Relay team DQ'd

This is the least of UNC's worries since the NCAA is about to bring the hammer down on the athletic department after the recent investigation revealed 20+ years of systemic cheating (fake classes, forged grades, etc.) in order to keep athletes eligible.

mvv wrote:

I am still curious as to what time the unc women ran? anyone know?

I'm rooting for a team that's on the bubble for the women's dmr and I am curious as to what times teams will be capable of running at conference.

Star wrote:

The reason that any rule is written that leads to a DQ was made on the premise of someone gaining an unfair advantage over someone else.

Since limited words cannot describe every situation, it is up the officials to interpret the rules and decide when to apply them.

We hope that they are only applied when a true advantage is gained.

One could argue that fouls like obstruction and interference are inherently subjective and that making a pass in the designated zone is an objective call without the need to consider "unfair advantage".

Regardless, since presumably no one on the thread actually saw this particular infraction, it's not clear how you expect anyone to give an informed opinion as to whether an unfair advantage was gained in this instance.

From your first rule quote:

"If steps on or over the inside lane line are allowed by rule"

Where in the IAAF or NCAA rules is there an allowance to step on or over the inside lane line?

If such an allowance doesn't exist, that quote is irrelevant.

What you've quoted is USATF guidance to Umpires, not the explicit rules this particular race was run under. (Not sure what rule 141 you are referring to, but it isn't IAAF rule 141 which covers age and sex categories.)

mvv wrote:

I am still curious as to what time the unc women ran? anyone know?

I'm rooting for a team that's on the bubble for the women's dmr and I am curious as to what times teams will be capable of running at conference.

I know they beat NC state, who is on the list at 11:04 right now from that meet.

You are just getting hung up on wording and not the spirit of the rules which is to prevent someone from gaining an unfair advantage.

Citizen Runner wrote:

One could argue that fouls like obstruction and interference are inherently subjective and that making a pass in the designated zone is an objective call without the need to consider "unfair advantage".

Right.

If it's a pass outside of the zone then it is an objective call.

If that happened here you can't argue the DQ.

That doesn't mean it's a good thing, though.

Being awarded a win because the team that finished ahead of you passed outside of the zone is not the most rewarding experience in track.

You were still beaten in the footrace.

If the competitor cut inside the rail to pass or shoved you to the side and was DQed, I'd feel better about accepting that as a win.

Personally, I like to outrun the competitor vs. being lucky that they messed up.

Are talking about the mens 4x800 relay when Lee was DQ'd at the NCCAA championship?

Star wrote:

You are just getting hung up on wording and not the spirit of the rules which is to prevent someone from gaining an unfair advantage.

Sorry, I'm a little unclear.

Is the referee supposed to (or empowered to) make subjective calls as to whether to enforce a particular rule?

If so, can you point me to where that is documented?

If not, then what is the purpose of the wording of the rules if not to explicitly define what is allowed and what is not?

UNC-Cheat wrote:

This is the least of UNC's worries since the NCAA is about to bring the hammer down on the athletic department after the recent investigation revealed 20+ years of systemic cheating (fake classes, forged grades, etc.) in order to keep athletes eligible.

Uh seems like someone doesn't like UNC. But this is the wrong thread for that discussion. No one here cares about UNC cheating here.

Thanks rcco for actually answering my question. The 11:04 is a converted time so unc actually ran around 11:10. NC state ran 11:11. Good to know!!

UNC-Cheat wrote:

This is the least of UNC's worries since the NCAA is about to bring the hammer down on the athletic department after the recent investigation revealed 20+ years of systemic cheating (fake classes, forged grades, etc.) in order to keep athletes eligible.

Uh seems like someone doesn't like UNC. But this is the wrong thread for that discussion. No one here cares about UNC cheating here.

Thanks rcco for actually answering my question. The 11:04 is a converted time so unc actually ran around 11:10. NC state ran 11:11. Good to know!!

Star wrote:

If it's a pass outside of the zone then it is an objective call.

If that happened here you can't argue the DQ.

That doesn't mean it's a good thing, though.

Hard to see how having officials make subjective rulings on objective criteria would be a better thing.

I do not believe this is referencing the UNC women's team. However, I was at the UCS invitational and witnessed the entire race and resulting disqualification. I was uncertain about whether the team was disqualified for their coaches being on the track the entire race or for athletes exchanging outside of the zone. I did not notice a botched exchange, but I could've missed it.

Please look at this video "2015 region 12 championships 9-10 yr boys 4*100 meter" on you tube from 1 wk ago. Lane 6 track Houston 3rd and 4th exchange. Flag judge raises white flag showing exchange good but second judge dqs team for exchanging baton before zone. Its clearly a bad call but USATF had no video of event and wouldn't allow protest because it was a judgement call. If there was no video I would totally agree but video supports the flag judge as well as the relay team in the fact that they did absolutely nothing wrong and the baton was passed in the exchange zone