Olympic Fencer Shin A Lam Refuses To Leave After Losing Controversial Decision (PHOTOS)

The Olympics are still only a few days old, but we already have a major controversy to discuss. In a fencing match to determine which woman would go on to compete for the gold medal, Germany’s Britta Heidemann defeated South Korea’s Shin A Lam, despite the protestations of the South Korean team.

To set the stage, the two fencers were tied and the clock was stopped with only one second left in their match. If either could score a point in the one second (something that’s virtually impossible to do), that person would be the winner. Otherwise, the match would continue to an additional round.

The referee signaled for the match to start and Heidemann quickly attacked, scoring a point. At least, that’s what the judges said. The clock never actually started and, upon review of the video, it appeared that it took Heidemann more than one second to score the point.

The South Koreans protested and eventually filed a formal appeal, which they lost. During this time–which amounted to 45 minutes–Shin refused to leave the piste (the platform that they fence on). She just sat there, crying. Later, she stood, defiant of the judges’ ruling. Eventually, she had to be removed by security.

The crowd gave Shin a standing ovation as she was escorted out.

Shin ended up losing the bronze medal match. Heidemann lost the gold medal match.

Leave a Reply



14 Responses to Olympic Fencer Shin A Lam Refuses To Leave After Losing Controversial Decision (PHOTOS)

  1. Quote:”Otherwise, the match would continue to an additional round.” That is -simply put- wrong. Plain rubbish so to say. A drwa after that very last second would have given the win to Shin. If none had scored during the remaining last second the Korean would have taken the win by the alloted advantage she had gained earlier-simply by chance. Not a fair way to win, either ’cause this simply put her in the position to wait for the German fencer’s actions.

  2. She didn’t refuse to leave. The fencing federation’s appeals bylaw requires that the fencer remain on the piste while the appeal is being reviewed. If she had left, it is considered an admission of defeat. So while they were reviewing the decision, this girl had to sit there for an hour crying. get your facts straight!

  3. This story is garbage, if all of your articles are like this then you sir are an asinine writer.

  4. Get your facts correct!!!! Pure garbage on what you write here…. What a f@#$#@# dick.

  5. WOW absolute garbage. Absolute garbage.
    Shame on you for posting this horrible article.

    In case you haven’t read yet (which I doubt you haven’t), there is a bylaw which dictates if one must stay on the piste for their appeal to stand.

  6. there’s always a chance for you to edit your article to get your facts straight. i sure hope you do, as everyone can see all these comments.
    if you dont, anyone reading this article will condemn you for writing an ill informed article, and furthermore refusing to change your facts as per request of your readers.

  7. this article is just full of it, pure garbage.

  8. How could you gather so many wrong facts in an article???
    What a talent!

  9. It’s really a shame that the article was written this way. It should have talked about the unfair decision rendered by the referee and the entire fencing committee should be ashamed…unless of course, they are all part of this controversy that they created (it really seems that way because the clock stop conveniently with 1 second left and it is impossible, as video illustrated, that the hit can be made within 1 second. This girl prepared 4 years for this and it comes down to that …….is unbelievable. This has to be looked at from the Olympic committee! She had to remain on the piste for protest. If she left, she is admitting the defeat.

  10. Need to stay on the piste!

  11. get ur facts straight before u post crap like this!
    didn’t u read Fencing Federation Rule?
    Protested? Are u kidding me? She had to stay there by rule until appeal decision is made. Correct ur article!

  12. There’s no allotted win here; the match would indeed have continued. Three rounds, total time 9 minutes. That they were tied was a consequence of simply awful “fencing” characterized by double hits. Shin had played the double game, did so in this assault even though she should have known better: “know your opponent” is a fundamental rule of fencing, or used to be. The poor quality of refereeing was not unusual. The manic preoccupation with timing–was there really 1 second left or even 3?– was not, either; Heidemann’s failure to maintain distance before the “Allez!” is in fact a commonplace at least on German sport fencing strips, but no one called her on it; extended confabulation to arrive at a determination just what happened is a commonplace, too. Some expert commentators have described what she did as consisting of multiple attacks. Nonsense. With one second to go, she jumped the gun and performed an easily visible sequence of compound actions which ended with a swat (the real “attack”–and that did not even meet the FIE’s own definition of what an attack is–a fully extended sword arm ahead of any advance or lunge, ignored by everybody) activating the scoring light. That should have signalled failure. The referee, if she knew anything, could have simply said so. It is an easy call.What basically happened–and it had to–was that “fencing” was revealed to be the sham it is in front of a global audience. For 20 years the IOC has wanted to dump it. It should.

  13. In my haste, I neglected to be complete: it is 3 rounds, 9 minutes and…a possible 15 points, but then, there’s such constant extemporaneous-from-the-belly-button changing of rules, one can no longer seriously think of “fencing” as rule-bound anyhow.

  14. Actually Shin was about to win without continuing another 3 minutes as she had Priorité.
    Referees intended to give prize to Heidemann who was more famous and European.
    Fencing is no more gentleman’s league, sports is no more sacred.