US sore losers in Olympics

Zaph wrote: »

Actually that should read:

GB: 19 Gold (57); 13 Silver (26); 15 Bronze (15) = 98
Australia: 14 Gold (42); 15 Silver (30); 17 Bronze (17) = 89
Germany: 16 Gold (48); 10 Silver (20); 15 Bronze (15) = 83

Cheers - late night

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

Lol yes there's a lot of bitterness that the American Nastia Liukin was beaten by a fraction of a point in a tiebreaker by He Kexin (who is probably 14 anyway) on uneven bars.

Though the British are just as bad, they only want the age thing to be exposed so that their 4th place gymnast will get the bronze.

Nastia Liukin is Russian in my book so the US can't complain too much about rules being bent. :pac:

PillyPen wrote: »

I'm very pissed at America,

Cheers!:D

juvenal wrote: »

Yeah that was ridiculous. They were giving out about the ethics of the rules when the Chinese girl was awarded gold. You can suddenly decide the ethics are dodgy when it affects you. Everyone knew the rules.

It's not just the Americans giving out about it - many people within the gymnastics world, American and otherwise, are giving out about it. It wasn't the decision of the FIG to enforce a tie-breaking rule at the Olympics - the IOC demanded it following the debacle of 2004. It was the first Olympics in which duplicate medals weren't allowed in gymnastics. Had it been at Worlds, or any other competition in gymnastics, the tie would have stood. Even the president of the FIG, an Italian man named Bruno Grandi, has stated that he believes both gymnasts should have received a gold medal.

Victor wrote: »

You've got that wrong, that only happens with the soccer World Cup.

In fairness that was due to an OG and the country was the cocaine and political corruption goldmine that is Columbia

metaoblivia wrote: »

It's not just the Americans giving out about it - many people within the gymnastics world, American and otherwise, are giving out about it. It wasn't the decision of the FIG to enforce a tie-breaking rule at the Olympics - the IOC demanded it following the debacle of 2004. It was the first Olympics in which duplicate medals weren't allowed in gymnastics. Had it been at Worlds, or any other competition in gymnastics, the tie would have stood. Even the president of the FIG, an Italian man named Bruno Grandi, has stated that he believes both gymnasts should have received a gold medal.

I'm well aware that the FIG weren't happy, and I saw an interview with the FIG chief who stated the disagreement with the IOC.

Personally I think awarding joint golds in a competition where the result is based on judging is a bit of a cop-out. I'm not a gymnastics expert, and I know you follow it, but what's to stop them doing another routine where surely they're be at least a slight difference in the scores. Yes, they may be slightly tired from their first exercise, but they can perform again, I'm sure they do it multiple times in training every day. In the same way I would also question the awarding of two bronze medals in the boxing, but the folks over in the boxing forum appear to be in favour of it. If you're physically able to fight for gold a couple of days later, then you should be able to fight for bronze.

In a contest like swimming or running if it is a dead heat, then there's no possible way to separate the competitors without having a repeat. Obviously this doesn't happen, but where the result relies on the opinions and whims of other humans, they should at least have a shoot-off to decide 1 and 2. At least it's a bit better than some countback.

While it's debatable that the countback system is flawed, everyone was aware of it going into the Games and knew the process should such a scenario arise. I doubt there would have been as much uproar in the US media had the roles been reversed.