Video Review Guidelines

When we started reviewing the submitted against the video recording guidelines, we saw that we would likely have to reject hundreds of videos from the competition if we held them all to the details of those guidelines. After talking to NGBs and coaches, we heard that in many countries, due to new health and travel restrictions, along with schools and colleges starting, many of these groups would be unable to record new videos.

The first IJRU Championship should be decided on the hard work and performance of the athletes, not how well someone operates a camera or holds a QR code – with the integrity of the competition being maintained. Most of the problems with the videos are small oversights that don’t impact the integrity of the submission.

We took the original criteria and went back to their underlying goals, mapping them to what is acceptable (even if not good for the video production or great for judging) and under which conditions to reject (mostly situations where we can’t maintain the integrity of the competition).

Video review criteria

Below you will find a clear, goal-based guide for how we will decide which videos to accept and reject. It follows the principles of the submission requirements and gives more flexibility in how they are evaluated.

	Purpose to prevent	Acceptable	Reject a video if
Verification code	Teams submitting old videos before the VWC time period opened	since this is the first time for this requirement, the code doesn’t have to be legible or scannable	No QR code is shown at all Other evidence that the video was recorded before the VWC recording opening date No other way to verify the recording date of the video
Athlete verification	No way to see the athlete’s face so not sure who is really in the video	Athlete leaves after verification but returns and we can see their face during/before/after the routine	Cannot see the athlete’s face during or before the routine (if they stay in frame after we see their face)
Athletes in frame	Swapping between athletes, getting outside assistance, running start	OK if an athlete partially leaves the frame, as long as part of their body is visible, so we know no one switched out or got external assistance (e.g., a trampoline or tumble track) An athlete fully leaves the frame before or after competing, but not between competing (if “athlete verification” can be reestablished)	After a routine starts, an athlete completely leaves the frame and returns to continue competing
Landscape format	Poor videos on the production, hard to judge	OK, may not get as much credit as a better recording (ability to see some skills, entertainment value)	Can’t be judged
Fixed frame	Moving the camera to follow the athletes, giving an advantage, allowing the use of more space, hard to judge	Bouncing or unsteady hand-held camera work is ok Slightly edging the camera over if the athlete gets close to the edge is ok as long as the athlete would not have gone out of frame entirely without the movement	Large movement of the camera following the athlete in frame (1/3 across a station to capture a tumbling pass is not ok)
Clear audio	Judges not knowing how to call false starts/switches, when to stop counting The timing tracks used don’t have incorrect timing	Garbled or quiet audio (but still usable beeps) No audio (for freestyle)	On speed: start, stop and switch beeps are inaudible/unusable for judging Timing track timing is wrong (longer than the specified time beep-to-beep)
No editing	Editing together parts of routines Speeding up (time compressing) speed entries	Cropping at start or end of video	Evidence of splicing (examples: sudden jumps in movement, changes in lighting) Evidence of speedup/slowdown

You can still submit videos!

The video submissions are still open. You have an opportunity to upload a video that you thought would be rejected (if it meets the criteria below). The VideoHub site will be open through August 25.