| Photography / Photojournalism / Sports | ©2012-2013 ~Sarahorsomeone |
The Journal Portal
Browse Journals |
Polls |
deviantART [dee·vee·un'nt·ART]
Keep in Touch!
|
Deviousness |
I don't think the IOC had much to do with 'screwing' anyone over to be honest; these decisions are, on the whole, controlled by the individual federations 'in charge' of each sport (in this case the FIE).
(As you may or may not know) in fencing if a match goes over to 1 minute extra-time (as it did), one of the fencers is randomly assigned priority and if neither fencer manages to score in that time the fencer with priority will win, effectively on the basis of the toss of a coin. Shin Lam was given that priority. On the one hand, the 1 minute of extra-time went on a few seconds too long because of timing problems (without which Shin Lam would have won), but on the other hand Britta Heideman managed to score in that time when Shin Lam did not. If Shin Lam had won it would have only been on the basis of that priority ruling.
It was an impossible decision to make really; I know the media on the whole are siding with Shin Lam (no doubt because of all the heart-wrenching photographs of her in tears all over the internet), but whatever the refs or FIE had decided would have been unfair on one or the other. What was bad was that the situation that occured (with the timing) could occur in the first place, and the way the whole thing was handled generally in regard to the welfare of both athletes; I can't say I really have a 'side' in the Shin Lam vs Britta Heideman argument. If the match had been the final I would have given them both a gold medal if it was up to me (but sadly, being a semi-final SOMEONE had to win to determine who fought who in the next matches).