Olympics Discussion Thread

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui The South Koreans said they told the judges, who said, wait until afterwards and then file it. So if a team was down by 3 at the beginning of a game and then was told to wait until later, they condoned it?

And the judges say that didn't happen. So, who knows? At the very least, even if they were told that, the South Koreans should have known the procedure and done more than just walk away...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Seeing the character of the judges (ie, the Nemov score and then raising it later due to crowd protests; the phantom disqualifcation [later reversed] of Piersoll, etc), I'm inclined to believe others.

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Well, given the judges lack of spine, I'm inclined to think they would have folded and changed the score rather than just send them away. But like I said, we don't know what happened, so there's no point in going back and trying to correct an official's decision after the point.

[Winston]

Congratulations to Norway on the Gold in Javelin last night. Now, Gangerolf did say they had some hopes for doing well, but a top spot ahead of so many strong rivals... Heia Norge!

Denmark - Korea starts in half an hour. Now would be a good time to acquire a TV set I suppose, but as it is, thank Heaven for net radio.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Um.. then why don't you run the instant replay on Hamm and see what he messed up but wasn't caught? The fact is that this isn't an 'instant replay' error, but an INITIAL score error. It'd be like playing a football game, but the official scorer said one team actually was starting with -3 points.

The thing is that the -.2 points was a manditory deduction. If the judges had seen it, they would have had to take off -.2 points from their scores. The real question should be whether the South Korean should give up his bronze and give it to the gymnist who finished in fourth place due to that judging error!

[Imran Siddiqui]

The thing is that the -.2 points was a manditory deduction. If the judges had seen it, they would have had to take off -.2 points from their scores.

Once again, why don't we do a replay on Hamm and see what 'manditory' deductions he did that the judges didn't pick up. Seeing deductions is a judge's decision, starting point total isn't.

[Drake Tungsten]

No, the real question is why anyone gives a **** about yet another South Korean whine.

[Ted Striker]

What about the wig???

****ers

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Once again, why don't we do a replay on Hamm and see what 'manditory' deductions he did that the judges didn't pick up. Seeing deductions is a judge's decision, starting point total isn't.

I basicily disagree. Manditory deduction are not supposed to be part of the judge's decisions. You're welcome to look at the replays on Hamm. Of course if you're looking at a football analogy, I think a situation from some years ago with college football is relevant. The CU Buffs were playing Missouri, and they scored a touchdown to win the game in the last few second on what was believed at the time to be 4th down. However, after the game it turned out that it had actually been a "fifth down", but in a specular screwup the officals had failed to update the down marker after 2nd down and no-one had noticed.

The CU Buffs argued that the outcome should not be changed because they would not have spiked the ball on what was actually 4th down if they had known that instead of thinking it was merely a 3rd down. Ultimately the results of the game with CU getting a 5th down stood, and CU went on that year to win the national championship.

The same essential principle actually applies here. While gymnists would almost never alter their routine, they could make decisions on certain behavoir during it based on the scores of their opponents. For instance, a gymnist could decide to take a step in order to ensure that he doesn't fall, based on the knowledge of what score his nearest competitor who actually already completed his final exercise, wouldn't get ahead of him just based on a minor deduction, but might if he fell. I also know that a Chinese female gymnist ended up sucessfully improving to complete all the elements of her routine after an error, if she though she had a large enough margain, she might decide to leave one of those elements out in order to ensure that she doesn't screw up and make a fall that could really screw up her score. Raising the score of the gymnist behind him/her after the competition would be unfair because it means that he/she made his/her decisions during the competition based on faulty information. For this reason changing scores way after the even if the original score was due to a judging mistake is a bad idea.

[Drake Tungsten]

****ing fifth down...

[Winston]

Denmark in the lead 8-7, halfway through the 1st half.

[Winston]

14-14 at half time.



This isn't going to be no children's matinée.

[Drake Tungsten]

What sport are you talking about? Not all of us are following Danish athletics with bated breath...

[Winston]

Handball, Women, Final, can't talk..

17-16 Korea..

[Imran Siddiqui]

Handball .