During the 2012 London Osimpics, the‘bad call’ especially focused on Korean athletes, had been a target of
criticism, letting‘Olympics’ to be called ‘Oshimpics’ (‘Oshim’means ‘a bad call’ in Korean). The victims of questionable judgments had been listed in three events: fencing, swimming and judo, which were later overturned. Moreover, a secretary general of International Fencing Federation forced a Korean fencer, Shin
A-lam to go down from the stage in a threatening manner when she would not agree to the judgment the referee made. Making a judgment involves a strong subjectivity. A re-evaluation can be made through a video review, but this is also under the judge’s jurisdiction. On the other hand, the problem can also be found from Korea Sports Council (KSC). KSC did not show an enthusiastic attitude towards a misjudgment. Moreover, an immediate raise of an objection could not be found in revealing the truth of these faults. KSC must take a proactive stance in finding out the truth, and if the result is positive, an apology must be accepted. Of course, humans cannot judge as accurately as robots can. However, humans are animals of morality. They can admit a miscarriage of judgment and go through a process of re-examination by relying on technology. Today referees should resemble the mind of the so-called ‘Kyo Oh Gi’, a Japanese Sumo referee. If a wrong judgment is made, he would take the responsibility and show a determination to end his life himself with a dagger he carries in his waist pocket. This is quite anachronistic considering modern sports, but this an example of how important sports rulings should be. If the shortcomings of the 2012 London Olympics can be compensated for and revised through a fairer and more reliable technique, the true goal that Olympics proposed could be reached.
< 저작권자 © 중앙헤럴드 무단전재 및 재배포금지 >