No Bronze for You!
August 14, 2024 12:45 PM Subscribe
American gymnast Jordan Chiles was awarded the bronze medal at the 2024 Paris Olympics. She was then ordered to return it.
Deep dive from Vox.
In a move that reeks of racism, the Olympics flip-flopped on their scoring. With a ruling from a tribunal panel, they determined that the initial, objectively incorrect, score should stand, awarding the bronze to Romanian gymnast, Ana Barbosu, instead of Chiles.
Here's the recap:
--Chiles competes in the floor exercise
--Chiles is awarded a score of 13.666, which put Barbosu into 3rd place
--Within 47 seconds, Chiles' coach files an inquiry stating that the judges mis-scored
--Judges agree and award Chiles a score of 13.766, jumping Chiles to 3rd place
--Chiles received the bronze on a medal platform with two other women of color
--Romania claimed that Chiles' inquiry about the score was filed four seconds after the one-minute allowed time
--The International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled in Romania’s favor, demanding Chiles return the medal. Interestingly enough, the head of that panel has ties to Romania (NYT gift link).
If the judges hadn't missed the tenth of a point originally, there wouldn't be an issue at all, and Chiles would have the medal. The panel is somehow able to ignore time-stamped evidence that the inquiry was filed in time.
In an unexpected turn of events, Chiles will receive the most unique medal of all though: a bronze clock from womens water polo sponsor Flavor Flav (story from ESPN).
In a move that reeks of racism, the Olympics flip-flopped on their scoring. With a ruling from a tribunal panel, they determined that the initial, objectively incorrect, score should stand, awarding the bronze to Romanian gymnast, Ana Barbosu, instead of Chiles.
Here's the recap:
--Chiles competes in the floor exercise
--Chiles is awarded a score of 13.666, which put Barbosu into 3rd place
--Within 47 seconds, Chiles' coach files an inquiry stating that the judges mis-scored
--Judges agree and award Chiles a score of 13.766, jumping Chiles to 3rd place
--Chiles received the bronze on a medal platform with two other women of color
--Romania claimed that Chiles' inquiry about the score was filed four seconds after the one-minute allowed time
--The International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled in Romania’s favor, demanding Chiles return the medal. Interestingly enough, the head of that panel has ties to Romania (NYT gift link).
If the judges hadn't missed the tenth of a point originally, there wouldn't be an issue at all, and Chiles would have the medal. The panel is somehow able to ignore time-stamped evidence that the inquiry was filed in time.
In an unexpected turn of events, Chiles will receive the most unique medal of all though: a bronze clock from womens water polo sponsor Flavor Flav (story from ESPN).
According to reports that were published, the Romanian Gymnastics Federation is saying that they weren't wanting Chiles' medal taken away - they wanted it shared.
Take that for what you will.
posted by drewbage1847 at 1:04 PM on August 14 [17 favorites]
Take that for what you will.
posted by drewbage1847 at 1:04 PM on August 14 [17 favorites]
Sometimes you get an Olympic medal for your performance. Other times it is less clear. Seems stupid and absurd at first glance, but if you think about it, this means any one of us has a chance of being awarded a bronze medal.
posted by GoblinHoney at 1:12 PM on August 14 [3 favorites]
posted by GoblinHoney at 1:12 PM on August 14 [3 favorites]
To add to the story:
After the initial FIG ruling, USA Gymnastics submitted time-stamped video evidence that the inquiry was submitted 47 seconds after the score was posted, well within the required one minute. This was rejected because "rules do not allow for an arbitral award to be reconsidered even when conclusive new evidence is presented."
posted by mcduff at 1:13 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
After the initial FIG ruling, USA Gymnastics submitted time-stamped video evidence that the inquiry was submitted 47 seconds after the score was posted, well within the required one minute. This was rejected because "rules do not allow for an arbitral award to be reconsidered even when conclusive new evidence is presented."
posted by mcduff at 1:13 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
Is someone demanding that the medal be physically returned? Because I do not see the optics of that going well for CAS or IFG.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 1:15 PM on August 14
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 1:15 PM on August 14
Boy, do I miss Sports Illustrated.
posted by Ideefixe at 1:20 PM on August 14 [5 favorites]
posted by Ideefixe at 1:20 PM on August 14 [5 favorites]
WaPo: The push to strip Jordan Chiles of her Olympic medal smells awfully foul (gift link)
I don't have a link to it, but someone asked on Reddit what happens if she just doesn't return it and they basically said her career would be shut down.
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:23 PM on August 14
I don't have a link to it, but someone asked on Reddit what happens if she just doesn't return it and they basically said her career would be shut down.
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:23 PM on August 14
In a move that reeks of racism, the Olympics flip-flopped on their scoring.
Well, they flip-flopped again, a second time. They had actually already announced Chiles' score as what would have been fifth place, and then, while Ana Barbosu was celebrating, waving the Romanian flag around at having won the bronze, they flip-flopped to give it to Chiles. The Romanians took this very personally, because this isn't even the only time in recent memory that an appeal by an American after scores were announced took bronze from a Romanian and left them with nothing. This already happened in 2012.
Then later, the judges flip-flopped to take it away from Chiles and give it back to Barbosu.
Romania can be a pretty racist place, but for their part, the Romanians' reaction hasn't been "the white girl should have won" so much as "how cruel to let someone think they won then snatch it from them." Their push was indeed for a shared medal, not taking one away from Chiles.
I have no idea what was in the judges' hearts or why they changed their minds twice (but not a third time, when that might have made sense.) But the Romanian take has pretty consistently been, "Hey, how 'bout we don't snatch medals from people?" It seems, from what I have seen, to be purely a reaction to the horror of Barbosu having suffered because of the initial flip flop.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 1:42 PM on August 14 [25 favorites]
Well, they flip-flopped again, a second time. They had actually already announced Chiles' score as what would have been fifth place, and then, while Ana Barbosu was celebrating, waving the Romanian flag around at having won the bronze, they flip-flopped to give it to Chiles. The Romanians took this very personally, because this isn't even the only time in recent memory that an appeal by an American after scores were announced took bronze from a Romanian and left them with nothing. This already happened in 2012.
Then later, the judges flip-flopped to take it away from Chiles and give it back to Barbosu.
Romania can be a pretty racist place, but for their part, the Romanians' reaction hasn't been "the white girl should have won" so much as "how cruel to let someone think they won then snatch it from them." Their push was indeed for a shared medal, not taking one away from Chiles.
I have no idea what was in the judges' hearts or why they changed their minds twice (but not a third time, when that might have made sense.) But the Romanian take has pretty consistently been, "Hey, how 'bout we don't snatch medals from people?" It seems, from what I have seen, to be purely a reaction to the horror of Barbosu having suffered because of the initial flip flop.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 1:42 PM on August 14 [25 favorites]
I don't have any strong opinions on who should have won personally, other than wow, get it right the first time, or definitively at the end at least, because this is agonizing for people.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 1:48 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 1:48 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
According to reports that were published, the Romanian Gymnastics Federation is saying that they weren't wanting Chiles' medal taken away - they wanted it shared.
Puts me in mind of Canadian solo synchronized swimmer Sylvie Fréchette, who lost a gold medal in 1992 when a judge mistakenly entered a score as 8.7 rather than 9.7. Despite the judge's protestations, the score stood and the gold was awarded to Kristen Babb-Sprague of the USA. But 16 months later, after a lengthy post-Games appeal process, Fréchette's medal was upgraded to gold, with Babb-Sprague keeping hers (and no silver medal awarded). So, good on the Romanians for not wanting to strip Chiles of her medal, and may the Olympic committee be forced to drink Parisian-sewage-laden Seine water until they smarten the fuck up.
posted by hangashore at 1:52 PM on August 14 [10 favorites]
Puts me in mind of Canadian solo synchronized swimmer Sylvie Fréchette, who lost a gold medal in 1992 when a judge mistakenly entered a score as 8.7 rather than 9.7. Despite the judge's protestations, the score stood and the gold was awarded to Kristen Babb-Sprague of the USA. But 16 months later, after a lengthy post-Games appeal process, Fréchette's medal was upgraded to gold, with Babb-Sprague keeping hers (and no silver medal awarded). So, good on the Romanians for not wanting to strip Chiles of her medal, and may the Olympic committee be forced to drink Parisian-sewage-laden Seine water until they smarten the fuck up.
posted by hangashore at 1:52 PM on August 14 [10 favorites]
Wow, way to slide quickly past the part where the US had the Olympics take the medal away from the Romanian gymnast. It’s fine as long as it’s not happening to an American, right?
posted by Galvanic at 1:53 PM on August 14 [9 favorites]
posted by Galvanic at 1:53 PM on August 14 [9 favorites]
And the Romanian who came in 4th initially because she was faulted for stepping out of bounds even though she didn't, but didn't file an appeal to get ahead of her teammate who was 3rd at the time.
It was a shitshow no matter what.
posted by LionIndex at 2:20 PM on August 14 [18 favorites]
It was a shitshow no matter what.
posted by LionIndex at 2:20 PM on August 14 [18 favorites]
Yeah, I don’t see how the move to rescind the medal reeks of racism. To me, that reeks of bureaucratic incompetence, indecision, and flip-flopping. Once Chiles was in the spotlight, the racists came out and started doing their racist thing, because that’s what racists do. But just because racists use an incident as an excuse to be racist doesn’t mean the thing itself is racist, and acting like it is actually plays right into the racists’ hands…because it obscures th obvious truth that if the roles were switched, and Chiles was demanding the medal back from
the Romanian medalist, you can bet your bottom dollar the racists would be out in force being grotesquely racist about that.The reason Chiles is getting racist abuse is because she’s a black woman in the spotlight.I don’t really see the medal dispute as more than an inciting incident, but I’m open to hearing otherwise if people genuinely disagree.
posted by Merricat Blackwood at 2:28 PM on August 14 [14 favorites]
the Romanian medalist, you can bet your bottom dollar the racists would be out in force being grotesquely racist about that.The reason Chiles is getting racist abuse is because she’s a black woman in the spotlight.I don’t really see the medal dispute as more than an inciting incident, but I’m open to hearing otherwise if people genuinely disagree.
posted by Merricat Blackwood at 2:28 PM on August 14 [14 favorites]
Wow, way to slide quickly past the part where the US had the Olympics take the medal away from the Romanian gymnast. It’s fine as long as it’s not happening to an American, right?
The US didn't have them take the medal away. They pointed out a judging error, which was confirmed to be an error, within the confines of the rules. Regarding the second reversal, the evidence shows that two appeals were made within the required timeframe. So that is actually taking the medal away.
posted by bluloo at 2:30 PM on August 14 [10 favorites]
The US didn't have them take the medal away. They pointed out a judging error, which was confirmed to be an error, within the confines of the rules. Regarding the second reversal, the evidence shows that two appeals were made within the required timeframe. So that is actually taking the medal away.
posted by bluloo at 2:30 PM on August 14 [10 favorites]
This system seems unbearably cruel to athletes on both sides.
posted by ceramicspaniel at 2:36 PM on August 14 [22 favorites]
posted by ceramicspaniel at 2:36 PM on August 14 [22 favorites]
It was a shitshow no matter what.
Yeah, that is my takeaway.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 2:38 PM on August 14 [6 favorites]
Yeah, that is my takeaway.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 2:38 PM on August 14 [6 favorites]
Panel member who ruled on Team USA’s Jordan Chiles’ bronze medal appeal has a history of representing Romania in legal cases (CNN)
posted by armacy at 2:52 PM on August 14 [1 favorite]
posted by armacy at 2:52 PM on August 14 [1 favorite]
It kinda seems like maybe the main job of the Olympics is to keep reminding everyone of how corrupt the Olympics organizations are.
posted by aramaic at 2:54 PM on August 14 [25 favorites]
posted by aramaic at 2:54 PM on August 14 [25 favorites]
And the Romanian who came in 4th initially because she was faulted for stepping out of bounds even though she didn't, but didn't file an appeal to get ahead of her teammate who was 3rd at the time.
This is not a minor point. To argue that Chiles actually won the bronze is to say that you reject one arbitrary, incompetent judges' ruling that harmed her, even as you stand by another that benefitted her. It's a "Well, our bureaucratic paperwork was better than yours" argument, not a "justice says [person] actually won" argument.
SHIT. SHOW.
I think the real lesson is that the judges should run a much tighter ship that doesn't leave medals to be resolved based on appeals and paperwork after scores have already been announced.
This is why the Romanians proposed a three way tie: it was the only non-heartbreaking way to resolve the administrative incompetence.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 3:00 PM on August 14 [15 favorites]
This is not a minor point. To argue that Chiles actually won the bronze is to say that you reject one arbitrary, incompetent judges' ruling that harmed her, even as you stand by another that benefitted her. It's a "Well, our bureaucratic paperwork was better than yours" argument, not a "justice says [person] actually won" argument.
SHIT. SHOW.
I think the real lesson is that the judges should run a much tighter ship that doesn't leave medals to be resolved based on appeals and paperwork after scores have already been announced.
This is why the Romanians proposed a three way tie: it was the only non-heartbreaking way to resolve the administrative incompetence.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 3:00 PM on August 14 [15 favorites]
It's hard to parse how much of the problem is racism just because CAS's history of corruption and stupidity is so profoundly indefensible that it would be hard to parse whether any give decision was racist or not. Though, with the history of sporting authorities and policing gender issues primarily for non-white athletes, I'd say racism is probably also on the list of their issues.
posted by jacquilynne at 3:06 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
posted by jacquilynne at 3:06 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
Just the fact they get all of one whole minute to file an appeal is itself insane. As is the fact that the judges apparently don't have to explain their scoring, so Barbosu's "neutral deduction" never has to be justified, even though it seems likely to be wrong.
And yes, this is ridiculous and demoralizing for both Chiles and Barbosu, and they should both get bronze. I forget where I saw it but there was an article about multiple precedents for medal sharing in cases like this.
posted by trig at 3:09 PM on August 14 [4 favorites]
And yes, this is ridiculous and demoralizing for both Chiles and Barbosu, and they should both get bronze. I forget where I saw it but there was an article about multiple precedents for medal sharing in cases like this.
posted by trig at 3:09 PM on August 14 [4 favorites]
The US didn't have them take the medal away
The Romanian had the medal and the US appealed it and the medal was taken away from the Romanian. How else would you like me to phrase it?
There’s lots of completing claims about who is right, and what the objective standard is, but don’t back off the fact that medals are getting taken away from people and the US initiated that process.
posted by Galvanic at 3:12 PM on August 14 [3 favorites]
The Romanian had the medal and the US appealed it and the medal was taken away from the Romanian. How else would you like me to phrase it?
There’s lots of completing claims about who is right, and what the objective standard is, but don’t back off the fact that medals are getting taken away from people and the US initiated that process.
posted by Galvanic at 3:12 PM on August 14 [3 favorites]
Seems simple to give them both bronze. They essentially have the same score, so just do that.
posted by caviar2d2 at 3:13 PM on August 14 [6 favorites]
posted by caviar2d2 at 3:13 PM on August 14 [6 favorites]
The Romanian had the medal and the US appealed it and the medal was taken away from the Romanian. How else would you like me to phrase it?
I think they're trying to split hairs between "The final scores had been posted, naming her a winner about to be called to the podium" and "She actually had the medal in hand." Which... in a thread about how awful it is to jerk people around is a fairly disingenuous "well, actually."
Everyone in the arena considered Barbosu the bronze winner. She was waving the flag in celebration while the crowd cheered. Then they changed it.
There are three women with essentially identical scores, depending on whose appeals/paperwork you like best. That's a weird and discomforting way to settle it.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 3:17 PM on August 14 [4 favorites]
I think they're trying to split hairs between "The final scores had been posted, naming her a winner about to be called to the podium" and "She actually had the medal in hand." Which... in a thread about how awful it is to jerk people around is a fairly disingenuous "well, actually."
Everyone in the arena considered Barbosu the bronze winner. She was waving the flag in celebration while the crowd cheered. Then they changed it.
There are three women with essentially identical scores, depending on whose appeals/paperwork you like best. That's a weird and discomforting way to settle it.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 3:17 PM on August 14 [4 favorites]
The US didn't take the medal away from Romania. The US simply asked that Chiles's score be recorded to properly reflect her performance. This wasn't a subjective thing. It was an error on the part of the judges that was caught by the US.
posted by hydra77 at 3:18 PM on August 14 [5 favorites]
posted by hydra77 at 3:18 PM on August 14 [5 favorites]
There's a hell of a lot that I don't understand about gymnastics, but the more I learn about this case in particular, the more questions I have. The biggest one, however, is this: It appears that the scoring is much more regimented than I would have assumed - enough so that one can be expected to raise an inquiry in the space of a minute based on knowing that a score is a tenth of a point off due to a full-turn being scored as a three-quarter-turn or what have you. Meaning that, within a minute, you'd be expected to recognize when a judge's scoring is wrong, based on what the score apparently objectively should be.
And if this is the case, then why are we relying on judges in this manner at all? Why not just go to the VAR for all the judging and take an extra minute or two to make sure that you actually get it right in all cases? What am I missing here?
posted by Navelgazer at 3:19 PM on August 14 [5 favorites]
And if this is the case, then why are we relying on judges in this manner at all? Why not just go to the VAR for all the judging and take an extra minute or two to make sure that you actually get it right in all cases? What am I missing here?
posted by Navelgazer at 3:19 PM on August 14 [5 favorites]
Just the fact they get all of one whole minute to file an appeal is itself insane.
This, too, is interesting. I read in another article (don't recall where) that most athletes have the time it takes for the next athlete to start their routine, for challenges. This, in essence, gives 3-4 minutes for most challenges. But because Chiles went last, she only had one minute.
posted by hydra77 at 3:25 PM on August 14
This, too, is interesting. I read in another article (don't recall where) that most athletes have the time it takes for the next athlete to start their routine, for challenges. This, in essence, gives 3-4 minutes for most challenges. But because Chiles went last, she only had one minute.
posted by hydra77 at 3:25 PM on August 14
I think what it comes down to is that people like the drama of live scoring and getting results right away and doing everything by video replay would slow everything down.
But also, FIG is also corrupt and stupid and traceable scoring would limit their ability to be corrupt and stupid without significant oversight.
posted by jacquilynne at 3:26 PM on August 14 [4 favorites]
But also, FIG is also corrupt and stupid and traceable scoring would limit their ability to be corrupt and stupid without significant oversight.
posted by jacquilynne at 3:26 PM on August 14 [4 favorites]
I would say there is also a conversation about American sense of entitlement/exceptionalism to be had in the way the media keeps pressing Aly Raisman for supportive comments for Chiles for a "replay of the same situation" when it was literally the opposite: Raisman got a medal after it was revoked from a Romanian. The exact opposite happened to her, not the same.
Thing is, though, Raisman's take is that the judging is broken, announcing someone as a winner and then changing your mind is cruel, and both (if not all three) women should get bronze medals. So cut her some slack, I guess.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 3:37 PM on August 14 [3 favorites]
Thing is, though, Raisman's take is that the judging is broken, announcing someone as a winner and then changing your mind is cruel, and both (if not all three) women should get bronze medals. So cut her some slack, I guess.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 3:37 PM on August 14 [3 favorites]
I think literally everyone is saying that the best solution is to give the two Romanian women bronze in addition to Chiles keeping hers, rather than making Chiles give hers back and giving it to only one of the Romanian women. I'm not sure how that is American exceptionalism.
posted by hydropsyche at 3:50 PM on August 14 [6 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 3:50 PM on August 14 [6 favorites]
I wasn't talking about that at all.
I was talking about American media seemingly considering "You got your medal after someone else had it revoked" to be equivalent to "Your medal was revoked and given to someone else" because one side was American and the other was Romanian and can you believe how those people try and take our medals away?
posted by DirtyOldTown at 3:57 PM on August 14 [1 favorite]
I was talking about American media seemingly considering "You got your medal after someone else had it revoked" to be equivalent to "Your medal was revoked and given to someone else" because one side was American and the other was Romanian and can you believe how those people try and take our medals away?
posted by DirtyOldTown at 3:57 PM on August 14 [1 favorite]
The CAS decision (pdf) is something else.
Highlights (or perhaps lowlights is a better term) in no particular order:
1) CAS had the wrong contact info for USOPC, and it resulted in an almost 3 day delay in notification of proceedings to the USOPC, but for some reason the USOPC did not formally object to the delay or attend the hearing. (USAG did appear on behalf of Jordan.)
2) The FIG system for submitting inquiries had the coach informing someone (the vagueness is intentional here), who then pressed a button on a tablet using the Omega (official Olympic) timekeeping system, which informed the FIG officials that there was an inquiry. The FIG officials had no way of tracking whether any inquiry was timely, they just assumed that it was and went full speed ahead. The Omega timekeeping system had no way of automatically declining a late inquiry request. The CAS requested that the FIG identify the person who pressed the button on the tablet, and the FIG said the person was appointed by the local (French) Olympic Committee, and they could not identify that person. The CAS proceeded with this decision without hearing testimony from this unidentified person, relying on the Omega timekeeping system (but without any input from the person who pressed the button about whether there were any delays in the system, or from the person themself in pressing the button after the inquiry was made).
3) CAS throws FIG under the bus with this paragraph, revealing them to be the major stumbling block to the two bronze medal solution that everyone seems to want:
144. The only case on which the Applicants rely is Daniela Maier (Germany), the German Ski Association & German Olympics Sports Confederation v. Fédération Internationale de Ski (FIS), Swiss Olympic, Swiss-Ski & Fanny Smith (Switzerland). Yet this followed a conciliation process resulting in a consent award between the parties under the supervision of the CAS. In the present case, when presented with an opportunity to agree to a consent award which would make bronze medals available to Ms. Chiles and Ms. Bărbosu, the FIG declined to do so.
posted by creepygirl at 5:01 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
Highlights (or perhaps lowlights is a better term) in no particular order:
1) CAS had the wrong contact info for USOPC, and it resulted in an almost 3 day delay in notification of proceedings to the USOPC, but for some reason the USOPC did not formally object to the delay or attend the hearing. (USAG did appear on behalf of Jordan.)
2) The FIG system for submitting inquiries had the coach informing someone (the vagueness is intentional here), who then pressed a button on a tablet using the Omega (official Olympic) timekeeping system, which informed the FIG officials that there was an inquiry. The FIG officials had no way of tracking whether any inquiry was timely, they just assumed that it was and went full speed ahead. The Omega timekeeping system had no way of automatically declining a late inquiry request. The CAS requested that the FIG identify the person who pressed the button on the tablet, and the FIG said the person was appointed by the local (French) Olympic Committee, and they could not identify that person. The CAS proceeded with this decision without hearing testimony from this unidentified person, relying on the Omega timekeeping system (but without any input from the person who pressed the button about whether there were any delays in the system, or from the person themself in pressing the button after the inquiry was made).
3) CAS throws FIG under the bus with this paragraph, revealing them to be the major stumbling block to the two bronze medal solution that everyone seems to want:
144. The only case on which the Applicants rely is Daniela Maier (Germany), the German Ski Association & German Olympics Sports Confederation v. Fédération Internationale de Ski (FIS), Swiss Olympic, Swiss-Ski & Fanny Smith (Switzerland). Yet this followed a conciliation process resulting in a consent award between the parties under the supervision of the CAS. In the present case, when presented with an opportunity to agree to a consent award which would make bronze medals available to Ms. Chiles and Ms. Bărbosu, the FIG declined to do so.
posted by creepygirl at 5:01 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
I don't really understand why all these shitshow clowns get to be the only gymnastics competition game in town anyway. I bet Simone Biles could start her own league.
posted by JanetLand at 5:09 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
posted by JanetLand at 5:09 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
I've had lots of thoughts on this and not many solid conclusions, probably cause I don't know what I'm talking about. I keep wanting to compare this to other sports with video review, which sort of supports Chiles' case. I've seen lots of footballers celebrate goals even more fervently then the Romanian gymnast only for them to be called back because of VAR; I've never seen a team have to return a trophy because someone determined days later that the VAR was wrong.
But then of course most video review decisions affect the game as it goes on in a way that doesn't happen in gymnastics where each performance is a discrete event (though maybe the other Romanian gymnast not appealing the out call helped Chiles decide not to include some other, harder element in her routine?--probably not...)
I have wonder why all the focus on process when they could just have independent judges assess the three routines and determine which was the best in light of the information which has come out after the fact. I suspect (though I am not a gymnastics judge) at least one reason for prioritising the scores on the day and the subsequent process is that there's a fair amount of arbitrariness in at least the execution portion of the score. Despite the seeming precision of three decimal place scores, on a different day, with different judges, any of the three might have got the highest mark. I wonder if hiding behind seemingly arbitral procedural rules is a way of keeping people from thinking too hard about that. That bit of me says they're all within the margin of error, just give them all the bronze. Maybe there should just be a ton more ties in gymnastics?
That said, I wonder if an easy way to address this particular situation in future is to just put a big P for provisional next to any score that falls below its expected difficulty score and publicly post a clock which shows a three minute countdown for the coach to challenge it. Once the countdown is finished you can start celebrating.
Now I'm going to forget about gymnastics for another four years and spend another Premier League season listening to endless complaints about how VAR is ruining the game right up until it gives our own team the penalty kick it deserved.
posted by nangua at 5:15 PM on August 14 [3 favorites]
But then of course most video review decisions affect the game as it goes on in a way that doesn't happen in gymnastics where each performance is a discrete event (though maybe the other Romanian gymnast not appealing the out call helped Chiles decide not to include some other, harder element in her routine?--probably not...)
I have wonder why all the focus on process when they could just have independent judges assess the three routines and determine which was the best in light of the information which has come out after the fact. I suspect (though I am not a gymnastics judge) at least one reason for prioritising the scores on the day and the subsequent process is that there's a fair amount of arbitrariness in at least the execution portion of the score. Despite the seeming precision of three decimal place scores, on a different day, with different judges, any of the three might have got the highest mark. I wonder if hiding behind seemingly arbitral procedural rules is a way of keeping people from thinking too hard about that. That bit of me says they're all within the margin of error, just give them all the bronze. Maybe there should just be a ton more ties in gymnastics?
That said, I wonder if an easy way to address this particular situation in future is to just put a big P for provisional next to any score that falls below its expected difficulty score and publicly post a clock which shows a three minute countdown for the coach to challenge it. Once the countdown is finished you can start celebrating.
Now I'm going to forget about gymnastics for another four years and spend another Premier League season listening to endless complaints about how VAR is ruining the game right up until it gives our own team the penalty kick it deserved.
posted by nangua at 5:15 PM on August 14 [3 favorites]
I can’t help but compare this to the Jim Thorpe case, where nobody wanted the medals they didn’t win:
posted by doubtfulpalace at 5:59 PM on August 14 [1 favorite]
The organization with the help of IOC member Anita DeFrantz had contacted the Swedish Olympic Committee and the family of Hugo Wieslander, who had been elevated to decathlon gold medalist in 1913.From a Guardian article about the medals being reinstated to Thorpe after 110 years.
“They confirmed that Wieslander himself had never accepted the Olympic gold medal allocated to him, and had always been of the opinion that Jim Thorpe was the sole legitimate Olympic gold medalist,” the IOC said, adding that the Swedish Olympic Committee agreed.
“The same declaration was received from the Norwegian Olympic and Paralympic Committee and Confederation of Sports, whose athlete, Ferdinand Bie, was named as the gold medalist when Thorpe was stripped of the pentathlon title,” the IOC said.
posted by doubtfulpalace at 5:59 PM on August 14 [1 favorite]
Honestly I look at all this coverage and think: we're just polishing a turd at this point. Everything about this sport is sordid.
I mean, why is women's gymnastics in its current form still so fricking popular? Its gross!! Its inherently sexist!! The men don't have to prance around pretending to do pretty dances. They get to just show off their phenomenal strength and skills without having to wear sequins or add some random curtsey and butt wiggle at the end of their bar routine. Why can't the women do that? Oh wait - because they are girls, and girls can't be strong unless they are also delicate? Or something. (Hm. I guess no one told the other female olympic heros, like Li Wenwen the Chinese weightlifting gold medalist, who is AWESOME. )
It doesn't have to be that way! Want to see amazing gymnastic skills and actually good dancing, all while wearing clothes? Try Breaking!* Try literally any of the other sports out there that respect women just a tiny bit more, and would allow athletes with these natural abilities and interests to shine. Maybe even one where there are teenagers who seem to be enjoying themselves and supporting each other, like skateboarding!
*Damn, can you imagine what someone like Simone Biles would bring to a sport like break dancing if she was trained as a dancer?
posted by EllaEm at 7:39 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
I mean, why is women's gymnastics in its current form still so fricking popular? Its gross!! Its inherently sexist!! The men don't have to prance around pretending to do pretty dances. They get to just show off their phenomenal strength and skills without having to wear sequins or add some random curtsey and butt wiggle at the end of their bar routine. Why can't the women do that? Oh wait - because they are girls, and girls can't be strong unless they are also delicate? Or something. (Hm. I guess no one told the other female olympic heros, like Li Wenwen the Chinese weightlifting gold medalist, who is AWESOME. )
It doesn't have to be that way! Want to see amazing gymnastic skills and actually good dancing, all while wearing clothes? Try Breaking!* Try literally any of the other sports out there that respect women just a tiny bit more, and would allow athletes with these natural abilities and interests to shine. Maybe even one where there are teenagers who seem to be enjoying themselves and supporting each other, like skateboarding!
*Damn, can you imagine what someone like Simone Biles would bring to a sport like break dancing if she was trained as a dancer?
posted by EllaEm at 7:39 PM on August 14 [2 favorites]
You can't compete in any major international sporting event without agreeing to binding arbitration before CAS. As a reminder, CAS is an incompetent buffoon of a "court" which routinely endorses obscenely harsh sanctions for violations which couldn't possibly have enhanced performance of the aggrieved athletes, and is answerable to, basically, no one.
posted by 1adam12 at 7:52 PM on August 14 [5 favorites]
posted by 1adam12 at 7:52 PM on August 14 [5 favorites]
AFAICT the US brought up the time stamped proof after we lost the arbitration; has it been reported why? Did we file the appeal on time but then not defend it well until it was too late? Did CAS just not ask the US team about it?
On the one hand, it certainly sounds like a bad decision was made. On the other, it's very American to assume there should unlimited series of appeals and litigation.
posted by mark k at 8:59 PM on August 14 [1 favorite]
On the one hand, it certainly sounds like a bad decision was made. On the other, it's very American to assume there should unlimited series of appeals and litigation.
posted by mark k at 8:59 PM on August 14 [1 favorite]
AFAICT the US brought up the time stamped proof after we lost the arbitration; has it been reported why? Did we file the appeal on time but then not defend it well until it was too late? Did CAS just not ask the US team about it?
The USAG statement on twitter says, "The video footage provided was not available to USA Gymnastics prior to the tribunal's decision and thus USAG did not have the opportunity to previously submit it."
Nobody is saying where it came from. USAG had less than 24 hours notice that the hearing was happening, so it's quite plausible that a third party didn't know that their video was important until after the hearing.
posted by creepygirl at 9:45 PM on August 14
The USAG statement on twitter says, "The video footage provided was not available to USA Gymnastics prior to the tribunal's decision and thus USAG did not have the opportunity to previously submit it."
Nobody is saying where it came from. USAG had less than 24 hours notice that the hearing was happening, so it's quite plausible that a third party didn't know that their video was important until after the hearing.
posted by creepygirl at 9:45 PM on August 14
Maybe even one where there are teenagers who seem to be enjoying themselves and supporting each other, like skateboarding!
When Melanie De Jesus Dos Santos and the French team had a devastating qualifications round, Canadians Ellie Black and Shallon Olson consoled and encouraged her.
When Suni Lee had a tough moment on vault at Nationals, Simone Biles was there to talk her through it and cheer her on her next event:
‘I don’t think I could have done it without her’
In one of the best bars finals in the world, Suni Lee cheered on everyone else's routine before winning a bronze. She said she watched everyone, because the rest of the field was so good. Here's her happily nerding out about Nemour: “Watching her on bars is like watching a feather,” Lee said of Nemour. “She literally looks like a feather up there. She’s flying, she’s so light. It looks so good, and it’s so fast and so smooth.”
After Kaylia Nemour's routine, Qiu Qiyuan, Nemour's biggest rival was the first to hug her after her routine, and again after Nemour realized she had clinched the gold. Qiu: "Nemour and I are rivals, but we are also friends, and I feel very honored to compete together on this big stage in the world."
When this floor final clusterfuck happened, Sanne Wevers, the 2016 beam medalist, who's from the Netherlands and has absolutely no dog in the Romania v. USA fight, came out swinging in support of the athletes and against the incompetence of the FIG: "This situation is heartbreaking for both Jordan and Ana. It's terrible what these two girls have to endure and the criticism they are facing! And then, FIG has the nerve to disable the option for people to respond . . . wow, just wow. You should be standing up for the athletes, protecting them, and doing your job. Take responsibility, and understand what it feels like to have the world come down on you. Because this is real. Athletes, please stick together."
And then there's one of the women at the center of this controversy: Jordan Chiles is such a supportive teammate that two different MeFites brought her hype woman skills up in a thread about a Simone Biles. Jordan and Simone also participated in lovely tribute to their rival Rebeca Andrade during the medal ceremony for this cursed floor final.
Sneer at people all you want for liking something you think they shouldn't, but if you think that gymnasts don't find joy in the sport and their competitors, or don't support each other, you are simply wrong.
posted by creepygirl at 10:28 PM on August 14 [32 favorites]
When Melanie De Jesus Dos Santos and the French team had a devastating qualifications round, Canadians Ellie Black and Shallon Olson consoled and encouraged her.
When Suni Lee had a tough moment on vault at Nationals, Simone Biles was there to talk her through it and cheer her on her next event:
‘I don’t think I could have done it without her’
In one of the best bars finals in the world, Suni Lee cheered on everyone else's routine before winning a bronze. She said she watched everyone, because the rest of the field was so good. Here's her happily nerding out about Nemour: “Watching her on bars is like watching a feather,” Lee said of Nemour. “She literally looks like a feather up there. She’s flying, she’s so light. It looks so good, and it’s so fast and so smooth.”
After Kaylia Nemour's routine, Qiu Qiyuan, Nemour's biggest rival was the first to hug her after her routine, and again after Nemour realized she had clinched the gold. Qiu: "Nemour and I are rivals, but we are also friends, and I feel very honored to compete together on this big stage in the world."
When this floor final clusterfuck happened, Sanne Wevers, the 2016 beam medalist, who's from the Netherlands and has absolutely no dog in the Romania v. USA fight, came out swinging in support of the athletes and against the incompetence of the FIG: "This situation is heartbreaking for both Jordan and Ana. It's terrible what these two girls have to endure and the criticism they are facing! And then, FIG has the nerve to disable the option for people to respond . . . wow, just wow. You should be standing up for the athletes, protecting them, and doing your job. Take responsibility, and understand what it feels like to have the world come down on you. Because this is real. Athletes, please stick together."
And then there's one of the women at the center of this controversy: Jordan Chiles is such a supportive teammate that two different MeFites brought her hype woman skills up in a thread about a Simone Biles. Jordan and Simone also participated in lovely tribute to their rival Rebeca Andrade during the medal ceremony for this cursed floor final.
Sneer at people all you want for liking something you think they shouldn't, but if you think that gymnasts don't find joy in the sport and their competitors, or don't support each other, you are simply wrong.
posted by creepygirl at 10:28 PM on August 14 [32 favorites]
On the one hand, it certainly sounds like a bad decision was made. On the other, it's very American to assume there should unlimited series of appeals and litigation.
I had the same thoughts. I've worked in sports administration for decades and been involved in countless decisions and appeals during that time. Firstly, the timeframes given for an appeal (by whatever name) in the first instance was ridiculous - 60 seconds? Really? But the fact that appeals exist is because officials are human and, with the very best of intent, can make errors, so reasonable access to appeals is critical (didn't happen here) and these should be considered by people who were not part of the original decision (didn't happen here). There also needs to be an avenue for a further appeal, ensuring all parties have a reasonable opportunity to present their case (didn't happen here). But that's where it has to end. There should not be endless avenues to appeal again and again - in the end, the referee's decision has to be accepted.
The problem comes when, as with lots of Olympic sports, there is a desire to ratify results and present awards immediately after competition finishes (perhaps so the TV cameras can move on to something else). This doesn't allow for any reasonable review of decisions, nor does it allow judges and others time to properly consider their decisions. It's tough on competitors to wait while judges consider the outcomes, but it's even tougher to celebrate a victory, then have it yanked away by something you weren't even aware of. Decisions should be clearly communicated as 'provisional' until all checks have been completed and any appeal period has elapsed. Only then should final results be announced and awards handed out. There are circumstances where an appeal may be pending when awards are handed out, but this must be made clear at the time of the presentation. It's still tough on competitors to take back a victory after a presentation ceremony, but at least it's been flagged to them at the time.
posted by dg at 11:19 PM on August 14
I had the same thoughts. I've worked in sports administration for decades and been involved in countless decisions and appeals during that time. Firstly, the timeframes given for an appeal (by whatever name) in the first instance was ridiculous - 60 seconds? Really? But the fact that appeals exist is because officials are human and, with the very best of intent, can make errors, so reasonable access to appeals is critical (didn't happen here) and these should be considered by people who were not part of the original decision (didn't happen here). There also needs to be an avenue for a further appeal, ensuring all parties have a reasonable opportunity to present their case (didn't happen here). But that's where it has to end. There should not be endless avenues to appeal again and again - in the end, the referee's decision has to be accepted.
The problem comes when, as with lots of Olympic sports, there is a desire to ratify results and present awards immediately after competition finishes (perhaps so the TV cameras can move on to something else). This doesn't allow for any reasonable review of decisions, nor does it allow judges and others time to properly consider their decisions. It's tough on competitors to wait while judges consider the outcomes, but it's even tougher to celebrate a victory, then have it yanked away by something you weren't even aware of. Decisions should be clearly communicated as 'provisional' until all checks have been completed and any appeal period has elapsed. Only then should final results be announced and awards handed out. There are circumstances where an appeal may be pending when awards are handed out, but this must be made clear at the time of the presentation. It's still tough on competitors to take back a victory after a presentation ceremony, but at least it's been flagged to them at the time.
posted by dg at 11:19 PM on August 14
OK, bronze medal is cool and all, but A CLOCK FROM FLAVOR FLAV? You can keep yer gotdang bronze medals, IOCC, it's TIME for you to pull your head out of your ass. I'll TIME how long that takes ON MY CLOCK FROM FLAVOR FLAV, you a-holes!
-- not an actual quote from Chiles, but it should be
Now I want a clock from FLAVOR FLAV :/
In all seriousness, CAS can eat a bag of dicks.
posted by JustSayNoDawg at 12:04 AM on August 15 [1 favorite]
-- not an actual quote from Chiles, but it should be
Now I want a clock from FLAVOR FLAV :/
In all seriousness, CAS can eat a bag of dicks.
posted by JustSayNoDawg at 12:04 AM on August 15 [1 favorite]
The men don't have to prance around pretending to do pretty dances. They get to just show off their phenomenal strength and skills without having to wear sequins or add some random curtsey and butt wiggle at the end of their bar routine
I for one am in favor of also allowing the men to prance around in sequins and butt wiggle.
posted by meese at 4:01 AM on August 15 [7 favorites]
I for one am in favor of also allowing the men to prance around in sequins and butt wiggle.
posted by meese at 4:01 AM on August 15 [7 favorites]
I want to reiterated that if the judges hadn't already mis-scored another competitor (she was judged to be out of bounds when video replay showed she clearly wasn't) then Chiles and Barbosu would have been competing for 4th place. I don't know why Romania didn't challenge that ruling or even if they could.
posted by thecjm at 6:35 AM on August 15 [2 favorites]
posted by thecjm at 6:35 AM on August 15 [2 favorites]
The US simply asked that Chiles's score be recorded to properly reflect her performance.
That really is, as someone said, an impressively bad "well, actually."
posted by Galvanic at 7:20 AM on August 15 [1 favorite]
That really is, as someone said, an impressively bad "well, actually."
posted by Galvanic at 7:20 AM on August 15 [1 favorite]
I mean, why is women's gymnastics in its current form still so fricking popular? Its gross!!
To the extent it is 'popular', it's because of people like Biles taking it to a new level; gymnastics gyms are struggling and American Ninja Warrior type equipment is popping up and propping lots of them up. There are like 10 gyms in the US producing Olympic medal winning athletes; there are lots more for young kids that do it for fun.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:43 AM on August 15
To the extent it is 'popular', it's because of people like Biles taking it to a new level; gymnastics gyms are struggling and American Ninja Warrior type equipment is popping up and propping lots of them up. There are like 10 gyms in the US producing Olympic medal winning athletes; there are lots more for young kids that do it for fun.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:43 AM on August 15
To be clear, the sides as defined are, essentially:
1) I support the American gymnast, who would not have won if the judges had made no errors, but might have won if there were longer timelines for paperwork
2) I support the Romanian gymnast, who the judges actually picked, though she would have lost if they'd made no errors, and also would have lost if appeal paperwork had a longer timeline
3) I support the other Romanian gymnast who would have won if the judges made no errors and also perhaps if she had better appeals on her behalf
4) This is all deeply fucked and we would all be better served if three women within a whisker of one another shared the medal
Choose your fighter, I guess.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 8:31 AM on August 15
1) I support the American gymnast, who would not have won if the judges had made no errors, but might have won if there were longer timelines for paperwork
2) I support the Romanian gymnast, who the judges actually picked, though she would have lost if they'd made no errors, and also would have lost if appeal paperwork had a longer timeline
3) I support the other Romanian gymnast who would have won if the judges made no errors and also perhaps if she had better appeals on her behalf
4) This is all deeply fucked and we would all be better served if three women within a whisker of one another shared the medal
Choose your fighter, I guess.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 8:31 AM on August 15
From my (limited) understanding, I think Team 3 might be 'I support the other Romanian gymnast, who would have won if the judges made no errors or if the rules allowed for appeals of the kind of error that was made in her case.' But I'm not 100% sure that's the case.
Either way, Team 4 all the way, with a side of the extremely unpopular Team 5, "maybe let's stop having Olympic competitions where the winner is decided by judges based on criteria that aren't all that objective in the first place." There's some interesting commentary I've read -- with no real idea whether it is terribly accurate, but it certainly sounded informed to uninformed me -- that suggests that the current technical committee members are pushing to remove a lot of the non-objective criteria from the judging standards by taking out or reducing the impact of judging elements that were frequently the target of disagreement among judges like deductions for having bad music.
That still leaves the problems as in this situation of figuring out whether someone completed a rotation or whether someone stepped out of bounds, but at least that allows from some objective measure of whether they did or didn't, even if live judging isn't quite that good at applying the objective measure.
posted by jacquilynne at 9:10 AM on August 15 [2 favorites]
Either way, Team 4 all the way, with a side of the extremely unpopular Team 5, "maybe let's stop having Olympic competitions where the winner is decided by judges based on criteria that aren't all that objective in the first place." There's some interesting commentary I've read -- with no real idea whether it is terribly accurate, but it certainly sounded informed to uninformed me -- that suggests that the current technical committee members are pushing to remove a lot of the non-objective criteria from the judging standards by taking out or reducing the impact of judging elements that were frequently the target of disagreement among judges like deductions for having bad music.
That still leaves the problems as in this situation of figuring out whether someone completed a rotation or whether someone stepped out of bounds, but at least that allows from some objective measure of whether they did or didn't, even if live judging isn't quite that good at applying the objective measure.
posted by jacquilynne at 9:10 AM on August 15 [2 favorites]
I used to really dislike any sport that was judged. I didn't think they were "real" sports, not like "how fast can you run from point A to point B" or " can you put this ball in this goal more often than your opponent."
But I've totally given up on that stance. First off, it comes across as misogynistic. Did I dislike judged scores, or did I dislike gymnastics and figure staking?
But beyond that - ALL sports are judged. Was that a foul or not? Did the runner stay in their lane or use proper form? Was that tackle worth a yellow card or not?
Some of the issues with sports like this is the opacity. The athlete does their thing then numbers pop up on the screen. Most Olympics sports are niche for the 47 months until the next Olympics and I like most people haven't got a clue what goes into the scoring.
Judged events are also easy to manipulate by corrupt officials but sports like basketball and soccer have also had corruption scandals with their referees.
posted by thecjm at 10:29 AM on August 15 [2 favorites]
But I've totally given up on that stance. First off, it comes across as misogynistic. Did I dislike judged scores, or did I dislike gymnastics and figure staking?
But beyond that - ALL sports are judged. Was that a foul or not? Did the runner stay in their lane or use proper form? Was that tackle worth a yellow card or not?
Some of the issues with sports like this is the opacity. The athlete does their thing then numbers pop up on the screen. Most Olympics sports are niche for the 47 months until the next Olympics and I like most people haven't got a clue what goes into the scoring.
Judged events are also easy to manipulate by corrupt officials but sports like basketball and soccer have also had corruption scandals with their referees.
posted by thecjm at 10:29 AM on August 15 [2 favorites]
I want to reiterated that if the judges hadn't already mis-scored another competitor (she was judged to be out of bounds when video replay showed she clearly wasn't) then Chiles and Barbosu would have been competing for 4th place. I don't know why Romania didn't challenge that ruling or even if they could.
According to the CAS decision, paragraphs 69-70, coaches can request video review out of bounds deductions. This is a separate process from an inquiry into the difficulty of the routine. Sabrina's coach (who is also her mom) made an inquiry into the difficulty of the routine, but did not request video review of the out of bounds deduction in a timely manner. The argument Romania made in the CAS hearing was that the out of bounds deduction wasn't communicated to them, but CAS found that a 0.1 deduction separate from the execution deductions was noted on the scoreboard and that was sufficient communication of the out of bounds deduction.
posted by creepygirl at 10:37 AM on August 15
According to the CAS decision, paragraphs 69-70, coaches can request video review out of bounds deductions. This is a separate process from an inquiry into the difficulty of the routine. Sabrina's coach (who is also her mom) made an inquiry into the difficulty of the routine, but did not request video review of the out of bounds deduction in a timely manner. The argument Romania made in the CAS hearing was that the out of bounds deduction wasn't communicated to them, but CAS found that a 0.1 deduction separate from the execution deductions was noted on the scoreboard and that was sufficient communication of the out of bounds deduction.
posted by creepygirl at 10:37 AM on August 15
butt wiggle at the end of their bar routine
What are you talking about? This would be a .1-.3 deduction for an uncontrolled landing.
posted by fluttering hellfire at 12:12 PM on August 15 [2 favorites]
What are you talking about? This would be a .1-.3 deduction for an uncontrolled landing.
posted by fluttering hellfire at 12:12 PM on August 15 [2 favorites]
AFAICT the US brought up the time stamped proof after we lost the arbitration; has it been reported why?
In response to my own question, the WP has some additional details. It appears the US did not present the timestamped evidence at the arbitration hearing, and in fact they didn't even question the claim that they submitted the appeal late.
OTOH, it confirms that the US (due to a bad e-mail address?!) wasn't notified that there would be an arbitration hearing until 3 days after it was scheduled, and a day before it happened, which is bonkers.
But beyond that - ALL sports are judged. Was that a foul or not? Did the runner stay in their lane or use proper form? Was that tackle worth a yellow card or not?
I admit I'm just kind of slotting this incident into a very long list of bad calls that have changed the outcome of games, and it's not even near the top. The fact that this is primarily an individual sport makes the mistakes more poignant, but it is in the nature of watching sports that the mistakes that hurt "your" athletes are outrages and the ones that hurt other people are part of the game.
posted by mark k at 10:47 PM on August 15
In response to my own question, the WP has some additional details. It appears the US did not present the timestamped evidence at the arbitration hearing, and in fact they didn't even question the claim that they submitted the appeal late.
OTOH, it confirms that the US (due to a bad e-mail address?!) wasn't notified that there would be an arbitration hearing until 3 days after it was scheduled, and a day before it happened, which is bonkers.
But beyond that - ALL sports are judged. Was that a foul or not? Did the runner stay in their lane or use proper form? Was that tackle worth a yellow card or not?
I admit I'm just kind of slotting this incident into a very long list of bad calls that have changed the outcome of games, and it's not even near the top. The fact that this is primarily an individual sport makes the mistakes more poignant, but it is in the nature of watching sports that the mistakes that hurt "your" athletes are outrages and the ones that hurt other people are part of the game.
posted by mark k at 10:47 PM on August 15
As I noted above, the USAG statement said that they could not have presented that timestamped evidence because it was not available to them until after the hearing.
Assuming that they are not lying about this, I think it's ridiculous to call failing to present that video an error.
In CAS report, Jordan's coach was reported as saying she was not tracking the time and did not know if it was late or not. If USAG had only that information, and the Omega timekeeping information, it may have assumed the Omega timekeeping information was correct, and thought it had no basis to object to the Omega system's recording of the inquiry. The worst I can say about USAG is that in hindsight they should have covered their bases and objected to the official timekeeping software anyway, especially since the person who took the inquiry could be found.
posted by creepygirl at 11:07 PM on August 15
Assuming that they are not lying about this, I think it's ridiculous to call failing to present that video an error.
In CAS report, Jordan's coach was reported as saying she was not tracking the time and did not know if it was late or not. If USAG had only that information, and the Omega timekeeping information, it may have assumed the Omega timekeeping information was correct, and thought it had no basis to object to the Omega system's recording of the inquiry. The worst I can say about USAG is that in hindsight they should have covered their bases and objected to the official timekeeping software anyway, especially since the person who took the inquiry could be found.
posted by creepygirl at 11:07 PM on August 15
« Older Early mammal could help answer one of biology’s... | Delivery will take more than 30 minutes Newer »
"We are wrong, but our rules don't allow us to correct that more than once, so our original decision to fix the errors made by our judges can't be fixed again to award this medal to the person who actually won it. Whoops! So sorry."
To think that I was feeling better about gymnastics in this Olympics!
posted by dellsolace at 12:54 PM on August 14 [15 favorites]