebastian,
What happen with: benefit of the doubt will be given to the athlete? And how is it possible to give sanctions to people that following the existing rules? And why remove two perfect records when it’s proven that no cheating was involved and that Natalia Molchanova deliver the dives without any kind of un-fair coaching or treatment and most important followed the rules there was to be followed by the athlete.
To punish people with rules that do not exist is an interesting manoeuvre, it tells us that it's probably been no real lawyers present in this secret investigation and this for sure raise questions about how impartial the review has been. It is also highly remarkable that there are things in the investigation that does not match the reality in this case!
First of all; here you have an investigation and a verdict (from a confidential investigation?!) in a democratic organization that did not give the accused an opportunity to answer for themselves. Only this by itself is disqualifying the whole investigation through this is a basic human right.
Secondly is about inconsistent behaviour. 2008 the whole AIDA community including the Executive Board accepted the exact same situation at the competition in Lignano, Italy. Natalia and Alexey did 2 WR and I was the head judge, second judge was Pim Vermeulen who was the AIDA Sport Officer at the moment and was judging at the other side of the pool in that competition. Here were no complains or even the smallest question about correctness even if I was officially training with them both at an earlier 4v training camp that year. So why should there be any questions when you follow the exact same rules one year later with an additional three judges checking and judging everything. This situation tells you directly that the judge, athlete and/or the organizer did not see any wrong, by the rules, at the competition one year later in 2009.
Then I never received any payment, only reimbursement for my expenses, traveling and accommodation costs.
/B
ps. who is the person behind DivingDane?
What happen with: benefit of the doubt will be given to the athlete? And how is it possible to give sanctions to people that following the existing rules? And why remove two perfect records when it’s proven that no cheating was involved and that Natalia Molchanova deliver the dives without any kind of un-fair coaching or treatment and most important followed the rules there was to be followed by the athlete.
To punish people with rules that do not exist is an interesting manoeuvre, it tells us that it's probably been no real lawyers present in this secret investigation and this for sure raise questions about how impartial the review has been. It is also highly remarkable that there are things in the investigation that does not match the reality in this case!
First of all; here you have an investigation and a verdict (from a confidential investigation?!) in a democratic organization that did not give the accused an opportunity to answer for themselves. Only this by itself is disqualifying the whole investigation through this is a basic human right.
Secondly is about inconsistent behaviour. 2008 the whole AIDA community including the Executive Board accepted the exact same situation at the competition in Lignano, Italy. Natalia and Alexey did 2 WR and I was the head judge, second judge was Pim Vermeulen who was the AIDA Sport Officer at the moment and was judging at the other side of the pool in that competition. Here were no complains or even the smallest question about correctness even if I was officially training with them both at an earlier 4v training camp that year. So why should there be any questions when you follow the exact same rules one year later with an additional three judges checking and judging everything. This situation tells you directly that the judge, athlete and/or the organizer did not see any wrong, by the rules, at the competition one year later in 2009.
Then I never received any payment, only reimbursement for my expenses, traveling and accommodation costs.
/B
ps. who is the person behind DivingDane?
Last edited:
Sebastian,
btw, you sign you post with Sebastian Naslund AIDA Media/PR - it means that what you say represents the whole AIDA Executive Boards point of view?!
/B
btw, you sign you post with Sebastian Naslund AIDA Media/PR - it means that what you say represents the whole AIDA Executive Boards point of view?!
/B
If AIDA doesn't have rules for these kind of incidents (conflict of interest/necessity of unbiased judging) I certainly think they shoud make one in order to prevent something like this happening again. It's very unfortunate for everyone (But that's very easy to say now, after the fact 
Bill do you honestly think what occured is fair to all athletes. and hat you are free of blame???
i see you still choose to ingore the issue at hand, you cant give a record to somebody regardless of performance because of the circumstance.
there is an UNFAIR advantage given EVEN if the judging was fair. simply by having your coach as your judge gives an unfair advantage that others do not have...
also see you ignored my other question.... WERE YOU PAID FOR TRAINING/COACHING ETC the competitor?
i dont understand how you can see your actions as exceptable.
all will agree that Natalia has the ability to do these dives but the dives were not done under accepted World Record attempt circumstances so its impossible to give a record that is fair to all divers both the current record holders AND future record holders.
it is equivelent to somebody doing a World record distance dive but not in a world record situation. the requirements are not met so the dive cant be counted as a world record.
i'm done with this thread, i really am for somebody who for such a long time guided our sport and is supposed to be a guiding light to judges and competitors alike, yet cant till the difference between right and wrong is sad.
DD OUT
i see you still choose to ingore the issue at hand, you cant give a record to somebody regardless of performance because of the circumstance.
there is an UNFAIR advantage given EVEN if the judging was fair. simply by having your coach as your judge gives an unfair advantage that others do not have...
also see you ignored my other question.... WERE YOU PAID FOR TRAINING/COACHING ETC the competitor?
i dont understand how you can see your actions as exceptable.
all will agree that Natalia has the ability to do these dives but the dives were not done under accepted World Record attempt circumstances so its impossible to give a record that is fair to all divers both the current record holders AND future record holders.
it is equivelent to somebody doing a World record distance dive but not in a world record situation. the requirements are not met so the dive cant be counted as a world record.
i'm done with this thread, i really am for somebody who for such a long time guided our sport and is supposed to be a guiding light to judges and competitors alike, yet cant till the difference between right and wrong is sad.
DD OUT
DivingDane
Free of blame is nobody. And especially not me.
AIDA was on the way to add a conflict of interest rule long before my time. But they decided that there was very good reason why not create a rule about this. Simply because it is impossible to judge/check/control this in all levels/situations - and also to judge/check/control what REALLY is a conflict of interest situation. (money, relations, feelings etc etc etc) Then it is impossible to check money that goes under the table or anything else that can be done outside of knowledge for the public. What case of conflict of interest is most strong, is it money, is it personal feelings or other different relations/connections? And who is the one to judge this exact and correctly/precisely?
Therefore have AIDA put all focus on cheating instead. Cheating is very easy to judge/check/control and is the MAIN things to control and make sure not happen. That is why the DC was created in the first place but it looks like this info has been all ignored in this case. (the reason to pic on conflict of interest is suspect cheating)
And the history is long of so called conflict of interest situation, but AIDA have always put all trust in that the judge is not cheating. Like at the WC in Bahamas last year where we had Gabi, Carlos Coste partner/manager, as one of the 3 judges judging all of Carlos opponents. Or the up-coming WC in Okinawa where we will have 3 judges from Japan and one judge from USA and one from Finland. To have a full no conflict of interest situations - the judge from USA can not judge his own team or any team competing agains his team. Same for the judges from Japan and the one from Finland. BUT we still allows this to happen because we trust our judges to not cheating.
And again: I never received any payment, only reimbursement for my expenses, traveling and accommodation costs.
/B
Free of blame is nobody. And especially not me.
AIDA was on the way to add a conflict of interest rule long before my time. But they decided that there was very good reason why not create a rule about this. Simply because it is impossible to judge/check/control this in all levels/situations - and also to judge/check/control what REALLY is a conflict of interest situation. (money, relations, feelings etc etc etc) Then it is impossible to check money that goes under the table or anything else that can be done outside of knowledge for the public. What case of conflict of interest is most strong, is it money, is it personal feelings or other different relations/connections? And who is the one to judge this exact and correctly/precisely?
Therefore have AIDA put all focus on cheating instead. Cheating is very easy to judge/check/control and is the MAIN things to control and make sure not happen. That is why the DC was created in the first place but it looks like this info has been all ignored in this case. (the reason to pic on conflict of interest is suspect cheating)
And the history is long of so called conflict of interest situation, but AIDA have always put all trust in that the judge is not cheating. Like at the WC in Bahamas last year where we had Gabi, Carlos Coste partner/manager, as one of the 3 judges judging all of Carlos opponents. Or the up-coming WC in Okinawa where we will have 3 judges from Japan and one judge from USA and one from Finland. To have a full no conflict of interest situations - the judge from USA can not judge his own team or any team competing agains his team. Same for the judges from Japan and the one from Finland. BUT we still allows this to happen because we trust our judges to not cheating.
And again: I never received any payment, only reimbursement for my expenses, traveling and accommodation costs.
/B
To AIDA leaders and AIDA members.
There are TWO things going on here:
- A conflict of interest.
- AIDA not following and a proper and fair procedure.
Yes I worry about conflict of interest.
But what worries me MUCH more is an organisation that chooses not to follow proper procedures. It worries me because it's a reflection of the leaderships' character.
And that worries me, because this will direct the culture of the whole organisation.
The solution can be simple as I stated above in my previous post:
- Apologise to the members and those involved for not following a fair procedure.
- Have a new proper procedure.
By doing this the AIDA board will win the respect of all members, and prove itself indeed worthy of such important position by having the courage to recognise their own mistakes and truly BE the leading example so many need.
In the words of Gandhi:
- BE the change you want to see in the world.
Love, Courage and Water,
Kars
There are TWO things going on here:
- A conflict of interest.
- AIDA not following and a proper and fair procedure.
Yes I worry about conflict of interest.
But what worries me MUCH more is an organisation that chooses not to follow proper procedures. It worries me because it's a reflection of the leaderships' character.
And that worries me, because this will direct the culture of the whole organisation.
The solution can be simple as I stated above in my previous post:
- Apologise to the members and those involved for not following a fair procedure.
- Have a new proper procedure.
By doing this the AIDA board will win the respect of all members, and prove itself indeed worthy of such important position by having the courage to recognise their own mistakes and truly BE the leading example so many need.
In the words of Gandhi:
- BE the change you want to see in the world.
Love, Courage and Water,
Kars
Last edited:
Fattah,
Natalia Molchanova did not bring the tag to the surface on that dive so she got 96 points instead of 97. WR most be white card - not yellow or red.
have a nice day
/B
Natalia Molchanova did not bring the tag to the surface on that dive so she got 96 points instead of 97. WR most be white card - not yellow or red.
have a nice day
/B
Do you have more info maybe?