I agree on all counts. And the FIG should be ashamed of themselves for trying to guilt Hamm into giving up his medal. What passive-aggressive bullshit.
Professional wrestling?
Actually, that may be a pretty apt comparison.
Maybe a thread in IMHO isn’t the place to ask this, but I’m going to anyway: does anyone think there might be corruption involved in all these gymnastics-related fiascos? When I say this I’m thinking of the high bar scores with Nemov, the vault horse setting in Sydney with Khorkina, and possibly the all-around men’s, though those last two could have been simple human error I suppose (in which case I think whoever’s responsible for those errors should be publicly flogged, because that’s criminal). I remember SkateGate two years ago, so now I wonder, every time I see such flagrant discrepancies and errors, if there’s some form of collusion or conniving going on. Maybe I’m just paranoid; what are other poeple’s takes on it?
I’m also convinced that there are some corrupt judges being paid to give better scores to certain athletes. Yes, maybe some mistakes are just mistakes. But I don’t think it’s paranoia to think that these competitions are fixed to a certain extent. I think it’s unrealistic to believe that all of these judges are completely honest.
I have a hard time watching figure skating now (one of my favorite sports) because of my disgust at the judging.
Hamm can exchange his the same time the Russian basketball team from 1972 exchanges their gold medal.
Hamm’s situation and the 1972 basketball situation are a lot different.
But I don’t think either Hamm or the Soviet team should give back their gold medals. They both earned them. They both benefited from incompetent officials.
Just as they have gone back and found other problems with different competitors in gymnastics, one could examine earlier parts of the basketball final and find times when the American team got a break from the officials.
This had nothing to do with Khorkina, it was set low for everyone. One of the gymnasts pointed it out and it was reset, and everyone given the chance to rejump. If it was corruption, it was incompetent corruption.
No you can’t. I watched that basketball game. The officials were not inept, they were corrupt.
I have a question.
The Korean guy did the exact same PBar routine 2 other times in the Olympics. Did the judges get the start value right those times? Anyone know?
And a comment. If we re-score his routine with the correct start value, and then deduct for the illegal hold, he comes in 5th. This may be why we’re hearing so much more from the FIG and IOC than we are from the Koreans. Just a thought.
For the record, I think Hamm earned his gold and should keep it. He had a goal to reach and did it. You can’t change the rules after the game. Good Job Paul!
And just which official was corrupt and what proof do you have of it?
IIRC, and it was a long time ago, the officials never gave an explanation for the running the last play three times. No foul, no call, just a “do over”. As far as I know, no explanation was ever given. Were they “convicted” like the figure skating judges? No, but the figure skating judges were not convicted in a court of law, either. The basketball officials were like the Russian judge in the figure skating trial, corrupt, but not investigated.
Perhaps you prefer the term “favortism”. It was as blatant as the Chinese judge who gave a Chinese diver a 7.5 on a dive that no one else rated above a 5.0. Fortunately, that one had no impact as the high score was tossed out, as well as one of the several 4.5’s.
Or as blatant as the official who flagged Ian Piersoll for a DQ. The form on which the DQ is officially recorded was blank, which is why it was tossed out. In that case, he seemed to be trying to get even with Ian for calling the Japanese swimmer’s breaststroke illegal, instead of nationalism or block affiliation. (It was indeed an illegal move, but missing it was may not even have been ineptitude. Some illegal moves are hard to see, and they don’t seem to call moves like that in lympic finals. My kids, they would be DQ’d for a move like that.)
It might be difficult for people watching the Olympics now to appreciate just how fierce the East West rivalry was. Each side maneuvered to control the international organizations in charge of “their” sports, and sports in which they wanted control. As a cynical western child, I was kind of amazed how innocent the press was. Shirly Babashoff was actually criticized for pointing out that the East German women were clearly on steroids, to the point of damn near changing genders.
I remember watching the 1972 Olympic basketball final and being puzzled and over the years, the American media has shed more heat than light on the topic. HBO had a very good documentary on the game a couple of years ago and most of this comes from watching that show (filtered through my memory)
Here is my brief summary of the disputed course of events:
- 3 seconds left in the game, USSR leads 49-48. Doug Collins is fouled hard driving to the basket after making a steal.
- Collins goes to the line with a foggy head and makes the first free throw.
- The Soviet coach knows that he is going to want a timeout and, under the system at the time, he presses a buzzer from his bench, telling the scorer’s table that. The Soviets SHOULD be granted a timeout at the next ball.
- While Collins shoots his second free throw, the scorer’s table hits the horn indicating that a timeout was called, however that should not have been done. Nevertheless, Collins hits the free throw. USA 50, USSR 49.
- The officials on the court don’t know that the Soviet team wanted a timeout, so they tell the USSR to inbound the ball and they do, they don’t score, and the final horn sounds. The USA apparently wins.
Now, all hell breaks loose.
- The Soviet coach screams to the officials that he should have been granted a timeout. However, under the rules, since the officials screwed up, too bad. You can’t go back and start over.
- The head of the International Basketball Federation, a Brit (I believe his name is Jones) walks over to the scorers table and orders that 3 seconds be put back on the clock and the Soviets be given another opportunity. Jones has no authority to do to this, but the game officials agree to it.
- The Soviet team inbounds the ball again and the horn sounds very quickly before they can even get off a shot.
More hell breaks loose
- What had happened was that the clock had not been reset to 3 seconds and the timer was telling the officials that they weren’t ready.
- Finally, the clock is set at 3 seconds. The USA’s incompetent old dolt of a coach Hank Iba is perplexed. The American player guarding the inbounds pass (it was either Burleson or McMillin) believes that the official is telling him to back up and he gives the passer a good view of the court. The official, 30 years later, says that he was only indicating that the passer could run the baseline and the American player misinterpreted his sign.
- The pass goes the length of the court to Aleksandr Belov, who catches it over two American players and lays it in at the buzzer. USSR 51, USA 50
The USA protested the game afterward, but the protest was denied on a 4-3 vote strictly along East-West political lines.
The key thing here, at least for me, is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the Soviet team used undue influence in getting an extra shot at the winning basket. Yes, the Soviet coach yelled a lot. Why wouldn’t he? He wanted to have a chance to win the game. If the roles were reversed and the USA team had been denied a timeout, I’m sure Iba would have been all over the refs.
But the Soviets didn’t bribe people in this instance. They didn’t cheat in my mind. The officials screwed up. Just like the gymanstics judges did in 2004.
The HBO documentary was called “:03 from Glory”
Thank you, I always wondered what happened.
I wouldn’t agree that there was no sign of corruption, however. Blatant favortism is a form of corruption, and the team itself does not have to do anything wrong. Take the dive I mentioned earlier. The Chinese judge clearly so far out of line with the other experts, that his/her vote was a form of corruption. That is one thing that bothered me about that figure skating debacle. That a French judge could be pressured or bribed is less egregious than the favortism exhibited by the Russian (former Soviet?) judge. Favortism belongs in the stands, maybe in the booth, but not amongst the judges. The 4-3 vote along political lines is a sign of a corrupt international organization. On the other hand the actions of the British official you mention could be construed as admirable, depending on how you view using one wrong to correct another.
Do you happen to remember the nationalities of the refs in that game? I seem to recall that those that made the decisions were eastern block. But that could easily be American media hyperbole, or distorted memory.