The controversy surrounding the decision to strip U.S. gymnast Jordan Chiles of her bronze medal took a new turn on Thursday when the United States said the Olympic arbitration panel had sent “crucial communications” to incorrect email addresses.

The dispute has been brewing since Chile’s floor exercise in Paris on August 5. She was initially awarded fifth place, but after a review of her score she was bumped up to third. Days later, the gymnast was demoted back to fifth place and had to return her bronze medal.

An international battle has broken out. Here’s everything we know.

What happened on August 5th?

The 23-year-old American received a score of 13.666 for her routine, which earned her fifth place. However, the US team’s coach, Cecile Landi, contested Chile’s difficulty level and submitted a request to the judges. After a review, they increased her score to 13.766.

This boost in performance took her over third place with a score of 13,700, which was held by Romanian gymnast Ana Bărbosu.

After the changeover, a devastated Bărbosu left the arena crying as Chiles walked onto the podium with the bronze medal around her neck. She told reporters: “This is just a dream come true… This medal means everything.”

Why did Jordan have to give Chiles back her bronze medal?

The controversy that followed centered on Landis’s investigation and its timing.

After Chiles was awarded third place, the Romanian Gymnastics Federation appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) – an independent body that settles international sports disputes – claiming that the American coach submitted the request after the one-minute time limit had expired.

On 10 August, CAS ruled that Landi had submitted the request too late and reinstated Chiles’ original score of 13.666, dropping her to fifth place and Bărbosu to third place.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) confirmed this decision and asked Chiles to return her bronze medal.

Shortly thereafter, Chiles posted four broken heart emojis on her Instagram story and stated that she was taking a break from social media for mental health reasons.

What happened after the first verdict?

On August 11, the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) announced that it would appeal.

“We firmly believe that Jordan rightly deserved the bronze medal and that there were serious errors in both the original scoring by the International Gymnastics Federation and the subsequent appeal process by CAS that must be corrected,” the USOPC said in a statement.

Also on August 11, USA Gymnastics (USAG) announced that it had “formally submitted a letter and video evidence” showing that Landi initiated the investigation 47 seconds after Chiles’ result was released – within the one-minute time limit.

“The video footage provided was not available to USA Gymnastics prior to the Tribunal’s decision and therefore USAG had no opportunity to submit it beforehand,” USAG added.

What’s new?

On August 14, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) published its reasoning for the decision, which relegated Chile to fifth place.

The three-judge panel that made the decision was “unanimous,” CAS wrote. “At the hearing, there was no dispute between the parties that Ms. Chiles’ request was submitted 1 minute and 4 seconds after her score was officially displayed on the scoreboard.”

“All parties have accepted as clear and conclusive the report prepared by Omega, the Official Timekeeper of the Olympic Games, and submitted by the FIG itself. No party has requested the admission of any other evidence,” the CAS continued.

This statement contradicts statements by USAG, which submitted a time-stamped video showing that Landi made the request well within the deadline.

In a statement to The Independent On August 15, the US Olympic and Paralympic Committee also stated that it “vigorously contests” the arbitration panel’s decision “due to significant procedural errors.”

The committee said the information had been sent to the wrong email addresses.

“From August 6 to August 9, CAS sent important notices to incorrect email addresses at USOPC and USAG, an error that was not corrected until August 9 – three days after filing, two days after the deadline to file objections, and less than 24 hours before the hearing,” the USOPC said.

“As a result, we did not have enough time to respond sensibly or to gather the necessary evidence. We immediately informed CAS of our objections.”

USA Gymnastics also said that international referees had sent “claims to false email addresses.”

The American organizations announced that they would appeal.

What is the alleged “conflict of interest”?

In addition to all the other drama, the CAS decision is being criticized for another reason: one of its jury members.

The chairman of the three-member arbitration tribunal, Hamid Gharavi, has represented Romania in international litigation for over a decade, according to documents.

Gharavi is currently serving as Romania’s legal adviser in its disputes before the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, according to an article by the nonprofit International Institute for Conflict Resolution and Prevention, which first reported the revelation.

Gharavi’s biography on the CAS website also reveals his long experience representing Romania. The nonprofit organization argued that Gharavi’s presence on the jury could represent a conflict of interest, as Chiles’ place was ultimately moved in favor of a Romanian gymnast.

“The question is whether an Olympic referee who currently represents a country on the world stage can impartially decide a case involving a gymnast from that country,” said the International Institute for Conflict Resolution and Prevention.

“Is it realistic to expect that such an arbitrator can decide against the interests of this country or of the gymnast of this country, who in this case is represented by the Romanian Gymnastics Federation?”

Gharavi said The Independent that he was not permitted to comment on matters relating to his role as arbitrator in this or any other case.

In its press release on Wednesday, the CAS wrote that the composition of the panel “has not been contested or challenged by any of the parties or interested parties.” The CAS also said it had sent a “written statement” announcing Gharavi’s legal representation in Romania along with a notice of his appointment.

After the allegations against Gharavi were made public on Wednesday, the CAS said it “condemns the outrageous statements published in certain US media outlets” claiming that the panel – and Gharavi in ​​particular – was “biased due to other professional obligations or for reasons of nationality.”

Since no party objected to any of the panel members, “it can be assumed that all parties were satisfied that their case was heard by this panel. Any subsequent criticism is without merit or merit,” the CAS said.

However, USAG announced on Thursday The Independent in its statement that “CAS has not provided any panelist’s conflict of interest disclosures to USA Gymnastics, and we have not seen the disclosures to date.”