An American journalist for USA Today, Christine Brennan, weighed in on the discussion about which team should have been credited in the wake of the decision surrounding Valieva. Her remarks centered on the Canadian team rather than the Russian skaters, highlighting the nuanced outcomes that can arise when sanctions alter team results.
At the outset, the team medals were awarded with Russia taking gold, the United States earning silver, Japan securing bronze, and Canada finishing in fourth place. Following Valieva’s four year suspension, the Court of Arbitration for Sport prompted a review of the team competition results. In light of the disqualification, the International Skating Union reassessed the standings and assigned Russia a bronze medal due to the athlete’s results no longer counting toward the team score.
Brennan argued that the bronze should have been allocated to Canada after the recalculation. Her point rested on the fact that Valieva’s disqualification would have shifted two points to her rivals in the women’s singles short program and free skate, thereby altering the balance of points across the teams.
Under that recalculated scenario, the United States would have finished with 67 points and Japan would have claimed the lead at 65 points. Canada would have moved into third with 55 points, while the ROC would have trailed by just a single point behind Russia in the adjusted tally.
In the broader conversation, former champion Irina Rodnina weighed in on who bears responsibility for the Valieva situation, underscoring the complexities that surround decisions in elite skating and the cascading effects they have on team outcomes. The discourse reflects how a single disqualification can ripple through the rankings, affecting national teams and sponsors alike, and prompting renewed scrutiny of how scoring adjustments are applied in the wake of doping sanctions. The ongoing debate illustrates the tension between strict enforcement of rules and the desire for clear, fair rewards for each nation’s performance. The community continues to parse every angle, from the timing of the sanctions to the precise mechanics of how points are redistributed across programs and disciplines, in a bid to understand whether the final standings truly reflect the athletes’ efforts and consistency throughout the event.