At the Nordic Ski World Cup in Trondheim, the eternal discussion about the attachment controls in ski jumping has flared up. The focus is on DSV star Karl Geiger, to which criticism from Poland. Ski jumping expert Luis Holuch classifies the topic in his comment for sports.de.
Ski jumping should be as well as Formula 1. FIS race director Sandro Pertile has not only expressed this request once in his almost five years of term.
And at least in the event of discussions about the material and about compliance with the rules, the ski jumping of the premier class of motorsport is in no way inferior. But that should not be understood as a compliment.
The current case is Karl Geiger’s jumping suit. He caused a critical voice and inquiries, especially among journalists in Poland. And that is not surprising if you know how critically you deal with the discipline there – also because it is so important there.
No clarity in ski jumping
In addition, with Adam Malysz at the head of the Polish association, a former world-class ski jumper, who likes to comment on all possible topics in public.
Karl Geiger, in turn, looked at the whole thing factually and soberly and said: I have been checked several times at this Nordic Ski World Cup and passed all controls, and the topic is also done for me. It can also be for him, because as a athlete he is not responsible for control and compliance with the rules, but the FIS, especially material controller Christian Kathol.
The background to the dispute can be found here:
And it is not the first time the focus of the discussions. We remember the World Cup in Willingen when he disqualified Timi Zajc and whose Slovenian association opened openly on the same evening with a legal dispute. Even there, Kathol did not provide clarity – just as little as in the current case.
This is not a good sign.
Likewise, it is not a good sign that there are these discussions at all. Because in itself, the FIS had promised themselves from the introduction of electronic chips in the jump suits in summer that these discussions are once and for all.
And you can state that this has not been proven and there is still an urgent need for action.