At the recent Olympics, we witnessed a blend of triumph and heartbreak that defines the essence of competitive sports, whether it was the U.S. women’s rugby team winning its unlikely gold or heavy favorite Noah Liles losing the 200-meter dash to Botswana’s Letsile Tebogo. Moments like this are what make sporting mankind’s favorite entertainment. With these high-pressure, emotion-filled moments, there is bound to be controversy and protest over results, even more so in sports that utilize judges to determine accomplishment. As far as these Olympics are concerned, none have surpassed the controversy of the women’s gymnastics individual floor routines.

As the final performances unfolded, the competition was intensely close. Romania’s Ana Bǎrbosu and Sabrina Maneca-Voinea were tied with scores of 13.700, holding the third and fourth positions respectively. On deck was U.S. gymnast Jordan Chiles, who hoped for her first individual medal. As her results lit up on the Jumbotron, she was devastated. Her efforts had placed her fifth, with a score of 13.666. 

“However, Chiles’ coaching staff filed a formal inquiry, arguing that the judges had incorrectly assessed her difficulty score. After reviewing the request, the judges adjusted her score by a crucial one-tenth of a point, elevating her to third place with a score of 13.766, and consequently awarding her the bronze medal instead of the Romanians.

Ecstatic, the 23-year-old American gymnast celebrated with the silver and gold medalists: Simone Biles and Rebeca Andrade. However, the celebration was short-lived.

The Romanian team challenged the American inquiry, claiming it was submitted unlawfully. Specifically, the last routine of the rotation had precisely one minute to submit an inquiry regarding a difficulty score appeal, but the inquiry was submitted one minute and four seconds after the end of the rotation. So yes, they were late. Not by much, but nonetheless, too late. The judges agreed with this ruling, again ruling Barbosu as the Bronze medalist.

I understand the emotional toll this decision must have taken on Chiles. I feel sorry for Chiles because I believe she earned that bronze medal with her performance. But due to a judge’s mistake compounded by a missed deadline, the medal does not belong to her.

For those who argue the medal should be in her possession, I understand the sentiment. It is unfair that the last competitor only gets one minute to challenge and the rest of the field receives five, 10, maybe even 30 minutes to challenge. I foresee this dispute may incite a change in that rule. But at that moment, the laws of the International Gymnastics Federation explicitly stated she had one minute.

Take, for example, a homework assignment. It is due at 11:59. The deadline is clear and does not change whether you had practice or other homework. The expectation is that it is to be turned in at 11:59. It does not truly matter if you submitted it at 12:00:01. All that counts is the fact it is late and the subsequent consequences. Although it seems unfair, and you may feel like you were close enough, I believe the deadline is the deadline and that no exceptions should be made, especially in something as prestigious as the Olympics.

Could you imagine what the Romanians would have felt if Chiles was awarded the bronze because, ‘she was close enough’ to the deadline? It would have been inherently wrong and cruel.

Although the Americans claim to have conclusive proof that the inquiry was turned in on time, the tape has not been released to the public. Because of this, I cannot rule it to be truthful or not. However, the judging committee has not accepted the video as conclusive and I trust that decision. I believe the Olympic committee would have zero reason to not overturn their ruling if this “new evidence” was in fact true. Additionally, the fact that Team USA has not released the video and made a big deal of it ultimately leads me to come to the conclusion that the “irrefutable” video proof is illegitimate. 

Furthermore, I see no world in which the Romanian appeal to take away Chiles’ medal would be signed off on without checking video evidence. They would be privy to all media coverage, including many not shown to the public. I find it unbelievable and far-fetched that the committee could have made that substantial of a mistake after making several incidental errors.

In conclusion, while I believe Jordan Chiles performed well enough to earn a bronze medal, the rules as they were applied ultimately meant the medal rightfully belonged to Sabrina Maneca-Voinea. Even though I sympathize with her and the pain she must be feeling, I ultimately stand by the fact that the rules, no matter how problematic or unjust, must be followed in an event such as the Olympics.