What kept Shinohara from initiating the attacks?

Although one could easily perceive from the way the match unfolded that Shinohara's underlying ability was greater than Douillet's, Shinohara struggled throughout the match. Now, the big question is; "What forced Shinohara such a hard-fight ? What kept the stronger player from initiating the attacks ? Why was the "kaeshi-waza" (counter-attack) the only effective way for him to gain points ?" The answer lies in the "gripping" or "kumi-te," the way the two players took hold of each other.

The match began with a fierce grip fight. It was obvious that if Douillet confronted Shinohara head on by getting into a firm and square hold, then Douillet would be thrown. Douillet persistently keeps Shinohara from gaining an early advantage of getting hold of his judogi, and continues the grip fight. Time and again, Douillet commits a foul by continuously holding onto Shinohara's lapel and belt ("kata-eri" and "obi-tori"). These violations block Shinohara from moving his body into the right position to execute an effective "waza" (attack). In contrast, Douillet was given the freedom to dominate the tempo and steer the match into the direction he wanted.

For Douillet, this must have been his last resort. Had he confronted Shinohara head on by taking a straight and firm kumi-te, then he would have been thrown. Had he refused to grip, then the referee would have penalized him with "shido." Douillet decides to continue the match by trying to grip, but refusing to get into a hitch and locking his arms with Shinohara. He was prepared to take his chances on violating the rules, and to seek some way out of this difficulty and to eventually get the windfall. Foul play goes against true sportsmanship but as an athlete whose main objective is "winning," you could call it "strategy." Douillet chose to fight in a very risky situation.

It was during this grip fight that an unbelievable thing happened. None of the referees took note of Douillet's violations. The chief referee ignored Douillet's violations which he had been committing from the very early stages of the bout. The referees just let Douillet continue on and never penalized him. There was no chance for Shinohara to execute his waza. His movement was totally blocked by Douillet's persistent fouls. The match continued without any effective point by either of the players. About 1:39 minutes into the match, Douillet executes "uchimata" on Shinohara. Again, Douillet commits a foul by continuously holding onto Shinohara's belt over his shoulder. The referees fail to stop this also, and it takes us into that controversial scene.

Later on in the match, the referee penalizes Douillet with "chui" for taking a defensive posture, but still ignores the act of defensive kumi-te. 46 seconds before finishing, Douillet counter-attacks Shinohara's waza and scores "yuko". The referees fail to give any shido or chui in between.

Since Douillet avoided getting into a firm hitch with his opponent, the incomplete kumi-te only allowed Shinohara to execute an incomplete waza, which could easily be countered. Shinohara was well aware that it could give Douillet "koka", however Shinohara had no choice. Had he stalled, then the chief referee would have penalized him with "shido."

The underlying power of Shinohara's wazas was blocked and he could not initiate the attacks.

The bout ends.

We must focus on Douillet's defensive kumi-te that ultimately controlled the overall match. The critical issue is not the misjudgment of "uchimata-sukashi", but rather the repeated foul play that induced this scene. We must think about the numerous misjudgements that ultimately induced the decisive misjudgement. The chief referee had committed a misjudgement right from the very beginning by ignoring Douillet's repeated and persistent violations.

Had the referees respected the rules and stopped Douillet's foul-plays such as obi-tori and kata-eri (continuously holding onto Sinohara's belt and lapel), the match would have taken a completely different course. The two athletes could have gripped head on like true heavy-weight champions and fought squarely like a true sportsman. We would have witnessed a superb match, where both players displayed their true powers and engaged themselves in real judo and not just a grip fight. The match was anything but spectacular. This was a tragic event for both Douillet and Shinohara, and also for the spectators and the entire judo community. It wa a great disappointment.

Douillet and Shinohara are two of the greatest judokas of our time, not just in power but also in their technical abilities. They are worthy of competing at the summit of world judo. A fair and square fight with head on confrontation would have produced a spectacular match enough to grace the final Olympic of the century.

How competent were the referees ? I'm afraid their refereeing skills were much too mediocre and inexperienced. The spectators were astounded at the ability of the referees that were put in the position to umpire a match in the class of Shinohara vs. Douillet. This match could have been one of the greatest judo matches of the century. The International Judo Federation (IJF) is gravely responsible for choosing such incompetent referees. This incident has left IJF with a significant challenge that must resolved, if we were to expect any progress in the global world of judo.