1994 Olympics in Lillehammer - Controversial Results across the Board!

Discussion in 'The Trash Can' started by Xela M, Mar 31, 2014.

  1. Susan M

    Susan M Well-Known Member

    1,542
    215
    63
    No, people pushing that argument are just making stuff up becasue they wanted T&D to win. There was really only one separation considered controversial in that it lasted about 12 seconds rather than the 10 seconds allowed. That one should have been called for a deduction. The ISU weren't calling for deductions for brief separations on anyone so there was no reason to call any other penalty here either.

    But still, these deductions were not subtracted from the mark a judge put up, the deduction was supposed to be incorporated by the judge when deciding on their marks. It was not uncommon for judges to take deductions in their own minds even if not called by the referee, so any number of them could have seen it and taken a mental ding off their mark for G&P. Or, as I suspect, they saw how much more difficult that dance was than anybody else's and decided that was enough to overcome a choreographic no-no, and that the tech mark should still be higher than anyone else's.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2014
    gkelly and (deleted member) like this.
  2. Taso

    Taso Well-Known Member

    6,686
    372
    83
  3. coraczek

    coraczek Member

    275
    6
    18
    I believe 5 seconds, not 10 were allowed.
     
  4. annabrown

    annabrown Member

    45
    2
    8
    Well even that one deduction might have kept them at silver over Torvill & Dean but it for sure would have lost them gold to Usova & Zhulin, so based on that U&Z atleast were robbed.
     
  5. Susan M

    Susan M Well-Known Member

    1,542
    215
    63
    It has been a lot of years now, I found a video and I think it must have been 5 as this one was more like 7 or 8. Still, it had been about the same at Europeans and it was not called there either, so it would have been kind of hard to allow it all year then ding them for it here. (And yes, one of the two moves T&D were dinged on was also in the Euros FD, but it was done very differently at Europeans. She was much closer to him it didn't look so much like a throw jump there.)

    When the ISU introduced the no-touch steps element I could not help but think back to this event and laugh.

    Did you watch skating under 6.0 because clearly you do not understand the concept of scoring in an ordinal system. Has any judge from that event ever been quoted as saying their ordinal for G&P would have been lower had they realized there should have been a .1 deduction? (maybe so, but I don't remember it.) I think the judges put them where they did based on what the teams did on the ice and would have put them in the same places even if the referee called for the deduction. The mandatory deduction would likely only have made a difference if a judge otherwise thought the programs were pretty much a coin toss and didn't have any better reason for placing one over the other. Otherwise, that better reason would have offset the -.1. What ever the absolute points, they would have produced the same ordinals because they would have adjusted their numbers accordingly.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2014
  6. fracturedleg

    fracturedleg Member

    88
    5
    8
    Usova & Zhulin probably should have won the 94 gold but they were screwed over by the judges and bad luck their whole career so nothing new there. I would have given Rakammo & Kokko the bronze over Torvill & Dean had they not fallen but not sure the judges would have ever done this.

    Kerrigan I would have had 4th. She had no artistry at all, and no exceptional jumps either. Bonaly atleast landed 2 hard triple-triples and more triples (6 to 5) than Kerrigan, even with the huge mistakes. Sato should have beat Kerrigan so badly in the long to make up for 7th to 1st in the short. Chen and Baiul beat Kerrigan overall easily.

    I would have given gold to Miskutienok & Dmitriev. Gordeeva & Grinkov are the better team but had mistakes. Shishkova & Naumov deserved the bronze. I might have even placed them 2nd in the long program over G&G due to much superior technical difficult/merit that night, although behind artistically.

    Stojko deserved the mens gold. It doesnt matter if you dont like his artistry. Urmanov had awful spins, awful footwork, poor choreography, and did less difficult jumps and not all clean either.
     
  7. fracturedleg

    fracturedleg Member

    88
    5
    8
    I wouldnt have even sent Kerrigan to the Games either. I would have sent Tonya Harding and Michelle Kwan since they were the first 2 finishers at Nationals, and Kerrigan had not medaled at the previous years worlds and customarily only medal winners of the previous years worlds were considered for a bye.
     
  8. berthesghost

    berthesghost Well-Known Member

    4,891
    585
    113
    ^ so.... Once Harding skated like crap, Kerrigan just barely lost gold by a fraction of a point, and Kwan a month later, with 5 of the top 10 finishers at olys missing, only managed 8th, did you rethink your assessment? :shuffle:
     
  9. fracturedleg

    fracturedleg Member

    88
    5
    8
    Naw, cant stand Kerrigan, her skating, or the nauseating hype around her that continues to this day so wouldnt have missed her. I am not American and so dont even really care if Americans do well or not unless I like them. I guess if I were and a member of the USFSA I guess I grudingly would have beaten Nancy Kerrigan on the teams due to my job being dependent on the U.S winning medals, but usually the precedent then was to only put medal winners from the previous years worlds. Sometimes even medal winners get bumped- Bobek in 96. So Kerrigan they made a special case for, probably in part due to the gruesome way she missed nationals rather than just the usual injury.

    Anyway had Nancy not been at the Games Tonya may have done alot better and medaled, so it is not certain the U.S would fare much worse with Harding and Kwan. I know Kwan wasnt a medal contender that year. Harding was treated like thrash the whole Games though because Kerrigan was there, and Nancy was classless through the whole thing in her usual manner. Tonya even speaks about it very angrily in the recent documentary about her.
     
  10. Susan M

    Susan M Well-Known Member

    1,542
    215
    63
    Since the criminal nature of the attack causing Kerrigan to miss Nationals was unprecedented, they probably figured there were no useful precedents regarding byes. Also, when the previous byes were given, the ISU rule for spots were different. There was a "named skater" rule that said the extra spot won by a podium finish could only be used by that skater. If the country did not send that skater, they could not name anyone else to that place.

    At the time, I don't remember anyone seriously arguing Kerrigan should not get a spot on the team if she demonstrated her readiness to compete in time. There was considerable sentiment the USFS should stand up to Harding's legal threats and give the second spot to Kwan, though. Thinking back, I have always wondered if Kwan would have been less tight and won in Nagano if she had had the experience of skating in Lillehammer.
     
  11. fracturedleg

    fracturedleg Member

    88
    5
    8
    I think WDing Harding from the team would have been wrong since she clearly earned her spot at Nationals and there was no legal evidence she was involved in the Kerrigan clubbing. She did admit to learning about the attack after coming home from Nationals and not reporting it, but I am not sure if that would fall under criminal conduct or not. She claims her life was threatened at that point if she spoke and it is why she didnt, even though she badly wanted to come forward with the news on her own. Poor Tonya.
     
  12. escaflowne9282

    escaflowne9282 Well-Known Member

    2,941
    580
    113
    Egads, even I wouldn't go that far. I may be less than complimentary towards Kerrigan, but Tonya made her bed and she had to lie in it. She chose to surround herself with poor influences, had a shoddy work ethic, lost favor with the USFSA, and at the end of the story her people wound up kiboshing a skater that she should have been able to beat on sheer talent alone.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2014
  13. Susan M

    Susan M Well-Known Member

    1,542
    215
    63
    Well before the team left to Lillehammer, Harding admitted to lying to the USFS, lying to the police, and lying to the media about her involvement in the coverup. To me, the honor of being an Olympic team member should carry with it certain expectations of character and behavior, and the misdeed to which she had already admitted were enough to deny her that place. It should not have needed a criminal conviction or even criminal charges.
     
  14. fenway2

    fenway2 Well-Known Member

    1,583
    201
    63
    Tonya was treated like trash because she acted like trash.

    I would have placed Kerrigan 22nd in the free skate behind Lily Lee.


    (Just thought I'd add to the hyperbole in this thread)
     
  15. neptune

    neptune Well-Known Member

    3,997
    194
    63
    OK, this is what Tracy Wilson had to say:

    "Separations are very clear. You're only allowed to separate 5 times, and for a maximum of 5 seconds."

    So, was Tracy Wilson wrong or what? Did the rulebook say 5 seconds or 10 seconds??? And did any of the other couples separate for more than 5 seconds? Apparently G&P separated for more than 5 seconds three times.

    If there was only one deduction, and merely for 0.1, then I can completely understand what you're saying. The question is what the actual deduction should have been. Could someone please provide us with a quote from the rulebook--or something similar? :)

    Personally, I don't care that much about who won. I just want to know what was fair. I liked/disliked various things about the top 3 teams.
     
  16. neptune

    neptune Well-Known Member

    3,997
    194
    63
    I had never heard the original before, so I checked it out. I don't think there's anything wrong with it, but it seemed kind of bland to me--Tozzi is not that gifted a singer IMO. Branigan may be melodramatic at times, but at least she gives her version oomph.

    Speaking of music, maybe this should have been the music for U&Z's FD: ;)

    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xsj26s_kylie-minogue-slow_music
     
  17. neptune

    neptune Well-Known Member

    3,997
    194
    63
    You're welcome. Enjoy the sunshine. ;)
     
  18. neptune

    neptune Well-Known Member

    3,997
    194
    63
    That makes all the difference. Hopefully someone can confirm this for sure.
     
  19. neptune

    neptune Well-Known Member

    3,997
    194
    63
    If it was 5 seconds, did G&P actually separate 3 times for that long?

    That's basically irrelevant. It's either against the rules or not. If the limit was 5 seconds, and G&P broke the rule 3 times, then that's 0.3 off.

    Let's also keep in mind that the winner of a contest isn't necessarily the athlete/team who was the most athletic and/or deserving. Sometimes it's just the one who was the smartest. For instance, let's say we have two football teams: A and B. Team A has far more talent, pushes Team B all over the field, and leads in almost all the stats. But Team B manages to win. Why? Because Team A did some dumb things and racked up some stupid penalties. Does that mean Team B was the better team overall? Of course not. It just means they found a way to win by playing it smart, while Team A self-destructed.

    If the rules are clearly spelled out in the rulebook, but you choose to ignore them, then that's just plain stupid. :p Winning is often about strategy, and if G&P deserved a 0.3 deduction, then I can't see any way they deserved to win. And they had no one to blame but themselves.
     
  20. gk_891

    gk_891 Active Member

    909
    127
    43
    Illegalities seem to be a major issue with many of Linichuk and Karponosov's students. G&P had illegal separations and an illegal lift in their 1993 FD. They had another illegal separation in their 96 FD. I think Krylova & Ovsiannikov had an illegal separation in their 95 FD. Lobacheva & Averbukh had 2 illegal moves in their 2002 FD (those jumps Ilia did at the beginning of their programs). And Denkova & Staviski had 2 prolonged lifts in their 2006 FD. L&K are either very clueless or they didn't care and broke the rules anyways.
     
  21. coraczek

    coraczek Member

    275
    6
    18
    The fact that judges could do whatever they wanted disregarding the rules, made the mockery of the 6.0 system. It's not surprising it was changed eventually.
     
  22. fracturedleg

    fracturedleg Member

    88
    5
    8
    They still can do whatever they want. Have you watched skating the last 3 years. The judging isnt improved, if anything it is even worse now. The journey from Chan's 4 or 5 mistake victories to Sotnikova SkateGate, and V&T's slew of 10s for interpretation and performance for Jesus Chris Superstar in between. They have even more marks to play around with, and even more possible outs to justify whatever they want to do.

    BTW, just curious are you British?
     
  23. coraczek

    coraczek Member

    275
    6
    18
    .

    No, I'm not and have never had anything to do with UK apart from visiting it a few times during holidays:).

    I also don't think that the current system is perfect. I'm sure that some of the verdicts are questionable and changes are needed. And I don't enjoy ice dancing inder the current system as I used to. But I believe the system isn't worse that the previous one and despite all imperfections it is fairer.
     
  24. nylynnr

    nylynnr Active Member

    429
    102
    43
    Going to agree with post #321 and throw a bit more memory lane hyperbole into the thread. Torvill & Dean should not have been anywhere near the Russians in the compulsory dances. The judges held them up; the British judge even had them first. It's not surprising, then, that regardless of the various merits of the free dances, the panel would only award them bronze.
     
  25. gkelly

    gkelly Well-Known Member

    10,809
    2,399
    113
    Specific rules tended to change every 2 years at the ISU congress, as is still the case.

    IIRC, the rules at the time allowed a certain number of separations less than 5 seconds, and one separation up to 10 seconds that either must be or must not be connected to stop in the middle or at the beginning/end of the program. I don't remember the details.

    We'd have to try to find a copy of the dance rules for 1993-94 to verify.

    Wilson's comments in the broadcast didn't cover the sum total of all the separation rules at the time. So relying on them to search for deductions would be an inaccurate approach.

    As would relying on a rulebook from 1992 or 1996 or 2014.
     
  26. fracturedleg

    fracturedleg Member

    88
    5
    8
    Mrs. Parry even had T&D 1st in the Starlight Waltz, their weaker of the two compulsory dances. No other judge had them higher than 3rd, and three judges even had the guts to put them 4th behind the Finns in that particular dance. She should be ashamed of her biased judging at those Games. She was worse than the Russian judge. She got a remprimand after the dance event for biased nationalistic scoring.

    The worst flag waving judging I saw though was Bill McLaughlin at the 97 worlds. He placed Bourne & Kraatz first in every dance at those worlds. Even their original dance where most judges had them 4th or 5th (despite that they came 3rd barely). He was the only judge to place B&K 1st in any of the dances, and in 2 of the 4 dances, their 2nd compulsory dance and original dance, no other judge had them higher than 3rd. I cant believe he only got a warning and not a suspension.

    Wilson always hated G&P so she is not an unbiased source. I am not surprised she would be looking for any explanation for them not deserving the gold medal, especialy with her good buddy Maya Usova sitting in the gold medal spot at that moment. Rumor is she hated them as she is a good friend of Maya Usova and was even a bridesmaid at Maya's wedding, so Pasha'a affair with Zhulin and the subsequent divorce upset her. G&P beating U&Z for the 94 Olympic Gold probably really upset her, and explains the ever increasing hate filled speeches on them in her commentary. That she was a huge fan of all of Bourne & Kraatz, Krylova & Ovsiannikov, and Anissina & Peizerat who G&P kept dominating and beating (deservedly), just added more fuel to her fire down the line.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2014
  27. Xela M

    Xela M Active Member

    928
    230
    43
    Ugh I remember her comments on G&P's legendary Libertango OD, which pretty much everyone agrees is a masterpiece. She said something like "they never touched the audience" or some similar nonsense. I also remember her trying to prove that B&K were so much better than G&P, which makes any statements by her about G&P completely ridiculous and irrelevant.
     
  28. gk_891

    gk_891 Active Member

    909
    127
    43
    I normally think of Tracy Wilson has an excellent ice dance commentator but her commentary on Grishuk & Platov should be looked on as a major source of shame for her.
     
  29. irishcream

    irishcream New Member

    11
    0
    1
    It had to be motives unrelated to their skating too, since she is far too technically knowledgable to really believe the crap she spoke on them. Even if she didnt like their style of skating, she knows full well the objective merits that go into giving a score, and is able to do that for anyone else (eg- Slutskaya whose skating she didnt like but knew her scores were justifiable and said so).
     
  30. irishcream

    irishcream New Member

    11
    0
    1
    As for T&D I think they were upset they werent treated like G&G in their comeback. G&G were treated like the class of the field and certain to win unless she they fell a couple times anyway. T&D are considered the best dance team ever generally speaking, just as G&G are, so they probably felt they deserved the same treatment as G&G got but werent close to it in the end.