The Crow Hop

One of the most controversial rules in competitive diving is that concerning the crow hop. The crow hop is defined as the lifting of one or both feet from the diving board prior to the take off when a diver is executing a dive from the backward or inward group. The intent of the rule is to prevent the divers from gaining added lift from the board when executing a dive. Also to prevent injury to a diver who may lose balance when taking off from the board. However, it has been found that very few divers have been seriously injured using the crow hop. This is possibly due to the fact that the divers practice dives with a crow hop in their workouts. Through constant repetition divers learn to adjust the body to any off balanced positions.

In previous years, few judges have ever really penalized divers for doing the crow hop. Recently much attention has been focused on the crow hop, when it was observed that many of the Chinese divers crow hopped when executing difficult dives. Most judges did not penalize these divers because they were in awe of the great performance. In time, the world got used the Chinese and it became more apparent that these divers, along with divers from other countries including the United States were using the crow hop to gain a height advantage. In some cases, the crow hop was so high that it could have been considered a double jump on the board.

An effort to enforce the rule was recently made in Perth. Australia at the World Championships when a special meeting was held on two occasions at which the rules and in particular the crow hop and split tuck, were discussed. Even when given specific instructions, some of the judges still ignored the crow hop rule and did not penalize the divers. However, many of the divers crow hopped less when informed that the rule was to be enforced. What makes a diver crow hop is not exactly known but there are several theories on the subject. Perhaps the most popular theory is that which relates the crow hop with the posture of the diver. It appears that when a diver has poor posture or possesses a postural defect as a result of an injury or muscular disease, he or she usually does not stand on the board in perfect balance because a shoulder or hip may be lower than the other. Therefore, when making the basic movements used in backward and inward take offs from the board, the diver must make certain physical adjustments to leave the board in reasonable balance. The common adjustments made by the diver is the lifting of one arm sooner, higher, or in a slightly different direction than the other arm which causes the diver to lift one or both feet from the board in an upward and/or forward direction.

Although it is almost impossible to correct a crow hop of divers who have some kind of physical defect that affects the posture, these divers will still be penalized for something which they have little or not control. How to correct or improve the crow hop has long been a problem for the diver. Many things have been tried such as slowing or increasing the speed of the arms prior to the takeoff, placing more or less of the feet on the board, placing the feet in different positions while standing on the board, moving the fulcrum forward or backward to change the rhythm of the board, etc. Some have even tried the "crow hopper stopper" which is placing a rubber band, cut from an inner tube, around the end of the board then placing the toes and instep under the band which keeps the feet on the board prior to the takeoff. The feet slip out from underneath the band when the diver jumps from the board.

The present rule regarding the crow hop may or may not be fair to all divers, especially to those who cannot correct the crow hop due to a physical defect. But the rule must stand and be enforced so that other divers can't use the crow hop as a means of obtaining greater height which, obviously, gives them an advantage over those who do not crow hop. This writer strongly suggests that if the crow hop rule is to be enforced, then it is the responsibility of the diving referee to instruct the judges to do so at each meet. Otherwise, if the judges are not going to recognize and adhere to the intent of this rule, then why have the rule?