Replies

With the rules as they are, considering BOTH the short and long programs the Russian's won fare and square. Anybody who doesn't like it just being obsessive.

Really? The rules permit judges to score higher for teams they like, or for political reasons? They allow them to swap scores with other judges? What was that judge's oath thing in the opening ceremony about then? These are the allegations here you know. You can't just assume it didn't happen.

What was that judge's oath thing in the opening ceremony about then?

The same thing as a politician's.

People have been screaming the same thing for years. During the last olympics(or maybe the one before) there was the thing in ice dancing about the Americans were rated behind the Russians, I think it was Jenny Meno and Todd Sands. Anyhow, the commmentators went on and on and on about how the Russians touched for .0123 seconds longer that allowed and roll that tape ten or twenty more times yada yada yada. They finally interviewed Meno/Sands and really pushed them for a hateful comment about the judges and the pair REFUSED to take the bait because they had to compete the next time. It's just something to take our minds off of Enron.

Those are the allegations. But you can't just assume the DID happen. What I'm trying to present here is a possible completely legitimate reason why the Russians could have won. This is easy for me because I really didn't like the Canadian performance. While it was technically very well done it did not appear as challenging (and all the FS "experts" say the Russian routine had a higher difficulty rating) and was not (to me) as asthetically pleasing. I am presenting why I, were I a judge at that even, would have scored the Russians higher and proudly voted them for the gold. In presenting why 1 person, without collusion or scandal, could make such a decision I'm trying to help show how 5 of 9 judges could. There's a general assumption on these threads that because the judges didn't agree with you that must mean it was fixed. I'm presenting the apparently shocking possibility that maybe the judges honestly don't agree with you. Unlike FS judges I'm not just throwing out a couple of numbers, I'm giving you explicit reasons why I felt the Russians were better. You might not agree with them but that's not the goal. The goal is to show that there isn't automatically collusion just because the judges don't agree with the audience. There still could have been collusion, I'm not ruling it out. I'm saying the rankings in themselves do not prove it was fixed.