About that "documentary"
I'd say that if those high behavioral standards were still taken into such high consideration in modern times before promoting to yokozuna, few would have been promoted past 1800-something. They still are taken into some consideration, but only when there is something serious. Asashoryu was always a punk, yet he became yokozuna. He never would have been if the "exemplary character" was observed before decision to promote. The fact is that sumo needs yokozuna to keep up the interest of the audience. Imagine if you had years or even decades without a single yokozuna. Or if you had very good wrestlers that no matter how many consecutive yusho they had they wouldn't have been promoted because of flawed character. I like that NSK still does some attempts (meek in my opinion) to weed out garbage throughout the ranks so that not any scumbag gets on top. Many say "nooo, the evil tyrannical NSK stands in the way of excellence". I say it doesn't do enough. Sumo still has rules and if exemplary character is one of those rules, then it should be observed. Some people would want to get rid of it entirely. "If some yokozuna behaves like a scumbag, let him, he is yokozuna afterall, he earned it", they'd say. At this point why call the title "Yokozuna" and not "Scumbag" instead?
Also why do all these martial arts "documentaries" feel the need to impress and always try to exaggerate or romanticize things making the whole feel disingenuous?
I'd given them both a loss if I was absolute ruler of Sumo. And that for bad sumo. Mitakeumi tries a half-assed pull, Takakeisho falls. Lame.
But since Mitakeumi was already out of the ring completely (even if still in the air) by the time Takakeisho touched with his arm, I'd say the ruling wasn't really bad. Still a torinaoshi would have been much better and I bet Mitakeumi would have won instead.