Arkaev speaks about

In view of the judging scandals in the Olympic men’s artistic gymnastics competitions the most successful coach of the World Leonid Arkaev has asked for changes to be made. In an interview the president of the Russian gymnastics federation explained: ”Something has to happen urgently now! Maybe I shouldn’t say that but we have a mafia of judges”, this was refered to the high-bar score of Alexei Nemov.
Also the former FIG- president Juri Titov spoke from a scandal and asked to check the videos of the event urgently…

The same can also be said considering the high score of the Greek gymnast Tampakos who meanwhile has become a quite a star in his home country. With his score on rings he somehow – of course personally unintentional – insulted the sovereign rings performance of World Champion Jordan Jovtchev. This incident then even has been topped in the high-bar final. Even if all current judging regulations are being considered, the scores and the actions of the judges and the highest judging committee of the FIG are not explainable! The situation then led to quite a tremendous reaction of a usuallly very fair Olympic audience which honoured all performances…!

The moral meaning of the incidents is even more important
In view of athletes like Ronny Ziesmer, Alexei Nemov or Jordan Jovtchev who take high risks in every minute they train or compete in their high-tech discipline in order to show perfection, it would be a moral disgrace when unprincipled Brevet (international judging license) judges for whatever reason undertake manipulations. This topic however is not new, it only came back to a wide public view on the Olypic stage in Athens:
The FIG is strongly asked to bring such kind of disregard of the athletes’ performances and the insult of their personalities to an end – as this is the actual task of the FIG!
Eckhard Herholz, gymmedia

1. The case Hamm / Kim: -- This case includes several aspects:
>> At first a mistake of the A- judges (arcording to my knowledge) had been noticed and admitted by them themselves immediately. At every small competition (also at small international tournaments) it is common in those cases to correct the start value. However, in this case the Korean gymnast was put off. In the end due to valid regulations and due to the time delay caused by the FIG the decision had to be made not to change the start value. It is correct that the change of a score, even if made immediately after the end of a competition, is difficult to explain when a TV-broadcast is taking place. However, the demand for explanations now after the event is much higher!
>> Secondly it is not understandable for me that start values can’t be changed after the event even if an according proof (e.g. video) is there. The comparison to soccer can only be considered conditionally as in soccer one goal directly influences the whole course of a match. This could be the case indirectly also in gymnastics but not directly. The possibility to protest against a score should however be limited to the start vaule and should not include the acknowledgement of elements as this could lead to an overflow of protests.

That means decisive for the ranking is not what is being performed but how it is being performed. Unfortunately at decisions in the area of fractions of tenths of a point it is even for an expert often not possible anymore to follow it with the own eyes only. The outcome of all apparatus finals has proved once again that the current judging regulations have deficiencies. In the elite area – contrary to what had been announced when this Code was created - a traceable differentiation of the best routines is not possible.

Scores which are not limited on top
The correct way would be to create the start value without a limit on top. Then Nemov with an accordingly difficult routine would have a one or the other tenth higher start value than e.g. Hamm and he would have worked out a headstart through this. This issue was discussed while creating the current judging regulations but was not realized as it was said the judges would be swamped with it.
In the sense of keeping gymnastics attractive it also would be necessary to raise the value of spectacular flight elements on high bar (or swinging elements on rings) compared to less attractive turns in or from an El-grip (or strength elements on rings)

Regarding the role of the head of the TC
Absolutely wrong and coined with a completely bad crisis management was the reaction by Adrian Stoica who convinced head judge Sawao Kato to raise two of the B-scores. The FIG and the TC are absolutely right: decisions of the judges regarding the B-score have to remain fact decisions. After all there are eight B-judges, that means the chance is quite low that a result is wrong (although it never can be completely excluded – unfortunately it will never be possible to judge gymnastics completely objective, meaning in seconds, meters or similar).

In order to summarize it can be said that the FIG reacted badly and unnecessarily bureaucratic especially in the case Hamm / Kim. The judges would have been ready to correct their A-score. To suspend the judges from Spain and Colombia (the role of Beckstead is still unclear to me…?) seems to me as an unnecessary hard reaction against them. They obviously didn’t have the intention to favour or to discriminate anyone.
The FIG should acknowledge their mistakes (not the ones of the judges) and should try to learn from them in order to prevent those kind of situations in future. These kind of incidents put a bad light on gymnastics which anyway already does not have the best reputation in public.
Thomas Hayn, Österreich