There are lots of very good points brought on both sides of this argument and if there is a practical way to implement changes to improve fairness in judging then all the major competition organizers would likely be open to adopting those changes. It is known that in competitions at both the commercial and hobby level that beers are slid by the entrant into categories where they will be the biggest in the class, even where they are out of style at the targeted style. We don't know the intent of the entrant in this particular case. The brewer may have made an honest decision that the beer aesthetically resembled an 8B beer even if it had a higher OG than appropriate for the style. (Additionally, do we know whether the published recipes are adjusted for efficiency that may not have resembled the brewer's personal version of the recipe?)
Judging is an inherently imperfect process and it is unreasonable to expect competitions to subject each beer to testing to ensure complicity with the style guidelines. Competitions, even large commercial competitions, do not have the equipment, time, or staff to test each beer. That is why competitions rely upon trained judges to apply the guidelines and assess the beers aesthetically. The judges are not perfect, sometimes the decision is wrong, but we have agreed to allow them to make the call.