Hamm Keeps Gold

That ruling by the CAS is certainly sending a very loud and clear message to the IOC that all international federations (as well as their subordinate national federations) must have rules in place that ensure the integrity and accuracy of their officiating. Given this situation with Mr. Hamm and the Salt Lake situation, the IOC will now have no choice but to insist that all international federations have such measures in place when they meet in Singapore in July 2005. All federations can call special meetings for such a purpose and it would not be at all surprising to see those federations calling such meetings to ensure that such measures are in place prior to the next time their sport is in an Olympiad. Let's see what happens now...

All I have to say about the ruling is this:


WOO HOO!!!!

That's great that he gets to keep the gold medal, but what's his future plan? Is he going to compete a few more years or is he all done?

According to an article in The Washington Post,

In dismissing Yang's appeal, CAS affirmed the essential arguments made by Hamm and his lawyers: that judges' decisions made on "the field of play" are not subject to review by judicial bodies unless fraud is alleged; that South Korean officials failed to appeal in a timely manner; and that it would be mere speculation to conclude that Yang would have won the event if his parallel-bar score had been adjusted, given that it wasn't the final event of the competition.

Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50829-2004Oct21.html
(Free registration required to read the entire article.)

This suggests that in their appeal to CAS, Korean officials either did not allege fraud or prove fraud, ex: being prevented from making a timely appeal by anyone on the judging panels.

Adding an excerpt from the New York Times article:

The three-judge panel said in the ruling that the Koreans needed to protest under established gymnastics rules while the competition was going on, which they did not, and changing a result after it had ended was too dangerous a precedent without evidence of fraud or impropriety.

The arbitrators added that it was not fair to declare that Yang would have won the gold if the start value had been corrected because the athletes still had another apparatus to contest and the results of that might have been different had the parallel bars result been different.

Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/22/s...&en=ad5275c3803336ce&ei=5094&partner=homepage
(Free registration required to read the entire article.)

I'm very happy for Paul. I feel this was the right decision. There is no doubt that certainly Yang has good reason to feel badly, but IMO, this was the correct outcome.
I especially like the excerpt from the NY Times, provided in the post above by hockeyfan. You can never know what would have happened if Yang had been marked higher. Athletes often approach different phases of a competition in slightly different ways, depending on whether they are the leaders or the ones who are trying to catch up.