Another IFSC rule problem - Stranik should have won

Martin Stráník would have won the first WC if he had gotten the bonus he was standing on in a very controlled position during his second attempt, see the picture. Alexey Rubtsov did stand on it in exactly the same position and then he grabbed the undercling with his left hand and got the bonus. Based on the rule, Alexey should not have gotten the bonus as he did not "achieve" anything by just marking the undercling with his hand. On the other side, both should have gotten the bonus for their foot, as they certainly both "achieved" something and also "controlled" it while they were standing on it. What if you get a no-hands by standing on a bonus, should that not count as "controlled"? Rule 7.4.2: The Bonus Hold shall be considered as “controlled” where a competitor has made use of the hold to achieve a stable or controlled position. It should be noted that one of the IFSC officials, Graeme Alderson, made this comment in a UKC forum thread. "Martin Stranik has been around long enough (medalist at World Champs back in Aviles 2007) to know the rules." If the commentators or one of the most experienced WC boulders did not understand this rule, Graeme and IFSC should possibly show some self-criticism and try to define the rule better, instead of blaming Martin for failing to understand it. A very simple and logical improvement is that the referee should inform the competitor that a bonus has been achieved, in exactly the same same way the referees inform about a top-out. In fact, Stranik marked the hold with his hand on his first try and by doing so he thought that he had gotten the bonus.