Farcical scenes in Japan-Korea judo quarterfinal

I beltive judges are all qualified enough for this special event. However they are not at the top positions to make decisions, I think. They jusf make decisions but they have no right to overrule! Only commissioners looks to have those authorities, which are shameful because it can be used politically sometimes. I am not sure only this event shows that. But watching more and more events, the power games between less powerful countries and powerful countries are obvious.

Watched the re-broadcast on Canadian TV, which should make it fairly neutral (unlike some of the posters here)

I think you're missing it. Most posters here are saying the same thing you are. The original decision seemed to be biased if not a very poor decision. But, IMO, I think that the judges (although having made a very bad call initially) would have earned more respect had they stood their ground and stuck by their decision. At worst, they would have come away from this as being poor judges. By all three judges unanimously changing their minds in favor of Ebinuma due to surrounding pressure, just shows how incompetent they are, and underscores the fact that they shouldn't be judging such an important event. Now, not only their judging, but other more qualified judges are going to be scrutinized under a microscope for every judgment they make because of this one incident.

Watched the re-broadcast on Canadian TV, which should make it fairly neutral (unlike some of the posters here). The colour commentator, a former Olympian in judo, was surprised at the original decision that awarded the match to Cho. He seemed to think the reversal was justified.

Why don't they just use video replays in the first place... Humans, no matter how competent, can't possibly accurately judge with only their own eyesight alone. At least videos don't lie.

The reversal of Yuko by Ebinuma was correct. The video repeatedly showed how Mr. Cho used his arm to protect from falling to his side on the floor. However, the decision made by the head judge is still a mystery to me. What was his motivation? Clearly cho dominated the final golden time except that close call. Three judges clearly saw all the efforts and actions made by him, only overturned by the onlooker, head judge, who was watching miles from the floor only by the video. Then why not make a decision remotely by, for example, the cell phone used by the some important person who can overrule the final decision made at his home coach?

"What happened was the japanese player won, the judges didn't see an ippon...the video replay clearly showed it, they made the right decision in reversing the decision."

So again, what's the point of having the judges on the floor?

mikihouse wrote on Jul. 29, 2012 - 10:38PM JST

And yes, the primary judge is a Korean if I am not mistaken...

Well, you are wrong!!

Referee MINAKAWA Edison (IJF) Brasil Judge 1 MIRZARAHMANOV Nagmanjon (IJF) Uzbekistan Judge 2 SULLI Massimo (IJF) Italy

And the referee seems like Japanese-Brazilian.

Video replay was brought in for the specific and intended purpose of introducing "farce" - where farce means reversed decisions based upon examination of slow motion video replay.We, the audience, competitors can suffer the injustice of incorrect decisions, or the disappointment of reversed decisions but I don't see how we can have it both ways.

Tiger, you're right of course. it was the semifinal that Ebinuma lost to Shavdatuashvili. Guess I had quarter-finals stamped on my brain.

Having them both get a bronze in the end seems about right to me. They were pretty evenly matched, I thought. Glad Cho got a second chance.

well in the end they got it right, Ebinuma landed a good action that should have been awarded. Too bad we went through that painful experience for Cho.

Seriously though I have never seen such a crap decision in my life. The medal should have gone to Cho and end with that. Sharing a bronze due to poor decision making makes no sense.

They didn't share the bronze because of this decision. In Olympics judo, the losers of both semi-finals go through to the repechage to fight for the bronze medals. Cho wouldn't have won the bronze even if he did get the decision. I have never seen such crap knowledge of international judo on some of these posts.

Can somebody tell me why the crowd were upset over the original decision anyway. Didn't see it.

I was in the audience and it looked to most of us that Ebinuma was the better player, particularly after his revoked Yuko. I thought he did better than Cho, but I'm really not an expert.

The crowd, who were upset over the original decision anyway and jeered loudly, became even more vocal following the farcical overturn and Cho was afforded a standing ovation as he left the mat.

The crowd didn't like the intital decision and disliked the reversal decision even more. At least Cho got a stand ovation and the bronze.

Seriously though I have never seen such a crap decision in my life. The medal should have gone to Cho and end with that. Sharing a bronze due to poor decision making makes no sense.

No surprise seeing the same old posters posting the same old negative comments and insinuating ridiculous claims with no evidence against Japan:

What happened was the japanese player won, the judges didn't see an ippon...the video replay clearly showed it, they made the right decision in reversing the decision. This is the way it should be, the winner should win. Hopefully more sports will implement video cameras and replays.

cleo:

Thanks for the info. I watched judo the day before (flicking through the channels until I decided on something which even the layman could understand - weightlifting). I couldn't understand what the silver or golden marks on the top left of the screen meant or what constituted a win, didn't know what ippon was, and just gave up.

Ebinuma was thrown for ippon by the eventual gold medalist Georgian in the semi-final. Not the quarter final. There is a clue in this headline..

cleo:

Thanks for the info. I watched judo the day before (flicking through the channels until I decided on something which even the layman could understand - weightlifting). I couldn't understand what the silver or golden marks on the top left of the screen meant or what constituted a win, didn't know what ippon was, and just gave up.

Ebinuma lost by ippon to Shavdatuashvili of Georgia in the quarter-finals.

The head judge should have intervened for any reasons we don't know. There could be many explanations such as above many reasons. Whatever reasons what so ever, the Japanease player failed to advance to the final. Maybe the help from head judge won't be enough. It's a shame..

Three flags for Cho meets audience complaints and a word from the referee director. Then, within a matter of minutes, 3:0 suddenly turns to 0:3. This is no coincidence. One judge might have made a mistake. But three? No.

Pukey2 - I can't pretend to know very much about Judo, but I think the crowd shared my impression that during the 5 minutes of the match and 3 minutes of 'golden score', although there were no points scored Ebinuma led most of the way. I thought the flag decision might have gone 2-1 to Ebinuma, but the 3-0 to Cho was a complete surprise.

I've never seen this game! it is so rediculous that the judges change their decision. at first they raise 3 blue flags, but after 5 minutes, they raised 3 white flags again. This reversed decision injures Judo's spirit.

Can somebody tell me why

The crowd were upset over the original decision anyway

Didn't see it.

I watched the match on TV and this was a joke and gives judo a bad name. Not good for both athletes, but in the end results matter more and it is worse for Cho than it is for Ebinuma. At least Ebinuma advances. When Ebinuma did his move on Cho, Cho's shoulder did not hit the ground. So, of course, Ebinuma should not get the point. But in the final part of the match, the judoka who makes more aggressive moves is declared the winner and that was clearly Cho. So the referees gave a 3-0 judgment to Cho. But the Federation's action was 100% political IMHO.

The IJF may have got it right this Olympics. I was at the judo yesterday, and I initially believed that Hiraoka had not been thrown by an ippon score in the final. Neither did the referee or the mat referees, who did not signal an ippon score at first. However, the video refereeing table must have called it and after the crowd were shown the replay on the screen we all realised that the video refereeing table were the only ones who called it correctly.

All this talk of a fix by the IJF is absolutely ridiculous. Anyone who knows anything about international judo will know that the Japanese have hardly any positions of influence in the IJF anymore and the Japanese have a poor relationship with the international body.

Pardon me, but if a judge's judgement has no meaning, what's the point of them being there?

Lots of sports have committees and other judges that can overrule initial decisions. I remember a long fight over Equestrian medals during the Athens olympics due to Bettina Hoy's time penalties. Initially she was given the time penalties and she dropped out of the medals. Then the Germans complained and got the result changed. Then GB and France complained as they lost the individual and team gold respectively, eventually having the original decision reinstated.

And umm.... who's on the Judo Federation Refereering Commision (my guess -- Japanese).

That's incredibly mean-spirited. Do you have any evidence that the commission is packed with Japanese judges who are also so unsporting that they would give a losing Japanese player a win he didn't deserve?

If we get into "well he/she is x nationality, so it's biased" mentality, we would be forced to have judges from countries that had absolutely no skill/representation in that sport - which would probably then lead to accusations that they were bribed or inexperienced idiots.

I didn't see the match, and I don't know who was the better competitor. But saying that the Japanese guy only won because of biased judges (who haven't been identified!) is very unsportsmanlike and goes against the Olympic tradition.

I do think Ebinuma should have been given the decision, the initial decision by the three referees should NEVER have been reversed. What's the point of having referees at the ringside if their decisions are not upheld? Why not just have Mr. Juan Carlos Barcos decide every match then? And for your information, none of the judges were Koreans nor Japanese. Let's not blow things with false information.

Feel really bad for the Korean judoka! I didn't agree with the initial decision, but I agree even less with the over ruling (if that makes sense?). I highly doubt it was the JOC's influence though. If that were true, the YUKO that the Japanese judoka had gotten during the match would never have been over ruled. Nonetheless, I hope that Cho Jun-Ho can make it back up through the repechage and at least win a bronze out of this.

In Sumo matches the referee sometimes makes a mistake because he can not see everything in a fast moving contest. That is why Sumo has four other judges placed around the arena to make a final decision, including digital replay. There have been so many instances of scores changed in the Olympic Judo events that I am even more confused about the Judo events taking place now. Cleo above has a good comment about the problems.

"I wonder how much the JOC paid the judges"

Maybe you were not watching...the whole crowd were so upset that they were booing the judges decision and were clapping when the decision was reversed as it should be.

And yes, the primary judge is a Korean if I am not mistaken...

I feel sorry for both athletes. The judges are completely incompetent and too dependent on the replays to make their decisions. Too many switched decisions and second guessing in other matches as well. They need to be fired!

Maybe it would have been fairer to give them a half-hour break, then let them have another go at each other.

In the matches preceding that one, there were quite a few instances of judges' decisions being overturned, points being taken from one contestant and given to the other, etc. for no reason that was apparent to the camera (or to me sitting in front of the telly, at any rate). The contestants didn't seem to know if they were coming or going. Very strange.

For the first time at the Olympics, video replay technology is being used to review contentious scoring but the over-rule of a judges decision following a draw has never been done before.

Looks like technology is being used well. Humans can make mistakes or miss things that a camera does not.

"All three judges on the mat awarded the bout to Cho, clad in blue, but the International Judo Federation’s Refeering Commission then intervened."

Pardon me, but if a judge's judgement has no meaning, what's the point of them being there? And umm.... who's on the Judo Federation Refereering Commision (my guess -- Japanese).

I saw this one on TV and it's hard to believe what happened. Farce? I wonder how much the JOC paid the judges. This one stinks big time!