If you are suggesting, I have taken him out of context, I dont think so. I think he was pretty clear. Flex the ankles to start the turn.
For example you said "In your case, I strongly suspect that as the athletes push into the boot, you dont have the forces needed to make it bend...hence the ankles dont flex forward, but instead the knees and hips flex...sending the COM back", whereas I think NEC is talking about a foot pullback that includes extension of the hip.
Since it isnt possible with the forces available, the skier will either be stuck and not move at all...or the skier will push their hips back. Further he suggested pulling the foot up "dorsiflex"...well this wont get your weight even to the ball...this will put your weight on the heel. Even if your mass does come forward a bit...your mass will still act through the heel....it has to since the skier's body has more mass then the foot....only once the foot has hit the top of the boot, can the mass move past the fulcrum of the heel and move back to the ball. But that all takes time.
Alternativley, if it was possible, and the skier could flex the boot as he suggests, and extend as he suggests, and taking into the converging paths....well, that will be a superman.
But why would you isolate some of my view? Read it all.....I stay with this thread for 9 pages, for someone to take some of my view and isolate it.
I am not isolating it, but some of the quotes I have seen going back and forth are.
As I wrote earlier, the main problem here is someone is looking at the ankle joint in isloation.....its important to understand the whole picture.
I think we are in agreement as to what happens in phase 3 or the control phase..or the bolded bit. But fundamentally opposed as to what happens just leaving skis flat.
I suggest that we push down on the ball of the foot.
NEC suggests we pull up on the ball of the foot.
How much of a difference is this? Well in reality of degree of "ankle openess/closeness" you are right...its not likely much at all. Since we can only open to the boots neutral position....and realistically, the forces are so low, we can only flex to the boots neutral position....so where is the difference?
Bottom of the foot.
My way, has the mass acting through the ball...as the forces build we can adjust the amount of ankle flex to keep it at the ball or allow it to move back to the arch as required.
NECs way has the mass acting through heel....once the forces build, it will naturally move to ball...and then from there, we agree what happens in the middle of the turn...at least
Ok this is the force between the body and the boot. However, the contact points between the body and the boot is around the heel AND between the shin and cuff.
The force between the boot and the ski may be quite similar in both cases and the ski does not care about the forces inside the boot. As I said before I think the major problem with too much dorsi in this phase is that you limit your lateral foot movements and balancing.
After that NEC advocates this foot containtment idea...where as I agree with Ron Lemaster...ankles straigten at the end of the turn, and we may even feel our calfs pressed into the back of the boot when leaving turns.