Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 51

Thread: Judging scandal in Torino?

  1. #31
    Medalist
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Back home where just living is my 'reality show'
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by kyla2
    O.k. here's why I am "bashing" S & P (although I personally feel I am just expressing an opinion). I was completely and totally disgusted by the lack of grace, class and good sportsmanship exhibited by the Canadian Figure Skating Federation, and S & P who bought into the theory that the gold was stolen from them. The Canadian Figure Skating Federation screamed, yelled, jumped up and down and spoke to any forum, written or televised, that would listen to them complain about how the gold should have been theirs. S & P played the role of the wounded innocents. They should have won an Oscar, not the Olympic Gold.
    Excuse me while I loudly and vociferously call BS on your statements. Skate Canada said NOTHING about an appeal or anything until AFTER the announcement had been made that a judge had 'confessed' to fixing results to Ms. Stapleford and Mr. Pfenning.

    Marilyn Chidlow (president of SC) was on the CBC set being interviewed by Ron Maclean and was leaving there to go to the press conference that had been scheduled by the ISU for later on the day AFTER the pairs event. In that interview with Maclean, she said there had been rumours that morning of improprieties, but that SC would do nothing until hearing from whomever was speaking at the press conference (I can't remember at this time who was speaking at it).

    There's this big crock of hooey floating around that all the appeals and BS were brought about at the behest of SC and Sale & Pelletier. The appeal came about AFTER a judge admitted to have voted a certain way under pressure. That she recanted several days later has no bearing on the submission of the appeal. The appeal was based on the appearance of fraudulent/dishonest behavior on the part of at least one judge.

    In interviews after the pairs event that night, S&P expressed disappointment at not winning gold, much like any other 'close' competitor would have done. There were absolutely no cries of 'cheating' or any other such things as have been attributed to them at all.

    I get reallllllly po'd at the crap that gets spewed out there -- it's nothing more than people not having their facts straight and looking to take their frustrations over the eventual results out on the wrong people. Jamie and David didn't cause that damn fiasco -- put the blame where it belongs -- on LaGougne, Stapleford and Pfenning. They're the ones who let it all out and turned it into the media circus it became.

    To blame Jamie and David is just as juvenile as you're accusing them of being.

    And that's MY opinion.

  2. #32
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    902

    Nonsense

    The wheels were in motion before the judging issue. There were cries of robbery before the judging scandal. In fact, it started right then and there as the medals were being awarded. But you're a Canadian so that is something I suspect you wouldnt see. If S & P had the class that I wish they had had, they would have said "no" to a second set of gold medals (for goodness sakes, have you have heard of anything so ridiculous??). The net effect was that all 4 medals were devalued. The true class of that whole debacle were B & S. They kept their silence and were gracious at a second medal ceremony when a second set were awarded (an absolute slap in their faces). The Russian Federation, for once, were justifiably outraged and I totally agreed with them.

  3. #33
    In my heart, I'm actually Canadian....
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Seattle at last!!!
    Posts
    2,884
    Quote Originally Posted by kyla2
    FURTHERMORE, I truly believe this whole scenario, which was played out across the planet via the mass media, cost Michelle Kwan the OGM that year. The judges didn't want a repeat of this fiasco, so they found a way to award the gold to Sarah by placing Irina ahead of Michelle.
    Wow. We must not have been watching the same competition, either that, or your TV was showing entirely different long programs from Slutskaya and Kwan than the ones mine was. Irina, tho not spectacular that night, SHOULD have been placed ahead of Kwan in the free skate (and IMHO, in the short program as well). That was easily the weakest performance Kwan had given in competition in many years, and perhaps ever, IMHO. No, Irina wasn't great either (no-one really was that night, except for Hughes and Suguri) but IMHO her performance was a shade or two better than Kwan's -- and this is coming from someone who will be the first to say that on many occasions, especially in Grand Prix Finals, Irina was given the nod over Michelle when Michelle actually skated better.

  4. #34
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,825
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Jamie and David didn't cause that damn fiasco -- put the blame where it belongs -- on LaGougne, Stapleford and Pfenning. They're the ones who let it all out and turned it into the media circus it became.
    Hi Lee. I agree with everything in your post except the part about blaming Stapleford and Pfenning for not sweeping what they knew under the rug. Truth will out, Speedy notwithstanding.

    MM

  5. #35
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    CAN WE DROP THIS NEVER ENDING NEVER RESOLVING DEBATE

    Look at the bright side: We know hanky panky has existed. We know the heartbreaker it is. We know it will put fear in the minds of future colluders because it will kill the sport. In effect, this may be the end of the cooperative cheats.

    Joe

  6. #36
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    1,094
    It's because we know that hanky panky existed that we know it is bound to happen again. Only now our chance of knowing that it happened again is virtually nil. We can see an incredibly wrong outcome but be powerless to know how it happened and who was responsible.

    What is clear is this: the talking heads can't say whether skaters control their own destiny, because they don't. The caller and the judges are in control. While a clean skate is not necessarily a winning skate, a skate with 3 falls can have the potential to be a winner.

    What does this mean to the casual observer, when they see a clean skate and a sloppy one, and the sloppyy one wins? The logical conclusion (and possibly the correct one) will be 'it was fixed!'

  7. #37
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    902

    JohnnyCoop

    I think we saw the exact same program but came to enitrely different conclusions. There are quite a few poeple who agree with me about this. Irina was very sloppy throughout most of the program. Michelle was not. But that's my last word on this subject on this thread. I don't want Joe to send the police after me!

  8. #38
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,964
    Quote Originally Posted by JonnyCoop
    That was easily the weakest performance Kwan had given in competition in many years, and perhaps ever, IMHO.
    Nah, not ever. She'd had worse performances at Nationals the years she won silver, esp. 1997, and at various fall events, often winning anyway because everyone else was worse. But weakest performance at Worlds or Olympics? Yeah, probably.

    in Grand Prix Finals, Irina was given the nod over Michelle when Michelle actually skated better.
    In the final long program, yeah. Clearly ahead after the SP and first LP (remember that stupid format?), so how the points work out for medals even if Kwan had won the LP gets complicated again.

    What if the final LP results at that GPF had been Hughes-Kwan-Slutskaya, which would have been reasonable going by jumps landed/lack of visible mistakes? In that case Slutskaya would still have gotten gold. Only Kwan-Hughes-Slute in the long would have given Kwan the gold.

  9. #39
    Down With It
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    13,691
    Quote Originally Posted by euterpe
    It's because we know that hanky panky existed that we know it is bound to happen again. Only now our chance of knowing that it happened again is virtually nil. We can see an incredibly wrong outcome but be powerless to know how it happened and who was responsible.

    What is clear is this: the talking heads can't say whether skaters control their own destiny, because they don't. The caller and the judges are in control. While a clean skate is not necessarily a winning skate, a skate with 3 falls can have the potential to be a winner.

    What does this mean to the casual observer, when they see a clean skate and a sloppy one, and the sloppyy one wins? The logical conclusion (and possibly the correct one) will be 'it was fixed!'

    I can definitely side by this because this was the logic I used to go by when watching skating competitions before I started following it closely. I would be like, "She fell, she doesn't deserve to win!" So I can definitely see some sort of outcry if a skater w/mistakes wins over one who does not have any mistakes. Sarah HAD to win that ladies event after that FS in SLC. I think the results were right, but even if someone else deserved to win (due to placement), something would have seemed wrong if Sarah didn't win. At least in the casual viewer's eyes.

  10. #40
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,825
    I don't think it's that cut and dried. I think the casual audience can relate to the concept that skater A did a bunch of really hard stuff and fell a time or two, while skater B just skated around in circles for a while -- no falls -- and called it a day.

  11. #41
    Down With It
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    13,691
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman
    I don't think it's that cut and dried. I think the casual audience can relate to the concept that skater A did a bunch of really hard stuff and fell a time or two, while skater B just skated around in circles for a while -- no falls -- and called it a day.
    Maybe, but the commentators would have to explain that to the viewers at large. I'm not so sure the average non-skating fan looks at all the details of the program enough to really tell whether a program with faults should win over one without any mistakes. (I certainly know I didn't.) After all, why would the audience boo marks at a competition? Who the people at large like isn't necessarily who wins. The crowd favorite doesn't always win.

    I think there would have to be an OBVIOUS difference (like the clean skate of a junior skater vs. the not-so-good one by a performer like Kwan).

  12. #42
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    In a lime tree
    Posts
    26
    Irina's ''scandal'' (or disapointment, call it as you wish) was undercovered by the media because of S&P doublegold, MK losing it and Hugues bouncing it. I will not go thru that again because I just realized it was almost 4 years ago.

    To me, the season is still young and so groovin'! Althought top skaters like Weir, MK, S&Z and so on are injured, I appreciate the determination from everyone and I never read that much online articles about figure skating, which can only be good for the sport even if COP is an old opinionated b****.

    When I'm the bus thinking about:

    -Sokolova's smile
    -Cziny's wins, spirals and posture
    -Irina's stucking to a foot over her head even if a lot of people should put one in their mouth
    -Liashenko's West side story from a East voidy skater
    -Rochette skating to old Madonna when the real one is having the greatest comeback of her life
    -Li skating (and giving his heart out) to music that we thought Weir would have skate to
    -Sandhu's tango de la macho and kicking a** in a drum based freeskate
    -Evan's getting it
    -Silvia Fontana used to kick butt at a real quick half-bielmann, can't wait
    -Buttle sticking to what he does best: introspective yet crowd getting and pleasing
    -Weiss going back to classical roots after meeting classical rock
    -Delshoes going for the wildest (IMO) theme
    -Seeing realistic, full of respect and honest answers from Tanith and Ben regardless of them probably not going
    -Petrova and Tikhonov having the most fun out there cuz they've already been

    Fudge... I could go like this all day! lol

    Regardless of any scandal, you can't beat the rush of an olympic season. Gosh, as I'm writing this... a lot is going in my head. I can only imagine in a skater's mind...
    Last edited by LimeZest; 11-15-2005 at 11:08 PM.

  13. #43
    Medalist
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Back home where just living is my 'reality show'
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman
    Hi Lee. I agree with everything in your post except the part about blaming Stapleford and Pfenning for not sweeping what they knew under the rug. Truth will out, Speedy notwithstanding.

    MM
    I didn't say them coming out with what they did was a 'bad' thing, but if they hadn't come out with it, it would have just gone down as another close competition. That's all...

  14. #44
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    I don't understand why skating officials should not sweep things under the rug. Allowing culprits to get away with wrong doing is just oh so massochistic.

    The sermon like phrase 'truth will win out' just might take 50 years and by then who cares?

    Joe

  15. #45
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Edwardsville, IL
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz
    Look at the bright side: We know hanky panky has existed. We know the heartbreaker it is. We know it will put fear in the minds of future colluders because it will kill the sport. In effect, this may be the end of the cooperative cheats.
    Joe
    I fail to see how SLC in any way put an end to colluders, who are obviously not worried about killing the sport, simply about their own power games and federation agendas within the ISU. Anyone who has watched skating over the past two seasons has seen some questionable results. And after 3 years, the judges should not have the excuse of "not being comfortable" with the new system and the PCS scoring, and yet it is clear to anyone with eyes that the PCS scores are not being used correctly. In fact, part of the blame probably lies at the feet of the ISU, who review the scores and will punish a judge for being out of line with the other judges (no matter if that judges scores actually make sense or not.) So the judges simply seem to huddle in a small, safe range for skaters based on their reputation and/or political alliance.

    As much as the ISU would loathe a CoP meltdown in Torino, I think it is possible. (However, I just don't think it's going to happen with the ladies.)

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •