Canadian Curling Star CAUGHT CHEATING at Winter Olympics 2026 Sweden & Switzerland OUTRAGED
.
.
Canadian Curling Star Mark Kennedy at Center of Olympic Storm as Sweden and Switzerland Raise Rule Concerns
MILAN — A controversy has shaken the curling competition at the 2026 Winter Olympics, placing Canadian veteran Mark Kennedy under intense scrutiny and igniting debate across the international curling community. Allegations from Sweden and Switzerland that Kennedy committed a technical rule violation during competition have cast a shadow over Team Canada’s medal pursuit and prompted officials to increase on-ice monitoring for the remainder of the Games.
The incident unfolded at the Milano Cortina 2026, where curling once again occupies a prominent place in the Winter Games program. With Olympic stakes high and national pride on the line, even the suggestion of impropriety has reverberated far beyond the ice sheets of northern Italy.
⚖️ The Allegation: A “Double Touch” Violation
The core of the controversy centers on what is known in curling as a “double touch” — the act of releasing the stone and then making additional contact with it after the initial release. Under the rules of the World Curling Federation, once a player releases the handle of the stone before the hog line, any subsequent contact with the stone is prohibited. If detected during play, such a violation can result in the removal of the stone from play.
Sweden first raised the issue following a tightly contested match against Canada, which ended in an 8–6 Canadian victory. Swedish curler Oskar Eriksson confronted Kennedy during the game, alleging that the Canadian had touched the stone after release to subtly influence its path.
Television footage appeared to show Kennedy’s hand briefly reconnecting with the granite after letting go of the handle — a motion that, if intentional and confirmed in real time by officials, would constitute a breach of competition rules.
The tension was palpable on the ice. What might otherwise have been an ordinary mid-round robin game escalated into one of the most discussed Olympic curling matches in recent memory.
🔥 A Second Accusation Intensifies Scrutiny
If the Swedish complaint alone had sparked debate, the situation escalated dramatically the following day when Switzerland raised a similar concern. Swiss lead Pablo Lachat stated that he witnessed Kennedy making contact with the stone after release in their matchup as well.
The fact that two separate teams independently reported the same type of alleged infraction intensified the controversy. What might have been dismissed as a one-off technical misstep now appeared, to critics, as a potential pattern.
Kennedy, however, firmly denied any intent to cheat.
“I don’t like being accused of cheating after 25 years on tour and four Olympic Games,” he told reporters, visibly frustrated. “That’s not who I am.”
For a player with Kennedy’s résumé, the accusation cuts deeply.
🏅 A Decorated Career Under the Microscope
At 44, Kennedy is one of the most experienced competitors in Olympic curling. He won gold at the Vancouver 2010 and bronze at the PyeongChang 2018. His career spans more than two decades at the highest level of the sport.
Known for his precision and composure, Kennedy has long been regarded as a model of technical excellence. That reputation makes the current scrutiny particularly striking. Curling prides itself on sportsmanship and self-regulation; players traditionally call their own fouls and uphold the “Spirit of Curling,” a code emphasizing honor and mutual respect.
The allegations challenge that ethos.
🧠 Technology and Its Limits
Modern Olympic curling incorporates technology to ensure compliance with release rules. Stones are equipped with sensors that activate a green light when the handle is released before the hog line, confirming a legal throw in that specific respect.
In Kennedy’s case, the green light illuminated on the contested deliveries, confirming that he released the handle in time. However, these sensors do not detect post-release contact with the granite surface of the stone.
That gap between what technology verifies and what cameras may reveal lies at the heart of the controversy.
Television replay showed what critics describe as a subtle brush or guiding motion after the initial release. Supporters argue that the motion could be incidental — the result of balance, muscle memory, or follow-through rather than a deliberate attempt to alter the stone’s trajectory.
👀 Officials Respond
Following Sweden’s complaint, the World Curling Federation deployed additional officials to monitor the hog line during subsequent ends of Canada’s games. For three consecutive ends, umpires observed Kennedy’s deliveries closely.
No violations were recorded during that monitoring period.
The federation later confirmed that decisions made during a game are final and that there is no mechanism for retroactive penalties based solely on video review after the match concludes. As a result, Canada’s victories over Sweden and Switzerland stand.
Still, the optics have proven difficult to manage.
💬 Divided Reactions Within the Curling Community
Reactions from fellow competitors and analysts have varied.
Former world champion Jackie Lockhart stated bluntly, “You should not be touching the stone after you’ve released it.” Her comment underscored the rule’s clarity, even as she stopped short of accusing Kennedy of deliberate misconduct.
Others have urged restraint.
Grant Hardie of Team GB suggested that labeling the action as cheating might be excessive, while Olympic skip Bruce Mouat emphasized that any contact may have been unintentional.
“There’s a difference between intent and accident,” one European coach remarked anonymously. “The rule is black and white, but human movement is not.”
Some observers have floated the possibility that any post-release contact could stem from ingrained muscle memory — a subtle habit developed over thousands of throws. Whether such a habit constitutes negligence or innocent reflex remains part of the debate.
🇸🇪🇨🇭 Sweden and Switzerland Demand Clarity
For Sweden and Switzerland, the issue extends beyond one player or one team. Both delegations have called for clearer enforcement protocols and expanded use of technology to eliminate ambiguity.
Eriksson’s confrontation with Kennedy was reportedly heated but professional. Swedish officials later expressed concern that insufficient oversight places opponents in the uncomfortable position of policing each other.
Swiss representatives echoed that sentiment, arguing that consistent application of rules is essential to maintaining fairness at the Olympic level.
Neither team has formally appealed the results, acknowledging the federation’s stance on final in-game decisions. However, both have indicated that discussions about rule enforcement will likely continue after the Games conclude.
🏔️ The Pressure of the Olympic Stage
Curling, though quieter than downhill skiing or figure skating, is no less intense at the Olympic Games. Every stone can shift medal probabilities. Every millimeter matters.
For Canada, a curling powerhouse with a storied Olympic history, expectations are immense. The country’s identity in winter sport is intertwined with success on the ice.
The allegations come at a delicate moment, with Team Canada pushing toward medal contention. Each subsequent throw by Kennedy has drawn heightened scrutiny from spectators, commentators, and rivals alike.
The psychological toll of competing under suspicion cannot be discounted.
📜 No Retroactive Punishment
Crucially, the World Curling Federation has reiterated that there will be no retroactive sanctions. Olympic rules prioritize real-time officiating decisions, and absent an official in-game call, outcomes remain unchanged.
That policy preserves procedural integrity but leaves some critics dissatisfied.
“If television can show it, why can’t we correct it?” asked one Scandinavian analyst during a broadcast panel discussion.
Yet others warn that expanding replay authority could fundamentally alter curling’s culture of trust and self-governance.
⏳ Legacy at Stake
For Kennedy, the controversy may prove more damaging reputationally than competitively. Even without formal penalties, allegations at the Olympic level linger.
His defenders argue that a career spanning four Olympic Games deserves the benefit of the doubt. His critics contend that experience should make rule compliance second nature.
As the tournament progresses, the narrative surrounding Canada’s campaign remains intertwined with the incident. Victory might quiet critics. Defeat could amplify questions.
🌍 The Bigger Picture
Beyond one athlete, the episode highlights evolving tensions in modern sport: tradition versus technology, trust versus surveillance, and the fine line between intent and outcome.
Curling’s identity has long rested on self-officiation and respect. The introduction of sensors, high-definition broadcasts, and global scrutiny complicates that heritage.
The debate over Kennedy’s alleged double touch may ultimately prompt rule clarifications or technological enhancements. Discussions are already underway about whether future stones should include additional sensors capable of detecting post-release contact.
For now, the controversy remains unresolved in the court of public opinion.
🔮 What Comes Next
As competition continues at the Milano Cortina 2026, all eyes remain on Team Canada. Every delivery by Kennedy is observed with intensified focus.
Will the scandal define Canada’s Olympic journey? Or will performance overshadow controversy?
The answer will unfold stone by stone.
One thing is certain: in a sport built on precision and trust, even the smallest gesture can reverberate across the world stage.
