The cancellation of the Margaret River Pro was undoubtedly the most controversial event of the last few weeks in the world of surfing, perhaps of the month and perhaps of the entire year. Could the event have gone ahead? Did Medina and Italo give their opinions in search of points and not avoid sharks? Was the danger really that great?

In the following paragraphs, four surfers respond, two in favor of what the WSL decided and two against, and give their corresponding arguments.

Sebastian Correa
Professional surfer

I'm too scared of sharks, I wouldn't want to be in the position of the tour surfers having to run around in fear. I think safety comes first, and with two shark attacks in one day they shouldn't go back to Western Australia with the tour, and if they do go back I think all the tour surfers have to agree.

Below: Sebastián Correa is afraid of sharks but not of giant, square tubes like the one in the video. 

Marcelo Matos
Qualified opinion maker

Margaret River itself doesn't appeal to me too much, it's a shame that once they surprise us with a high-quality wave where you can see good surfing, they cancel it. Surfing (as they define it) is an extreme sport, it depends on natural factors, suspending it for a few hours or even a day is one thing, cancelling it and handing out points is quite another. From my point of view, the competitor risks more by going to cities like Rio (where there are more than 15 murders a day and there have already been incidents with pro surfers) or surfing Tahopoo or Pipeline; it's a question of statistics. Even so, they could invest money in security and technology instead of in pools and solve the shark problem. On the other hand, I think that Medina and his gang took advantage of this situation, and made the best move of the championship, putting pressure on it to be cancelled.

Renato Quezada
Coach of the Peruvian surfing team

In Formula 1 you regulate the tools. Playing with nature and anticipating a shark attack is impossible. Is it so difficult to distinguish the difference between the essence of surfing and life itself? If there is a high possibility of attacks, do you force as an organizer to put the athlete's integrity at risk for a championship or world circuit? What is more important?

If my common sense of life protection works well, what decision do I make? Into the water?

I lived directly on a QS 6000 in Birubi, Australia, an area known for having sharks, the experience of "attacks". It was the last event of 2017, there were about eight CTs and the best of the QS. The ex-professional Sarah Beardmore and a whole qualified crew used software developed to map the entire Australian coast, on the beach they were with two drones to watch, with super lenses, two motorcycles just to be alert of approaches to the line up and to apply protocol in case something happens.

In the end, two of them appeared at two different times, they came closer than usual and the alarm went off, the motorcycles flew away and they took a girl to the shore in seconds, almost injuring her. There were two episodes on the same day and they cancelled the next day.

To keep calm, they said they were just passing sharks, but in fact I found out that one of them was a bull shark measuring over four meters, known for its curiosity and not for attacking humans so much.

In my opinion, that experience was like playing with fire. What if the calculations fail? It's like an accident, you never know what's going to happen, but what if it does happen? Is it fair to compete with that stress? They shouldn't hold tournaments in shark zones, period!

Miguel Combina

Qualified opinionator, former coach of the Chilean surfing team

I think this decision is bad. What are they going to do with Jeffreys? It would be better to ban the entire Formula 1 world championship, since the chances of something fatal happening are greater.

My position, the same as Tom Carroll's, is that technology can be used to prevent an attack, and if an attack occurs after that, unfortunately it is the sport we play, we don't play tennis, the waves are in the sea and there are many dangers. Are there no deaths at Pipe and are championships still held there? It's not that I am in favor of putting a competitor at risk, but they made the easy decision.

Two Brazilian goofballs complained, why didn't any Hawaiians or Australians do it? Those Brazilians were more afraid of not making it past the third round than of sharks, it's a wave where anyone can win, not very convenient for the aerial weapon that those Brazilians have, the two that I think will fight for the title at the end of the year, every point counts, it was the best move by Medina and Ferreira.