ATHENS - Paul Hamm did not earn a gold medal. We know that now. Yang Tae-young did earn gold. We know that, too.
The situation, you can imagine, is sticky. The solution, fortunately, need not be.
Yang should be given a gold medal. An additional gold medal because there is no way Hamm should be stripped of his days after the fact.
Is that so hard to see?
Are we so caught up in rules that we ignore fair play? Are we such slaves to bureaucracy that justice has no place in these Olympic Games?
Think back a couple of years. Recall the outrage and indignation in Salt Lake City when Canadian figure skaters Jamie Sale and David Pelletier were given suspiciously low marks. The cases share much in common.
Sale and Pelletier were essentially cheated out of a gold medal because a French judge said she was pressured to favor a Russian duo.
The outcry was extreme. Baby seals extreme. How could this cute Canadian couple be robbed of their dreams by unscrupulous judges?
Within days, the International Olympic Committee stepped in and announced a second gold medal would be awarded to Sale and Pelletier.
Maybe it was not the perfect answer, but it was closer to justice than the original outcome.
And so it should be with the gymnastics all-around title.
The facts no longer are in dispute. Two judges mistakenly gave Yang a start value - a degree of difficulty, if you will - of 9.9 on his final routine. The start value should have been 10.0.
That one-tenth of a point meant the difference between scoring 9.475 and 9.575. Had he been given the correct score, Yang would have finished .051 ahead of Hamm. The mistake, instead, dropped him to third place.
He was, like the figure skaters, robbed. In Salt Lake City, it was a deliberate act. This appears to be a mistake. Still, the results are the same. The wrong person walked out of the building wearing gold.
Knowing this injustice had been done, the International Gymnastics Federation's response was to punish the judges. The blunder was so grievous, they've been suspended.
But why stop there? Why not make amends with the victim, too?
The IGF says no. Says the rules clearly state an appeal must be made before the end of competition.
Yes, well the rules also say Yang should have been awarded a different score. So if we've already colored outside the lines, why are we so worried about the rest of the picture?
It's not like a second medal would tarnish Hamm's gold. That's already been done. We already know he was given something he did not completely deserve. Denying Yang his gold only makes it worse.
In fact, the only way to feel good about Hamm's medal is to make sure Yang gets his. That way, you never look at Hamm's gold with guilt.
Come on, you know it's the right thing to do. Isn't it the sort of thing we preach to our children? To make sure everyone is treated fairly?
This is not a blown call in the second quarter of a football game or the seventh inning of a baseball game. You can not retrace the steps of a game in progress because the dynamics are changed once the call is made.
This is different. It was the final rotation of the night. Yang was finished competing when the mistake was tallied.
And Hamm would have done nothing different if the correct score had been posted. He's already admitted he did not know how far behind he was going into the high bar. And he had already given up on the idea of gold.
The incorrect number changed nothing but the outcome.
Imagine, for a moment, if the roles were reversed. That it was Hamm who was denied a gold. That it was a South Korean judge who signed off on the bogus card. Because it was, in fact, an American who did it to Yang.
Do you suppose, if Hamm were cheated, that you might feel differently?
Now imagine how South Koreans feel.
And it's not a new sensation for them. In Salt Lake City, South Korea lodged a protest when one of its speed skaters was disqualified and America's Apolo Anton Ohno won gold.
The kicker is that, through the athletes, these Games already have shown us the depth of the human spirit.
We saw Markus Rogan supporting Aaron Peirsol's appeal in swimming, even though it would eventually cost him a gold medal.
We saw Michael Phelps give up his spot in a relay final to a teammate, even though it cost him a part of a world record and a place on the podium for the medal ceremony.
We've seen Iraqi soccer players given a second chance and Afghanistan women offered a first. From our athletes, we've seen cooperation and compassion. Dignity and respect. Is it wrong to expect the same from our officials?
They worry about precedent.
And, yes, it could open the door to future appeals. But isn't it better to judge appeals individually than to have blanket rules?
Is justice really a precedent we're trying to avoid?
