The gymnastics regulations state: Scores are fact decisions!
According to the judging regulations the final scores which were given in the all-around in Athens are fact decisions! Also a goal which was confirmed by a referee in a soccer match is a fact decision. No matter if the ball was one millimeter behind the goal line or not - the referee made a decision and it is a fact...! Everything would get extremely difficult if the results of a match still could be amended after the match is over or even a few weeks later!

Why did the Koreans officially raise their, certainly correct, objection only after the competition had ended...? If they would have officially addressed the jury during (!) the competition they would have had a better chance for the start value of the routine to be changed.

The regulations say: Protests against scores are not possible! The situation in gymnastics certainly would get difficult if everyone who doesn't like a score would be able to file a protest afterwards. There never would be a clear winner! Again: According to the currently known facts it was a human mistake and those things can happen. The judges in question were not sanctioned, they only were not chosen anymore for the apparatus finals. So it certainly is unobjective and not provable at the moment to see a US-deal which includes also the Colombian judge who lives in Ohio/USA behind all this.

So why a hearing in front of the CAS has been filed?
In the case of the all-around decision this hearing in front of the CAS is not understandable as the currently valid regulations in gymnastics don't include the opportunity to file a protest against scores afterwards. It is sad that this kind of judging mistake happened in the most important gymnastics event but in the moment of the awards ceremony at the latest Paul Hamm received the gold medal rightly, even if, seen in a sportive way, his victory unfortunately now (afterwards) is questionable.                                                            Only a personal decision by Paul Hamm to give his gold medal back "for the reasons of fairness" could change this... However, a comparison to the trampoline decision 3 years ago (Irina Karavaeva (RUS) handed over her World Championship gold medal to Anna Dogonadze (GER) due to an obvious calculation mistake in the scores) doesn't work because: Can you really blame Paul Hamm not to give back his medal when he has the currently valid regulations on his side, especially considering that there is only a score of 0.051 between the two gymnasts...?

The problem is a different one!
There are other things which actually should be criticized. With the current judging regulations a differentiation between the top gymnasts is nearly impossible.                                                              The FIG and the Technical Committees should react on this now!                                                            In this connection it has to be thought back to the situation one Olympic cycle ago:                               The men's and women's artistic gymnastics TC's presented their new and amended judging regulations for confirmation. At that point of time the fullfilment of the basic difficulty in the men's Code was at the score of 8.60 and in the women's Code at 9.00. FIG- president Bruno Grandi then intervened fatefully and asked for a unification of the scores for the basic difficulty. A salomonic decision by the two TC's for a basic difficulty at the score of 8.80 followed. This had the following impact:                                                                While for the women it became extremely difficult to reach a SV of 10.00 (as an example at the World Championships in Ghent 2001on floor only one female gymnast had a SV of 10.00 - now in Athens 2004 17 female gymnasts presented it), in the men's field already there in 2001 the top scores got closer and closer together (at that point of time especially on pommel horse and rings). In the progression now in Athens 2004 it was hardly possible to differentiate between the scores of many gymnasts. In the women's field it worked a bit better, as they had 2 tenth more to differentiate, than in the men's field considering that they had 2 tenth less than originally planned.

Judging World - completely mixed-up!
The judging World seems to be completely mixed up at the moment. It was planned that at the FIG- Congress in Antalya (TUR) in a few weeks the new judging regulations would be handed in by the TC's and would be confirmed there. The printed materials were supposed to be ready shortly afterwards. Now everything has been suspended.                                                                                                        The international judges courses - which were planned for the men in December in Leipzig/ GER and for the women in January in Osaka/ JAP - were cancelled!                                                                       Fundamental changes are now requested, even the score monument of 10.00 is called into question again. Grandy wants to present a detailed analyzis in Antalya and wants to propose new principles for the composition of the scores...!?

A table of difficulties and a time rule
Isn't a latent problem only coming to the surface again which is there already since more than a decade and for which a solution always has been prevented by the conservative forces of the national federations? The traditional procedure of fundamental changes in the judging regulations every four years certainly is not up-to-date anymore and completely prevents judging, understanding and transparency of gymnastics. Since long ago already a permanent catalogue of difficulties (elements) to be used for all times is needed! A somersault will always be a somersault and won't get objectively easier ore more difficult. Only if it is amended it gets another difficulty, up until a triple somersault with twist(s). However, for those amendments it again is possible to describe and clasify them objectively - in a catalogue of elements!                        This indeed calls the 10.00 into question as then it would be up to the subjective decision of the gymnasts which start value they can offer in their routine which would be combined observing certain technical and aesthetic regulations. A start value then could also be higher than 10.00.                                              The fear for an uncontrollable raise of start values is justified. Therefore clear limits of what is reasonable are necessary. The solution might be simple: On all apparatus clear time rules could be established on the basis of already known aspects and specific characteristics of each apparatus. On floor this has been common since long ago already. Offences against the time rules will be punished and will lead to clear deductions.                                                                                                                                      The possible start value on the apparatus, also over 10.00, is then defined through a clever and aesthetic (B-score) choice of more and less difficult elements and their combination (A-score). Records of difficulty, like already existing in trampoline, would be possible then.

Responsibility towards the public
Up to now it seemed that the primary task of the Technical Comittees has been to find the best way to classify the performances of the gymnasts with the modification of the Code every four years. However, modern judging regulations in the media- era primarily have the responsibility for gaining the public for the sports and for enabling to use all mechanisms and chanels of the media for it. The judging of sportive performances has to be understandable, traceable, logic and transparent.

<< back to GYMmedia.com