Outburst at the Nationals- 2000
Written by Sung Chul Whang
The following was written by Sabomnim Sr. and posted on a Taekwondo website after the 2000 Nationals. This was a particularly unfortunate Nationals, where poor refereeing decisions first cost Tom Lynn, Jr. the National Championship (he ended up with the Silver) and then (the very next day) almost cost Jennifer Huang her a medal and the right to compete at Team Trials. Both were being coached by Sab. Sr., and when the second wrong decision was rendered, Sab. Sr. simply “lost it” there is no other way to put it - in what will undoubtedly go down in history as not one of his finest moments. Fortunately, this second of the wrong decisions was overturned afer several hours of deliberation (the referee had counted her opponent to “9″ on a devastating head shot by Jennifer), but many people had witnessed Sab. Sr.’s outburst. This was Sab. Sr.’s letter of explanation to the Taekwondo community.
* * * * * * * * *
May 17, 2000
My name is Sung Chul Whang, and I coached Thomas Lynn Jr. and Jennifer Huang, both of New York, in the two controversial matches (the Men’s Lightweight Finals and the Women’s Featherweight Quarterfinals) at the 2000 Nationals on which many people have commented.
I agree with the commentator who said that there are better ways to voice one’s objections than standing in front of the head table and curse at the top of one’s lungs. I am sorry and apologize to anyone who had to witness that outburst, and take full and sole responsibility for any consequence of those acts. It pains me particularly that the reputation of the Tournament Committee may have been brought into question by my actions, and state with no uncertainty that those actions were mine alone, in my capacity as a concerned coach.
I make no apology, however, for standing up for my fighters. I also point out that my outburst was the culmination of two days of frustration, beginning with Tom Lynn having the National Championship, which was rightfully his, stripped from him (with all due respect to Tae Kim, who is a great fighter), followed by Jennifer Huang having her right to compete at Team Trials stripped from her. All of us who have been involved in competition Taekwondo have had our share of bad calls - you win some, and you lose some. But at any competition, particularly one of such import as the National Championships, my fighters and I have every right to (i) expect competent judging, (ii) know whether critical rules have been amended and (iii) count upon the uniform application of the rules known to then be in effect.
Specifically, we have a right to know whether the yellow score card, which until right after Tom’s match had been mandatory in the minds of most coaches and many referees, had been changed to become discretionary. And we have a right to protest technically incorrect decisions and have such incorrect decisions overturned. I will also add that I was actively discouraged by some people from filing a protest, because of my role as Tournament Committee member. As I said to those who so advised me, as seriously as I take my responsibility to the Committee, I also have a responsibility to stand up for my competitors. And if there was any favoritism on display because of my status as a Tournament Committee member, as has been suggested by one commentator, I would only point to the fact that the arbitration panel took over two hours to come to a decision over Jennifer Huang’s match.
Tom’s match is accurately described in other parts of this site. Yes, Tom had two solid head shots to Tae Kim’s two body shots. Yes, Tom was aggressively pushing the fight throughout three rounds, and although I realize that is a subjective call, I am reinforced in this belief by dozens of spectators who saw the fight and approached me with the same opinion. When I approached the head table to protest the decision, the Referee Chairman removed the yellow card from the table. It was never seen again. The missing yellow card is meaningless, as we all know what the card should have said. Based on very simple mathematics, it should have read Tom Lynn 27 points, Tae Kim 26 points. When I protested that the call was incorrect based upon the yellow card, I was told that the yellow card was discretionary. This was the first time that I had ever heard this. I immediately polled many of the top national coaches thereafter, and each responded the same way: Of course! It’s mandatory!!! I also polled the referees. The first few I spoke to would not speak out. Others later confirmed my belief that Referee Chairman either made up the rule on the spot, or he had only informed a select few of the discretionary nature of the cards. Either way, it is unacceptable that a rule that impacts winning and losing is not publicized in a proper manner PRIOR to its application.
Referee Chairman challenged me to show him where in the referee rule books the yellow card is shown to be mandatory. I countered that as in the law generally, there is statutory law, and there is common law, the law that has developed over the years from usage and custom as part of the practice of the jurisdiction. And the common law is no less enforceable than statutory law. The use of the cards, and the mandatory decision-making based on the results of the card rise, in my humble opinion, the equivalent of the common law of Taekwondo competition.
I also pointed out that when the scoring system was first introduced, as coaches we were informed that the purpose of the cards was to take the discretion away from the hands of the referee in the case of a tie, because too often it was claimed the referee’s discretion was questionable and unsupportable. At least with a mandatory, if imperfect, system, there would always be an objective manner in which to decide a winner in case of a tie. What Referee Chairman was now telling me was that the rule that was introduced to get rid of the referees’ discretion was suddenly, and might I add contradictorily, discretionary again. I know I am not the only one to question the fallacy of such circular thinking.
I have subsequently spoken to many referees, including at least two international referees, who have stated unequivocally that scoring under the yellow card was mandatory. Per Referee Chairman himself. Many coaches and others intimately involved in competition have stated the same thing over and over. I understand that rules can be changed, but when they are, there must be notice to the relevant public to that effect. Hypothetically speaking, if fighters were all of a sudden allowed to score points by punching to the head, it would be ludicrous to keep such a new rule from the knowledge of those whom it most directly impacts - the fighters and their coaches. Even more absurd would be to keep that rule from those who judge them, the referees, which is apparently what happened in this instance. Referees who were courageous enough to speak to us honestly said that until Referee Chairman told them for the first time AFTER we had protested Tom Lynn’s match that the cards were discretionary, they had been told in no uncertain terms that the yellow cards were mandatory. Mandatory, not discretionary. These same referees have said that they hated the card system, because they had been in situations in which they thought use of the yellow card system would force the wrong winner, but that even in those instances they had been told that they HAD TO follow the card system.
To have your fighter lose the National Championship based upon a rule that was changed unilaterally and without notice is bad enough. Then, to be told that your next fighter (Jennifer Huang) loses a quarterfinal match because those same rules which were supposed to have been changed are actually still in effect was more than I could handle. The center referee in this instance stated that when she added the scores on her sheet, it showed Jennifer Huang’s opponent as winning. As inexplicable and blatantly wrong as the referee’s call on superiority was in that match, my protest was based on other grounds.
I protested the result of the match based on several mistakes made by the center referee, including the fact that the other competitor had been given too much injury time, and that the center referee had counted to “nine”, not only “eight” , before checking on the other competitor. During the excessive time that was unfairly given the Jennifer’s opponent, I challenged the decision of the referee at the head table to force the match to continue, even after the center referee told him something to the effect that she could not in good conscience allow that match to continue as the other competitor was bleeding too profusely. The referee at the head table ordered the match to continue over my protestations. I had no choice but to let Jennifer continue to fight; my other option would be to keep her out of the ring, and forfeit the match.
The rest is history. If nothing else, the competitors and coaches will now know whether the yellow card system is discretionary, mandatory or mandatory but discretionary. Imagine what the Olympic Trials will be like this weekend if coaches and their athletes don’t know!
In closing, I note that Tom’s match is still officially under protest. But more importantly, I want to end on a positive note and point out that the outbursts were mine and mine alone. I am humbled and proud of the way Tom and Jennifer conducted themselves throughout the protest, and thereafter. Both accepted their decisions, and never turned bitter at the course of events. They walked away like champions, and in the true spirit of Taekwondo. Tom’s biggest concern that day was that his little brother fell one point shy of joining him in the medal stands and at Team Trials. I know I fell short of displaying exemplary behavior, and I don’t presume to be able to say I will never have such a moment again. I certainly hope that I will be remembered by the Taekwondo community for things other than standing in the ring and swearing. I apologize for the inappropriate language, but otherwise stand firm by my actions. I can only hope that we will all be the wiser for this experience.
