# Thread: 2012 London Olympic Games - Day Three - General Thread

1. Friggin hell. One protest and now she's Princess Diana.

2. Originally Posted by tralfamadorian
^^ I don't understand, why did they say the Koreans were supposed to pay then, wasn't this appeal against a referee's decision?
I THINK (though I have no idea, this is my interpretation) that is if they are appealing the decision on the first appeal. It sounds like they can take a decision "up the chain" once.

The whole rulebook, in English, is here http://www.britishfencing.com/upload...ok_t_23:04.pdf

That or because there is a difference between a referee and a judge. Perhaps the appeal was against a judges decision?

3. Originally Posted by beepbeep
A bit of volleyball snark:

What kind of parents name their child Destinee Hooker?
I remember seeing her in Big 12 matches when she played at Texas and thinking if your last name is Hooker, you probably want to name your daughter something normal and nondescript...Sarah, Beth, Jane...

Good then she grew up tall and strong!

I'm loving that NBC is actually showing volleyball live. Shocked by it, though.

4. Originally Posted by mazzy
Of course, the total of the actions took more than 1 sec. However, to determine that you would need to measure in finer increments which is not done. You basically have a zero/one situation: either the second was used up in one action or it was not. In the second case, a whole second remains and the game can be repeated ad infinitum.
Except the clock is supposed to be continuous. The rules say the overtime period is one minute. And according to the rules, if there is a problem with the clock, it is up to the referee to determine how much time has elapsed. So the referee should have looked at the video and considered the time that elapsed once the clock hit :01 and determined the proper amount of time. If the referee concluded that more than one second elapsed before the fourth, scoring touch, the referee should have called it for Shin.

Obviously, a lot of this problem could have been avoided if the clock had tenths or hundredths of a second. Then, when the referee ordered time placed back on the clock, she could have set it for less than one second, which it obviously should have been.

No idea. Apparently, the judge decided that it was a timekeeping mistake. It seems that the Koreans would have had to refuse to continue fencing if they wanted to challenge that. Technicalities being technical, I guess.
Again, that is obvious. However, it indicates that the timekeeper was not keeping proper time. When a clock only moves several seconds after it should have stopped, it indicates something is wrong. Most evident is the fact that the time did not start when the referee called for the fencers to start.

From a purely spectator pov, Heidemann has the better claim IMO. She did score one more point than her opponent in the time given by the judge, while Shin would basically be the profiteer of a coin toss.
Except that is the rule for extra time, and fencers adjust their strategy to the rule. If Shin did not get that advantage, she might have fenced the end of the semifinal completely differently.

I also loved that Heidemann actually went for the final point in the OT of the final despite having the advantage on her side.
I don't think that Shin was extraordinarily conservative in the OT. She had eight touches in the OT that were deemed simultaneous with Heidemann's touches. They just have different styles. It looks to me that Shin tended to rely on countering when Heidemann attacked. Shin did that even when she was behind in the scoring. Heidemann, who is much taller, probably favors an aggressive style that seeks to rely on her reach advantage.

5. IOC should get ready to receive at least a million emails as complaints from Korean netizens... good luck IOC

6. Originally Posted by reckless
Except the clock is supposed to be continuous.
If it says so in the rulebook, I stand corrected. I'm just an occasional spectator, but it seems to be that in this case FIE's equipment does not match their rules. Hell one could argue that their rules defy physics since continuous time measurement is physically impossible. If the smallest increments they use is seconds, then that is what we have to go by. We can argue all we want about how the world should be. FIE has an established timekeeping system that is most obviously not continuous.

The rules say the overtime period is one minute. And according to the rules, if there is a problem with the clock, it is up to the referee to determine how much time has elapsed. So the referee should have looked at the video and considered the time that elapsed once the clock hit :01 and determined the proper amount of time. If the referee concluded that more than one second elapsed before the fourth, scoring touch, the referee should have called it for Shin.
That's a position that one can get behind. Basically the ref should have taken the time (to what precision?) for every action and e.g. announced after the 2nd action that pi^(-1) seconds remained. Is there any precedent for this?

Obviously, a lot of this problem could have been avoided if the clock had tenths or hundredths of a second. Then, when the referee ordered time placed back on the clock, she could have set it for less than one second, which it obviously should have been.
As I tried to outline above, more precision does not necessarily mean that things will remain somewhat practical. You'll need to time the beginning & end of every action up to one hundredth of a second. It may be good or bad, but the system in place here determined the outcome.

Again, that is obvious. However, it indicates that the timekeeper was not keeping proper time. When a clock only moves several seconds after it should have stopped, it indicates something is wrong. Most evident is the fact that the time did not start when the referee called for the fencers to start.
To determine if something/what went wrong we would need to have access to original video data & synchronized audio. I don't have that and frankly, I do not care enough to invest the time.
I do agree that they should have made a more thorough investigation and probably should have postponed the finals to tomorrow to check the details. Particularly Shin was probably too disturbed by the whole mess anyway.

edit: I actually was intrigued enough to look it up, and it seems most likely that the timekeeper forgot to activate the clock at the 2nd action, then tried to correct it in between and got it down to zero that way. Oh my that is quite f*cked up.

7. Please take Greg Louganis and his head hitting dive off my TV - from early this morning til almost midnight, the bloody thing is haunting me

8. Austrians beating Australians in beach volleyball is not something you see every day.

9. Greg Louganis is still hot.

Wheeee Grange Hill music for Lithuanian Ruta.

10. Originally Posted by allezfred
Greg Louganis is still hot.
I just wiki=ed him, didnt realise he was HIV positive.

He is still hot, I agree - So unfair how men look great grey while us women (er no, never me!) are slaves to the dye!

11. Originally Posted by SHARPIE
I just wiki=ed him, didnt realise he was HIV positive.
Yeah, he was positive when he banged his head in Seoul.

12. British weightlifter explaining how her snatch was falling apart.

13. Originally Posted by allezfred
British weightlifter explaining how her snatch was falling apart.

I should write the PR for these girls

14. OMG are people on Twitter telling Tom Daley that he let his Dad down? What the feck is wrong with those dickheads?

15. Originally Posted by allezfred
OMG are people on Twitter telling Tom Daley that he let his Dad down? What the feck is wrong with those dickheads?
They are

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ing-final.html

Isnt it funny how 'internet trolls' are now a major menace according to the media - Ive been dealing with them for YEARS and FSU started cos I was a troll .... apparently!

16. For once NBC has spared me -- I haven't seen any of Louganis hitting his head on the board. Of course, now I'll probably see it on tonight's coverage of diving.

Originally Posted by allezfred
Greg Louganis is still hot.
Originally Posted by SHARPIE
He is still hot, I agree - So unfair how men look great grey while us women (er no, never me!) are slaves to the dye!
I concur that Louganis is still very hot. I hadn't seen him in quite a while until the recent fun Royal Caribbean promo he's in with Kwan. Still looks pretty good doing a handstand dive entry.

17. Originally Posted by skatingfan5
For once NBC has spared me -- I haven't seen any of Louganis hitting his head on the board. Of course, now I'll probably see it on tonight's coverage of diving.

You may be safe, he's over in London and whoring all over our Olympic Highlight shows today.

18. Greg Louganis is into dog agility training. Wow he's definitely gay then.

19. Originally Posted by Cachoo
I remember Mexican men diving from cliffs on the Wide World of Sports ages ago. For me it was scary to watch. Diving seems to be in the blood. Great job!!!
Acapulco cliff diving -- I used to look forward to it every year.

Originally Posted by beepbeep
A bit of volleyball snark:

What kind of parents name their child Destinee Hooker?
Probably not someone who thought, "There's no winning with 'Hooker,' so we might as well embrace it."

Originally Posted by SHARPIE
I just wiki=ed him, didnt realise he was HIV positive.
It was a big deal, because he knew he was HIV positive when he hit his head, and he was guilt-ridden for years for not telling the doctors who worked on his wound when he hit the boards, IIRC because he would have been ejected from the competition.

20. Originally Posted by allezfred
OMG are people on Twitter telling Tom Daley that he let his Dad down? What the feck is wrong with those dickheads?
I know, its ridiculous. Tom did his very best. Unfortunately, Pete Waterfield made a mistake on the 4th dive. Waterfield has had injury problems and these things happen when preparation is disrupted by injury. They did all they could and nobody can ask for more than that.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•