Sign in to follow this  
HenryK

Boy did they screw Asashoryu today

Recommended Posts

Paolo,

This isn't a sport, this is sumo. The gyoji raising his gumbai doesn't stop the bout, making everything afterwards immaterial. I'm sorry, I don't know what else to tell you, but that's the way it is. And that's the way it was here. That the gyoji raised his gumbai before Asa touched down was not part of the discussion at all. The only questions were "Asashoryu - ikitai or shinitai? Kotonowaka - tsukite or kabaite?". The gyoji are supposed to raise their gumbai when they feel the match is decided. If they're wrong, that's what the shimpan are there for.

So what would happen in the case when the gyoji raises his gumbai because he thinks one of the rikishi has stepped out and the bout stops but there is a mono-ii and the shimpan determine that the rikishi didn't step out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what would happen in the case when the gyoji raises his gumbai because he thinks one of the rikishi has stepped out and the bout stops but there is a mono-ii and the shimpan determine that the rikishi didn't step out?

My guess is that the shimpan would order a rematch, and reprimand the gyoji later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what would happen in the case when the gyoji raises his gumbai because he thinks one of the rikishi has stepped out and the bout stops but there is a mono-ii and the shimpan determine that the rikishi didn't step out?

My guess is that the shimpan would order a rematch, and reprimand the gyoji later.

Didn't that actually happen in a bout a few years ago? Toki vs Oginishiki I think it was.

Edit: This the match I'm thinking of:

http://www.banzuke.com/~movies/natsu2000/150500mov.html

Edited by ryafuji

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's amazing that the discussion still rages on the Asa-Koto bout as if it happened yesterday! I still remember the back and forth that Hananotaka and I had on the SML about it right after it happened. My disagreements on it are much softer and more narrowly focused than Paolo's, though.

As a little aside, after viewing the slo-mo replay HNT has provided, I believe it's possible that the gyoji began to raise his gumbai because he believed Asashoryu was about to land on his back (i.e., no shinitai, just a simple matter of one rikishi landing first). There was ample time to 'get the story straight' before delivering it to the media. Maybe - whatever... On the doutai though, HNT is spot on, the shimpan were confused and wimpish. But that's got nothing to do with the big picture, the way I see it anyway.

Over time, I've gradually tried to not see or judge sumo with foreign eyes, but have grown to accept it as a pure representation of Japanese culture and thinking, and therefore immune from the parallels that we foreigners instinctively draw on when being critical. I think I've done a decent job of that, but I'll have to say that despite years of trying, when it comes to shinitai, I'm a miserable failure. I still can't shake the essential conclusion that it's a flawed concept, despite having tried to confirm it. I even took to placing a star beside all the bouts in which shinitai was invoked, or appeared to have been invoked, in addition to those bouts where I thought it could or should have been invoked, even though it apparently wasn't. After all of that, I am still of the firm conclusion that it is not humanly possible to employ shinitai in any way that's remotely either consistent, predictable, reliable, sensible or transparent. I was still pulling my hair out every time I saw a wronged rikishi bow and exit down the hanamichi. I felt bad for him, and blamed it all on the men in black.

I needed help, a little peace. (Yusho winner...)

But now I can report that progress is being made. I'm de-programming myself and am mostly rehabilitated. I stopped rolling my eyes after these bouts about eight or nine months ago. And the dunce caps I used to see on the shimpan have disappeared too. I still feel the same way about shinitai but I also still love sumo, and now when the 'cheated' one departs the dohyo, I can just put a check mark beside the winner's name and say, "Wrong place, wrong time, pal...let's move on!" I am determined there will be no relapses!

It's great feeling proud of yourself. (I am not worthy...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's amazing that the discussion still rages on the Asa-Koto bout as if it happened yesterday! I still remember the back and forth that Hananotaka and I had on the SML about it right after it happened. My disagreements on it are much softer and more narrowly focused than Paolo's, though.

The primary difference here being that there's an argument to be had whether Asa was ikitai or shinitai. I disagree with you on that, but there is a debate to be had. There's no debate on whether the Asa and Koto were dotai - they clearly were not, and so a dotai torinaoshi is the epitome of strangeness. All this talk about gyoji's raising their gumbai and unusual situations is just hand waving, completely tangential to the issue.

Over time, I've gradually tried to not see or judge sumo with foreign eyes, but have grown to accept it as a pure representation of Japanese culture and thinking, and therefore immune from the parallels that we foreigners instinctively draw on when being critical. I think I've done a decent job of that, but I'll have to say that despite years of trying, when it comes to shinitai, I'm a miserable failure. I still can't shake the essential conclusion that it's a flawed concept, despite having tried to confirm it. I even took to placing a star beside all the bouts in which shinitai was invoked, or appeared to have been invoked, in addition to those bouts where I thought it could or should have been invoked, even though it apparently wasn't. After all of that, I am still of the firm conclusion that it is not humanly possible to employ shinitai in any way that's remotely either consistent, predictable, reliable, sensible or transparent. I was still pulling my hair out every time I saw a wronged rikishi bow and exit down the hanamichi. I felt bad for him, and blamed it all on the men in black.

I made this comparison years ago, but imagine a person new to baseball watching a baseball game. And they've had the rules explained to them: if the ball passes over the plate at point from the batter's knees to the letters of his jersey, that's a strike. But then they watch the actual game, and that's not the way it is at all! Pitches off to the side of the plate are getting called strikes! Pitches below the letters but above the belt being called balls! Not to mention that every umpire's strike zone is different!

Compared to the Major League strike zone, I think shinitai is pretty consistent and predictable, although of course it's not as explicitly spelled out (and then ignored). As you watch sumo, you get a pretty good idea of when a rikishi is shinitai, and the refs and judges, having sumo in their bones know when a rikishi is beyond the point of no return. Sure, there are a few judgment calls, and once in a while everyone involved will kick it, just as any kind of endeavor. Beyond the strike zone, Major League umpires a few times a year utterly fail in the far, far simpler judgements of safe/out and foul/fair, and this is generally considered "just part of the game". But I think the shinitai rules are necessary in the case of kabaite, for safety reasons. And as they are applied to other situations (which is rare), I personally like the idea of the rikishi who has actually defeated his opponent, applied technique and rendered his opponent incapable of making any kind of technique or righting himself, winning the match, even if in the course of defeating his opponent he touched the ground a split second earlier. The match that initiated this thread being a perfect example.

Edited by Hananotaka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

------------

vpl,jejima,ryafuji

briefly discuss a simple case of torinaoshi without the two guys falling simultaneously ( I find fascinating that I woke up tonight thinking exactly of that case !!! ). Torinaoshi because what else can be decided ? ....

------------

shomishuu

says "As a little aside, after viewing the slo-mo replay HNT has provided, I believe it's possible that the gyoji began to raise his gumbai because he believed Asashoryu was about to land on his back (i.e., no shinitai, just a simple matter of one rikishi landing first). There was ample time to 'get the story straight' before delivering it to the media. Maybe - whatever... On the doutai though, HNT is spot on, the shimpan were confused and wimpish.... ". Exactly my point of view !!

------------

hananotaka

says "This isn't a sport, this is sumo. The gyoji raising his gumbai doesn't stop the bout, making everything afterwards immaterial. I'm sorry, I don't know what else to tell you, but that's the way it is. And that's the way it was here. That the gyoji raised his gumbai before Asa touched down was not part of the discussion at all. The only questions were "Asashoryu - ikitai or shinitai? Kotonowaka - tsukite or kabaite?". The gyoji are supposed to raise their gumbai when they feel the match is decided. If they're wrong, that's what the shimpan are there for."

Needless to say, I am sorry but I miss you completely. First of all, IMO the action was so quick and completely unusual that neither the gyoji nor the shimpan had a clear idea of the timings, that you and I can easily reconstruct only with the slow motion ! Who among all this forum's attendants have ever seen a rikishi that is thrown with a perfect nage, does NOT fall, does NOT touch down and actually seems to force his opponent down BEFORE himself ? As Shomishuu says (and I agree), probably the gyoji began to raise his gumbai because he believed Asashoryu was about to land on his back.

Second: once again probably I was not clear. I had understood that you meant the gyoji pointed his gumbai BEFORE Kotonowaka fell, considering Asashoryu shinitai and end-of-story. So Kotonowaka in that exact moment is the winner, how can you maintain that the bout is not over ? If the shimpan think that the gyoji's decision was wrong, we are exactly in the case that vpl raises: they cannot award the win to Asashoryu because they cannot consider what happened AFTER the gyoji gave the win to Kotonowaka ! They could have done so only if the win was given to Kotonowaka AFTER he touched the ground. Only in that case they could have decided that Kotonowaka was kabaite (win) or tsukite (loss) !

What i do not know in this case is: if they cannot come to an agreement, what should they do ? Do they go by majority, do they hold the gyoji's verdict, or what ? that's why I find the torinaoshi the least evil...

Sorry, getting older I get also more and more verbose....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I made this comparison years ago, but imagine a person new to baseball watching a baseball game. And they've had the rules explained to them: if the ball passes over the plate at point from the batter's knees to the letters of his jersey, that's a strike. But then they watch the actual game, and that's not the way it is at all! Pitches off to the side of the plate are getting called strikes! Pitches below the letters but above the belt being called balls! Not to mention that every umpire's strike zone is different!

Phantom tags at second base during a double-play attempt come to mind, too.

I had understood that you meant the gyoji pointed his gumbai BEFORE Kotonowaka fell, considering Asashoryu shinitai and end-of-story. So Kotonowaka in that exact moment is the winner, how can you maintain that the bout is not over ? If the shimpan think that the gyoji's decision was wrong, we are exactly in the case that vpl raises: they cannot award the win to Asashoryu because they cannot consider what happened AFTER the gyoji gave the win to Kotonowaka ! They could have done so only if the win was given to Kotonowaka AFTER he touched the ground. Only in that case they could have decided that Kotonowaka was kabaite (win) or tsukite (loss) !

I dare say that argument only makes sense if Kotonowaka had visibly given up fighting when the gyoji started pointing his way, and that's why Asashoryu was able to pull him down. That clearly wasn't the case, heck, Kotonowaka had his back to the gyoji. Yes, the gyoji may have declared the match decided in Kotonowaka's favour prematurely, but unlike the hypothetical example above where everybody stops fighting, there was still a full progression to a point where Asashoryu might have been declared the winner instead. I'd also be tempted to have the "shinitai or ikitai" debate with Josh, but beyond that I'm in full agreement with him that the shimpan had sufficient information to make a decision one way or the other, and dotai torinaoshi doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Edited by Asashosakari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the shimpan think that the gyoji's decision was wrong, we are exactly in the case that vpl raises: they cannot award the win to Asashoryu because they cannot consider what happened AFTER the gyoji gave the win to Kotonowaka !

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!!!!

Arrrrgh! Is this not simple? Am I not making myself clear?

If the shimpan think the gyoji's decision is wrong, they declare it a SASHI-CHIGAE and make Asashoryu the winner! Of course they can consider what happened after he raised the gumbai!!! The rikishi are still in motion!!! The action has not stopped, and the shimpan DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT simply ignore everything that happened after the gyoji raised his gumbai.

Watch the video of the Toki-Oginishiki bout. The gyoji stops the match, and the rikishi stop fighting, without anyone stepping out or touching the ground. The chief judge then says that because the gyoji had stopped the match but Toki had not stepped out, there would be a torinaoshi. Had Oginishiki managed to push Toki out before the rikishi realized what happened and stopped the match, the gyoji's decision would have stood.

I am going to say this one more time, and then I'm done with the discussion. The issue of when the gyoji raised his gumbai NEVER CAME UP. It was never an issue with the judges. They did not discuss it, it was taken up in any of the newspaper or magazine articles written about the bout, it was not brought up by either Asashoryu or Kotonowaka. It is and was a NON-ISSUE. The gyoji judged Asa as shinitai and raised his gumbai for Kotonowaka. The judges then discussed: "Was Asashoryu shinitai or not?" They could not come to a decision, and declared it a DOTAI, and ordered a torinaoshi. It was not "torinaoshi for gyoji error", it was not "torinaoshi because we don't know what happened", it was "torinaoshi because they are dotai". This was the explanation given, and it was silly because it was obviously not dotai -- the shimpan simply couldn't come to an agreement. Had they said, "torinaoshi because of gyoji error", like the Toki-Oginishiki bout, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The said torinaoshi because of dotai, and that's what's ridiculous.

And yes, they DID have the opportunity to review it in slow motion. Several times!

I'm sorry to be so vehement about this, but this discussion is beyond silly. Paolo, either you don't know enough about sumo to be arguing this (you should be asking questions and expanding your knowledge), or you know plenty about sumo and you're just putting me on. Either way, I'm done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.... Of course they can consider what happened after he raised the gumbai!!! The rikishi are still in motion!!! The action has not stopped, and the shimpan DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT simply ignore everything that happened after the gyoji raised his gumbai....

...Watch the video of the Toki-Oginishiki bout. The gyoji stops the match, and the rikishi stop fighting, without anyone stepping out or touching the ground. The chief judge then says that because the gyoji had stopped the match but Toki had not stepped out, there would be a torinaoshi. Had Oginishiki managed to push Toki out before the rikishi realized what happened and stopped the match, the gyoji's decision would have stood....

...I'm sorry to be so vehement about this, but this discussion is beyond silly. Paolo, either you don't know enough about sumo to be arguing this (you should be asking questions and expanding your knowledge), or you know plenty about sumo and you're just putting me on. Either way, I'm done.

Come on, please take it easy, I apologize for giving you all this trouble ! I am not so important, after all. Unfortunately I was born a curious guy, and to make things worse I am also an engineer, so I would like to understand (you may think that I understand very slowly,if at all ...). Add that I am getting older and, as you seem to have noticed, that makes me rather annoying many a time... What I still do not understand (and probably never will) is this incredible (to me..) thing that the raising of the gumbai does not represent the end of the action. Following your words, let me make you an example that I hope you will be so kind as to give an answer to (come on, the last one!). What would have happened if Toki had gone on fighting and had it been Toki the one to push Oginishiki out immediately later ? Oginishiki could have maintained that the gyoji had already given him the win (even if wrongly..) and that he (Oginishiki) had consequently stopped: why should he have continued on ? And a side question: the gyoji raises the gumbai because he is convinced that A has touched outside the tawara (IMO the bout should be over, it might remain to be judged if A has really touched outside). A and B do not stop and go on fighting for several minutes, while nothing important happens. Do nobody stop them ? If yes, who ? Does the bout go on just because the two rikishi didn't realize that the gumbai has already been pointed ? I really do not see why these questions should be considered silly or should put you on. It is not my intention ! Regards. paolo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I still do not understand (and probably never will) is this incredible (to me..) thing that the raising of the gumbai does not represent the end of the action. Following your words, let me make you an example that I hope you will be so kind as to give an answer to (come on, the last one!). What would have happened if Toki had gone on fighting and had it been Toki the one to push Oginishiki out immediately later ? Oginishiki could have maintained that the gyoji had already given him the win (even if wrongly..) and that he (Oginishiki) had consequently stopped: why should he have continued on ? And a side question: the gyoji raises the gumbai because he is convinced that A has touched outside the tawara (IMO the bout should be over, it might remain to be judged if A has really touched outside). A and B do not stop and go on fighting for several minutes, while nothing important happens. Do nobody stop them ? If yes, who ? Does the bout go on just because the two rikishi didn't realize that the gumbai has already been pointed ? I really do not see why these questions should be considered silly or should put you on. It is not my intention ! Regards. paolo

If you want to talk hypotheticals, fine, I have no problem.

Let's say the gyoji raised his gumbai for Ogi, but neither rikishi heard or noticed this, and then Toki slipped to the side and knocked Ogi out. In this case there would likely be a mono-ii. The chief shimpan would ask the other shimpan what they saw, and then ask the gyoji for his view. He would kick it up to the video room, who would tell him what they saw. They would check the ja-no-ma for Toki's footprint. Not finding one, and with the shimpan on that side saying they didn't see him step out, the gyoji would probably be sashi-chigae'd, and Toki given the win. I think it's highly unlikely that, hearing the gyoji say "Shobu ari" that Ogi would continue pushing, and setting himself to be knocked out, but in the event that he did stop and get knocked out, there'd probably be a mono-ii, and if the judges agreed (remember, they can review the video) that Oginishiki stopped after hearing the gyoji, then we'd have the same situation as earlier. Error by gyoji, torinaoshi. Or alternatively, they could say, "Tough luck. You shouldn't let up until you know the win is yours," and give the match to Toki. Interestingly enough, there is nothing in the rules that say rikishi must stop fighting when the gyoji raises his gumbai; only that, except in injury, they can't stop in the middle of the match without instructions from the gyoji or the shimpan.

The key is that the gyoji is not the final arbiter. In effect, the mono-ii system means that all his judgments are ratified by the shimpan after the action stops. In the case of a mono-ii, he is forbidden from speaking until spoken to in the conference. He manages the dohyo and is the first line of judgment, but the action neither starts nor stops on his command. Consider the cases where a rikishi steps out but the gyoji doesn't notice. The shimpan raise their hand, indicating the bout has been decided. Notice how often a rikishi yorikiri'ing or oshi-dashi'ing his opponent will ignore the gyoji and make sure their opponent is clearly out of the ring before letting up their attack. It is the rikishi's responsibility to start and finish the match. The gyoji's job is to make sure it all goes smoothly, and declare the winner when he judges the action has been decided.

As in the Toki-Ogi case, I'd say it'd never happen that they'd continue fighting for several minutes after the gyoji raised his gumbai. The shimpan would stop the bout almost immediately, just as they did here. If no victor had really been decided, we have the same situation as here. Torinaoshi because of gyoji error.

An important thing to note from the Toki-Ogi bout is that the torinaoshi was not ordered because the gyoji declared wrongly for Ogi, but because the match had been stopped without a true victor being decided. In contrast, consider when there's a clear matta, but the gyoji doesn't halt the action. The bout proceeds even though one rikishi may stop, believing there's a matta, and then be pushed out. As Roho knows from experience, the pushed out rikishi ends up the loser, even though the gyoji didn't halt the match when he probably should have.

It's late, but tomorrow or the day after tomorrow I'll translate the official sumo rules concerning "shobu" (the match) and "judging".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to muddy the waters anymore than what it is now but I'd add that most rikishi won't be looking at the gyoji while they are competing. They often will check the gumbai to see if they have won after the bout was decided (i.e. when both are out of the dohyo or on the dohyo throwing each other out). I know you are talking about something hypothetical. But raising the gumbai isn't that much of point in declaring the winner as after all the gyoji could fall down and could not tip the gumbai when the outcome was decided.

One thing is that the gyoji will yell out, "Shobu Atta!" or "Shobu Ari!" so both rikishi could hear him so they could stop what they are doing. But this may also not be definite as the call could not be heard due to spectator noise.

When one rikishi or the other steps out of the dohyo, a shimpan who has witnessed the foot from going out will usually raise his hand but that is not for the rikishi but for the gyoji and other shimpan. Sometimes even the gyoji won't notice it and the bout will go on for several more seconds. I have seen more than a few occasions where the wrong rikishi was called as neither rikishi nor gyoji noticed the foot from going out and the bout was decided the other way. In this case the mono-ii will reverse the decision however most spectators would have not noticed it either and until the chief shimpan explains the verdict, they would have had no idea.

A gyoji does not decide who wins or loses, he is a facilitator and he only points to a rikishi whom he thinks is a winner. Almost all of the time he is correct but regardless of how close the call is, he must point to one rikishi or another as the winner so his decision is never final.

Back in old days, the gyoji did not need to call for the winner and you will see some old time rikishi with "undecided" bouts as the gyoji refused to "declare" the winner in a close bout and in those days there was no video replay.

Anyway I think the problem here is trying to pinpoint the precise moment the winner is decided either by the gyoji or shimpan. In case of the gyoji, he will more than likely call when one or the other touched the ground or out of the dohyo clearly. While during a mono-ii, all of shimpan would not necessarily look at who touched first or out first as one rikishi could put his hand down to soften the blow to the rikishi underneath so the rikishi would not suffer significant injury. The point is whether the disadvantage rikishi could recover or was attempting to execute a move.

With a slow motion video from a couple of angles (though camera angles may not always correctly show), they often can quickly identify who touched first but that is really not the end of it. While in a case like this, it's often a judgment call but all of the shimpan must come to a consensus and that is the reason some mono-ii take longer than others. But in the end you must come to a conclusion, the shimpan were in the best position to observe the bouts (closer than anyone and seeing it from the best angle) and you must see it as a judgment call i.e. you win some or lose some. Not much point in arguing about these calls until the hell freezes over. Those in Makuuchi had hundreds of bouts and by the end of their career, things will even out. These questions are not silly but at some point you have to let them go and live a happier life. After all sumo isn't unique in having close calls but in their case they do have more than one man deciding the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I mean to say that 'for me' I reject it...implied actually in the following paragraph. I can see why others don't, and that's fine. 'For me' I reject it because explanations as to why shinitai was (or was not) invoked are never made, and so therefore I can never pinpoint the reasons. Sadly, I will never be able to feel in my bones what the shimpan feel.

The thing is, if you really start to look for it, there are a fairly large number of bouts in which shinitai plays at least an implicit role, it's just not acknowledged because a) nobody cares to think too much about most mid-maegashira bouts, and b) there's no actual mono-ii. This thread may have started because of the Asashoryu-Tochinonada bout, but there are actually a lot of similar outcomes every basho; casual fans (and some not so casual ones) tend to rationalize those decisions on the base of "one guy fell below the plane of the dohyo", which we know doesn't actually mean anything and it's in fact the gyoji and the shimpan acknowledging that the guy clearly lost because his body was dead, without even bothering to go to the video replay to see if maybe the opponent fell down a split-second earlier. That's just rarely spelled out and so many people don't realize just how pervasive a concept it is in judging bouts.

Edited by Asashosakari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing is, if you really start to look for it, there are a fairly large number of bouts in which shinitai plays at least an implicit role, it's just not acknowledged because a) nobody cares to think too much about most mid-maegashira bouts, and b) there's no actual mono-ii. This thread may have started because of the Asashoryu-Tochinonada bout, but there are actually a lot of similar outcomes every basho; casual fans (and some not so casual ones) tend to rationalize those decisions on the base of "one guy fell below the plane of the dohyo", which we know doesn't actually mean anything and it's in fact the gyoji and the shimpan acknowledging that the guy clearly lost because his body was dead, without even bothering to go to the video replay to see if maybe the opponent fell down a split-second earlier. That's just rarely spelled out and so many people don't realize just how pervasive a concept it is in judging bouts.

I absolutely agree. This is what I was alluding to in a prior post about starring some of these bouts in which I felt it could have been applied, or maybe was, or maybe wasn't... I had thought about making posts about these bouts as they happen, but figured it would probably be irritating to many, in addition to leading people to believe I actually obsess over the subject. :-)

Henka Sightings yes - Shinitai sightings no. :-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...and is he applying some kind of technique? If he's applying a technique, he's perforce ikitai. If he's not applying a technique and can't right himself from his position, he's shinitai. You just have to watch the sumo and pay attention to the shape of the torikumi.

And here is where I feel we'll forever differ, and must leave it as we left it four years ago; for I feel that if he is trying to keep himself 'alive' longer than his aite, then that is a technique, often a very athletic one. It may be a struggle to name the kimarite, but that is often the case anyway. Thanks again for the fun. Signing off...

Edited by Shomishuu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And here is where I feel we'll forever differ, and must leave it as we left it four years ago; for I feel that if he is trying to keep himself 'alive' longer than his aite, then that is a technique, often a very athletic one.

Well, that's a fine reason to disagree with me on the Asashoryu-Kotonowaka bout; you would undoubtedly have a number of people experienced in sumo and well-versed in shinitai, like Mainoumi, who would agree with you. But that's no need to give up on the concept of shinitai altogether. Understanding and appreciating these nuances of the match can only deepen one's appreciation of sumo, IMO. I consider myself a connoisseur of shinitai, a tachiai aficionado, and a devotee of fine yotsumi. I even partake in the many varieties of henka :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the shinitai-kabaite point: as far as I understand the two concepts are separate in the sense that you can have shinitai without kabaite, probably not kabaite without shinitai. In the Asashoryu-Kotonowaka we can debate whether or not Asashoryu was shinitai ( I do not think so for the reasons that shomishuu clearly explains), but was Kotonowaka kabaite ? Everything I read says more or less "kabaite=touching the ground with a hand to avoid aite's injury". I would say that was not the case. Kotonowaka lands the first (not only with his hand but also with his leg, by the way) clearly far away from Asashoryu, and if he wins it should be because Asashoryu is considered shinitai and that's it. I see it conceptually more or less as the same case that occurred in the recent Asashoryu-Tochinonada (touching down first but with opponent shinitai) or when a rikishi lifts the other and transports him outside the tawara touching out with his foot before the other, who is considered shinitai.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boys, I feel as if I was writing a new chapter of the Bible without being a prophet nor an apostle ....

I know that you think that I am missing your points, but somehow I think that you are missing mine... Let me try to be clearer and summarize.

In 999 cases out of 1000 the gumbai is raised and "Shobu ari/Shobu atta" yelled (=whistle blown) AFTER everything happened (touch down or touch out); the two rikishi stop, a mono-ii possibly occurs. Every action has occurred BEFORE the referee's (the gyoji's, exceptionally the head-shimpan's) intervention. The first who has touched down or out loses, with the possible exceptions of a shinitai case or a torinaoshi for simultaneous touch down. That is clear.

What we are discussing is only the 1000th case, where some action occurs AFTER the first referee's intervention. Incidentally: when I wrote "raises his gumbai" I meant of course "raises his gumbai AND yells shobu ari" and whatever the gyoji performs to stop the bout. I do not think that the gyoji raises his gumbai if he does not want to stop the bout...

Strictly coming to the point:

...Let's say the gyoji raised his gumbai for Ogi, but neither rikishi heard or noticed this, and then Toki slipped to the side and knocked Ogi out. In this case there would likely be a mono-ii. The chief shimpan would ask the other shimpan what they saw, and then ask the gyoji for his view. He would kick it up to the video room, who would tell him what they saw. They would check the ja-no-ma for Toki's footprint. Not finding one, and with the shimpan on that side saying they didn't see him step out, the gyoji would probably be sashi-chigae'd, and TOKI GIVEN THE WIN.

You will excuse me, that is exactly what I cannot believe. I will believe it when I see a true case happening, and in that case I will open a new thread just to apologize with you in public.

Please follow me: the gyoji wanted to stop the bout because he had seen a winner (Ogi). If the two stop (it is the ONLY LOGICAL thing to do, since the gyoji yelled to stop), then Ogi should be the winner, then the gyoji himself (or the mono-ii) discovers that the decision was wrong, therefore torinaoshi. So far, so good. If the two by any reason do not stop, that is the WRONG thing to do, which should NOT happen since the gyoji has yelled to stop; then how can what follows become decisive for the bout ?

IMO this seems also to contradict what you write later:

...As in the Toki-Ogi case, I'd say it'd never happen that they'd continue fighting for several minutes after the gyoji raised his gumbai. The shimpan would stop the bout almost immediately, just as they did here. If no victor had really been decided, we have the same situation as here. Torinaoshi because of gyoji error.

Why should then the shimpan stop the bout almost immediately ? My answer is: because there is no use for the bout to go on when a decision by the gyoji has already been taken. Why else ? Is there another explanation ?

An important thing to note from the Toki-Ogi bout is that the torinaoshi was not ordered because the gyoji declared wrongly for Ogi, but because the match had been stopped without a true victor being decided.

Yes, but the match was stopped due to the gyoji's intervention; then the gyoji himself realized that his decision was wrong... Watching the video, it is hard to say who was the most puzzled among the gyoji, the shimpan, the rikishi ....

In contrast, consider when there's a clear matta, but the gyoji doesn't halt the action. The bout proceeds even though one rikishi may stop, believing there's a matta, and then be pushed out. As Roho knows from experience, the pushed out rikishi ends up the loser, even though the gyoji didn't halt the match when he probably should have.

That actually shows that the gyoji has more power then it looks, because if he does not see a matta, there is no matta !

... Interestingly enough, there is nothing in the rules that say rikishi must stop fighting when the gyoji raises his gumbai; only that, except in injury, they can't stop in the middle of the match without instructions from the gyoji or the shimpan.

Hmmm.... A bit forced ?

It's late, but tomorrow or the day after tomorrow I'll translate the official sumo rules concerning "shobu" (the match) and "judging".

That will be very very very interesting for me !!! I am really longing to read it ! Thanks.

... When one rikishi or the other steps out of the dohyo, a shimpan who has witnessed the foot from going out will usually raise his hand but that is not for the rikishi but for the gyoji and other shimpan. Sometimes even the gyoji won't notice it and the bout will go on for several more seconds. I have seen more than a few occasions where the wrong rikishi was called as neither rikishi nor gyoji noticed the foot from going out and the bout was decided the other way. In this case the mono-ii will reverse the decision however most spectators would have not noticed it either and until the chief shimpan explains the verdict, they would have had no idea.

A gyoji does not decide who wins or loses, he is a facilitator and he only points to a rikishi whom he thinks is a winner. Almost all of the time he is correct but regardless of how close the call is, he must point to one rikishi or another as the winner so his decision is never final....

I agree, and we have seen many gyoji's decisions reversed or "torinaoshi-ed". But have you ever seen a gyoji's decision (gumbai+yell) IGNORED, and the win awarded based on the events that followed ? If so, please show me a video and I will believe ...

...These questions are not silly but at some point you have to let them go and live a happier life...

I appreciate your taking care of my health and you may be right... Actually I feel at least as exhausted as Hananotaka now...I know that there are more important things in life ! But I find this topic so interesting ! Thanks.

Edited by paolo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That actually shows that the gyoji has more power then it looks, because if he does not see a matta, there is no matta !

well actually this (can't follow all other arguments :-) ) isn't true. You can see it all the time, especially in the lower divisions with unexperienced gyoji that they overlook a matta or don't regard something as a matta. So they are overruled by the shimpan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That actually shows that the gyoji has more power then it looks, because if he does not see a matta, there is no matta !

well actually this (can't follow all other arguments (I am not worthy...) ) isn't true. You can see it all the time, especially in the lower divisions with unexperienced gyoji that they overlook a matta or don't regard something as a matta. So they are overruled by the shimpan.

That is very interesting. And how does it happen: does the head-shimpan stop the bout immediately after the matta occurs, or does he wait for the end of the bout, then mono-ii and then they say it was a matta and call for a torinaoshi ?

I never happened to see it, but I only watch makuuchi (when I have time...) Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That actually shows that the gyoji has more power then it looks, because if he does not see a matta, there is no matta !

well actually this (can't follow all other arguments (I am not worthy...) ) isn't true. You can see it all the time, especially in the lower divisions with unexperienced gyoji that they overlook a matta or don't regard something as a matta. So they are overruled by the shimpan.

That is very interesting. And how does it happen: does the head-shimpan stop the bout immediately after the matta occurs, or does he wait for the end of the bout, then mono-ii and then they say it was a matta and call for a torinaoshi ?

I never happened to see it, but I only watch makuuchi (when I have time...) Thanks.

Most of the times they stop the bout immediately and the rikishi go for the tachiai again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this