duey Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Personally, I think the right thing for Hamm to do would be to give it up and take the silver. I would find it somewhat unsatisfying to go through life claiming fame fror a medal I really shouldn't have won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thailog80 Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Funny I don't remember the Gold being given to Roy Jones( I think it was) after the '88 Olympics debacle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotta Dream Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Keep it. It's not his fault that they screwed up. He didn't "back in" to the gold either. He nailed his final rotations to earn the gold. The Titans weren't taken away the victory when Buffalo got screwed. The Stars weren't taken away the Stanley Cup when Buffalo got screwed. (Buffalo always gets screwed by the way) The S.K. guy should get a gold too, but Hamm should definitely keep his and not be penalized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realist Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 The S.K. guy should get a gold too, but Hamm should definitely keep his and not be penalized. 4692[/snapback] This is probably the best thing to do. Didn't they do this with those Canadian skaters at the last Winter Olympics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Keep it. Then the S. Koreans shold hire Tanya Harding to fix his wagon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millbank Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 By him giving up the Gold medal , he actually would end the winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 I wouldn't blame him for keeping it, but "giving it back" might be the best thing for Hamm. These olympics need some positive press and he would be honored as a true olympian. And I'm pretty confident that the worst that would actually happen is that Hamm and the korean would share a gold. He could get lots of good press and keep his gold if he plays it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tuck Rule Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Keep it. As Hamm or a member of US team pointed out there were errors in ranking of Korean Yang Tae-young's performance as well. If he wants to get the 0.1 back he would also be taking a 0.2 penality on score as well. You need to take the good with thr bad. At least the Zebras are not as bad as those who gave the Patriots the win in AFC Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Perhaps the question should be why does he want to keep it when he knows that he won it in error? I try to avoid putting my values on other people (unless we're on the PPP board ), but I know there is no way in hell I'd feel comfortable keeping it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMCBillsFan Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 I say give it back. He didn't rightfully earn it. It was won on a mistake and can be kept on a technicality. Integrity is a big deal to me and I think he should give it back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30dive Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Here is the thing though....The scoring error was on an event earlier in the competition. It was not an error on the last event. performance's are differrent based on needs of the athlete. In other words had Hamm been trailing (because there was no earlier scoring error) would he have given his performance a little extra, kinda like pulling his goalie, because he had nothing to lose. If the IOC wants to give two golds thats fine but it cannot be determined what would have happened three events after the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent14 Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 It may have been won by mistake but weren't there deductions in the S. Korean's routine that weren't caught until on the tape. THose I believe would still have dropped the S.Korean's score and Paul Hamm would have won anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Here is the thing though....The scoring error was on an event earlier in the competition. It was not an error on the last event. performance's are differrent based on needs of the athlete. In other words had Hamm been trailing (because there was no earlier scoring error) would he have given his performance a little extra, kinda like pulling his goalie, because he had nothing to lose. If the IOC wants to give two golds thats fine but it cannot be determined what would have happened three events after the fact. 4728[/snapback] Am I the only one who finds thinking about male a gymnast "pulling his goalie" to be a disturbing reference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Am I the only one who finds thinking about male a gymnast "pulling his goalie" to be a disturbing reference? 4736[/snapback] Yep. A better reference would be to a tailgater to break his gut in giving it all for the team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 If we wanted everything to be computerized, we wouldn't let HUMANS judge the competition. Mistakes happen and it's part of the game. Didsn't someone use an illegal dolphin kick in one of the swimming events that gave him a 0.2 second advantage and thus the win? Don't see HIM giving back the medal either. And as others pointed out, it's no different than "No Goal," "No Goal II," "Home Run Throwup," "Just Give it to Them," etc. If the Olympics wanted things to be 100% perfect, they'd use the replays and computers to help judge. They don't, so the game's over. CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jukester Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 The S.K. guy should get a gold too, but Hamm should definitely keep his and not be penalized. 4692[/snapback] I concur. Hamm shouldn't have to give it back. The IOC should own up and offer the South Korean a gold also with no silver being awarded. It's the right thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zow2 Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Keep it. He apparently did a routine that would beat the South Korean's score that was given to him at the time. Had Hamm known he needed more points to win, they said he would have done a different routine with a higher point value. Whose to say he would not have nailed it? You can't unravel this...you can award a second gold medal to appease them but that's about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerJ Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Who says the guy who took silver is going to turn around and give that up to accept bronze. I think Hamm should and will keep the gold, and the IOC will swallow their pride and issue a second gold to the Korean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Hamm's Take I can't say I disagree with him after finding out more of the story. The Koreans should STFU and color. They have reaped what they sowed back in Seoul - and they really have more coming. Roy Jones Jr. ring a bell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiew Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Who says the guy who took silver is going to turn around and give that up to accept bronze. I think Hamm should and will keep the gold, and the IOC will swallow their pride and issue a second gold to the Korean. Agreed. Back in the days when races were decided by a guy with a stopwatch, there were often "ties" for medals. Don't see why they can't give two golds in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.