Was this from the broadcast? Curious if the panel had this view. I was watching from the other side of the rink, but I probably still had a better view than the judges. I was instantly suspicious of this jump, as it had many of the hallmarks of an underrotated jump and some of the indicators of a two-footed one, but I couldn't tell for sure in real-time. I noted that in my live PBP. I wasn't sure if the snow was from a skidding, underrotated landing or from a two-foot. I thought a two-foot was more likely than not, but wasn't comfortable making the call.
I then watched the replay in the arena, and it was from a frustrating side angle. It was impossible to tell anything re: rotation or two-foot. Given what I saw, I would've called it 3Loq and given it 0 GOE, giving the benefit to the skater. With this view, I'd call it 3Lo< and give it -3 for being underrotated and almost certainly two-footed. (The camera angle is not completely definitive, IMO; it's 95% likely.)
I do think the panel was mostly fair: they went -4 on the combo, which is what I think it deserved, or -3, even though the 3F+3Tq call could've had them go -1 or -2. I wonder if they had this view of the loop. Backing up my theory: judges 7, 8, and 9, who had the worst view of the loop, gave it the best GOE. (Granted, judge 8 was the US judge.)
The Finnish judge may needs glasses. -1 on the combo and +3(!!!) on the loop. Granted, she had the absolute worst view of the loop, but she had the best view of the combo, so something was off with her scoring. I do think the loop could deserve +3 (or more) if clean between the travelling threes in and the split jump out of it.
.
.
