Gymnastics management abandons Chiles and others, but refuses to award 3 bronze medals

If the Court of Arbitration for Sport has its way, Jordan Chiles will be allowed to keep her bronze medal for the women’s floor exercise at the Paris Olympics. Romanian gymnasts Ana Bărbosu and Sabrina Maneca-Voinea will also be allowed to win one each.

But in a 29-page explanation of the decision that led to Olympic officials stripping Chiles of her first individual medal, CAS said the international governing body for gymnastics had botched the arbitration of the event and was unwilling to make amends by awarding all three gymnasts a medal, even though all the athletes had arguments for bronze.

The International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) also failed to keep track of when Chiles’ coach inquired about her score during the Aug. 5 competition, a mistake CAS called a “failure.” The court ultimately ruled that the inquiry came four seconds after the one-minute window allowed for Chiles’ score to be checked.

The CAS officials on Wednesday roundly blamed FIG for the problems that arose during one of the most dramatic moments of the Paris Games. After the competition, Romanian officials appealed to the court, which had set up a three-person panel at the Olympics specifically to settle disputes.

The panel said the research was too narrow, which caused distress among the athletes.

“Had the Panel been able to apply the principles of fairness, it would certainly have awarded a bronze medal to all three gymnasts, given their performance, good faith and the injustice and distress to which they were subjected, in circumstances where the FIG provided no mechanism or arrangement to implement the one-minute rule,” the court said.

The explanation for the ruling also mentioned other serious problems with the organization of the floor exercise, which ultimately resulted in gold for Rebeca Andrade of Brazil and silver for Simone Biles of the United States.

Since then, the scoring of Chiles, Bărbosu and Maneca-Voinea has become one of the most controversial and followed stories of the Paris Olympics.

“The Panel expresses its hope that the FIG will draw the consequences of this case in the future, with regard to these three extraordinary athletes and also for other athletes and their support staff, so that this never happens again,” CAS wrote in its ruling.

The gymnastics association did not respond to requests for comment.

USA Gymnastics, denied the chance to present new evidence to CAS, vowed to appeal once more to the Swiss Federal Tribunal, the body that gives CAS its legitimacy for arbitration. Successful appeals to the Swiss tribunal are unusual.

USA Gymnastics reported Wednesday that CAS data released earlier in the day showed that USA Gymnastics did not have enough time to properly present its case in Chiles’ favor. According to the company, Chiles’ coach, Cecile Landi, submitted her evaluation 47 seconds after the score was posted.

“We will consider these and other matters on appeal as we continue to seek justice for Jordan Chiles,” USA Gymnastics said.

In a separate statement Wednesday, CAS pushed back against a New York Times report that the panel itself was in conflict because its chairman, Hamid G. Gharavi, had represented Romania in separate arbitration cases for nearly 10 years.

Gharavi is acting as legal adviser to Romania in disputes being handled by the World Bank’s International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes, The Times reported.

CAS said it “condemns the scandalous statements published in certain US media outlets alleging, without knowledge of the above and before the assessment of the reasoned decision, that the Panel, and more particularly its President, was biased because of other professional commitments or for reasons of nationality.”

The court stated that Gharavi’s participation was not contested during the gymnastics arbitration, so “it is reasonable to assume that all parties were satisfied with having their cases heard by this panel.”

USA Gymnastics said it had not seen any disclosures about Gharavi or any other panelist, “and we have not seen any disclosures to date.”

GALLING DEEPER

What We Know About Jordan Chiles’ Olympic Bronze Medal Case and What Happens Next

At the heart of the competitive dispute is a question posed by Chiles’ coach Landi about how Chiles’ floor exercise was scored. Chiles initially scored a 13.666 and placed fifth. She was the last of nine gymnasts to compete, giving her just one minute to ask a question under FIG rules.

The judges allowed the examination at that point and raised Chiles’ score by 0.1 to 13.766, putting her ahead of Bărbosu and Maneca-Voinea, who both scored 13.700. (Bărbosu had the edge over Maneca-Voinea due to a better execution score, meaning the judges felt she had a cleaner routine.)

In one of the most emotional scenes of the Games, Chiles screamed with joy, while Bărbosu, who thought she had won bronze, dropped her Romanian flag in shock and disappeared from the dance floor in tears.

But the Romanian Gymnastics Federation appealed to the CAS and concluded that the investigation had started too late.
After CAS announced its initial verdict on Saturday, FIG changed the final standings and informed the International Olympic Committee that it would award Chiles’ medal to Bărbosu.

According to the Romanian Federation, Bărbosu will receive her medal during a ceremony on Friday.

GALLING DEEPER

The IOC’s handling of the Jordan Chiles case ruling is disturbing and shameful

In the ruling announced on Wednesday, CAS found that FIG did not have a mechanism in place to promptly determine whether a study was filed late, even though the study was filed electronically.

Donatella Sacchi, president of the FIG Artistic Gymnastics Technical Committee, said that when the investigation arrived, “the information did not give any indication that it had been received too late.”

CAS said it was logical for Sacchi to proceed on the assumption that the investigation was timely, as there were no circumstances which could directly show that the investigation was out of time.

“If the FIG had put in place such a mechanism or arrangement, much heartache would have been avoided,” CAS said.

FIG was also unable to identify the person who conducted the survey, as the person was appointed by local organizers, Sacchi said.

Landi appeared as a witness at the hearing and said she knew the one-minute rule and “believed she had conducted the investigation as expeditiously as possible.”

CAS continued: “She could not say with certainty whether she had done the examination within or outside the one-minute time limit, because everything had been done in great haste.”

(Photo: Naomi Baker/Getty Images)