Why no Emma Coburn DQ?

Emma is too nice and pretty to be DQ's. Besides, she is the best steeplechaser in the U.S. There was no advantage gained in stepping inside the rail for two steps.

Please don't take the time to teach me or read it. That's not what I want. Stay on task: recruit me and focus on customer service. Are the emails my dad sends me really what is stopping you from doing either? What steps are you going to take to make progress happen?

first off did any official see the call and raise a flag as soon as it happened?

If no official saw it is there a foul?

She broke the rule, but unintentionally. No effect on outcome of race.

My take; she could have been DQ'd if there were a protest and that would have been justified by the rules, but we should let it go because it would be cruel not to.

I can't imagine that any of you are actually upset about it, even to the slightest degree. Just being drama queens as usual.

I'll guess no official saw it and Garcia would have been the only athlete who would have seen it and decided to keep her mouth shut.

Devil Dog wrote:

I can't imagine that any of you are actually upset about it, even to the slightest degree. Just being drama queens as usual.

I don't think anyone is upset. Some of us are just wondering how no official caught it. Or, if they did, if they choose not to raise a flag (which would be troubling). It looked very obvious on TV.

rojo wrote:

I disagree that Coburn didn't gain anything? Yes she did. She ran less ground than she whouldn't have had she not stepped on the rail.

Robert, watch it again. She ran less ground but she also slipped and stumbled. I used to run the steeplechase and I had this happen to my direct opponent, right in front of me, in a major (for me) final. I wouldn't want him to be disqualified. He lost more through the stumble than what he gained through taking a stride on the inside.

Rojo,

Does it not matter that she didn't step over the railing two times with her left foot? She stumbles, right foot down inside the railing, left foot down inside the railing, next step back on the track.

"Steps on or over the curb with two consecutive steps of the left foot"

Not applicable?

Same reason why Lebron James never gets called for a travel, carry, charge, technical foul, foul, double dribble, up-and-down, etc. Stars get better treatment.

DiscoGary wrote:

Coburn should have been DQ'd. That's what both the rule book and common sense says should have happened.

The rule book may say she should be DQed but common sense does not.

Common sense says you DQ someone if they have gained an advantage.

That was a trip that did not help her at all.

If this were a subjective rule, not one reasonable person would call a DQ on that.

Star wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

Coburn should have been DQ'd. That's what both the rule book and common sense says should have happened.

The rule book may say she should be DQed but common sense does not.

Common sense says you DQ someone if they have gained an advantage.

That was a trip that did not help her at all.

If this were a subjective rule, not one reasonable person would call a DQ on that.

My common sense tells me that you get DQ'd if you break a rule that calls for a DQ, no matter what the advantage might have been. The rule book is very clear on the topic and even directly addresses the "advantage" situation.

Apparently we have a large group of people who say "The USATF rules apply unless breaking the rule didn't give you an advantage."

I wouldn't want her DQ'd either, but if I'm the referee then I raise the flag and report it as a DQ. Wouldn't you?

My high school coach who officiated many NCAA championships, had always told me that it took 2 or 3 consecutive steps over the rail to raise a flag. Maybe the rules have changed since then? Or possibly that is still how a lot of officials interpret the rules.

Quite honestly this is a poorly written rule and is of little significance for races that are longer than 400 meters, as pretty much any race that is not run in lanes, every athlete is going to be running in excess of the given distance (unless they are in lane one the entire time). Lets look at this for what it was, an incidental slip that probably caused her more harm than good (in a race where there are about 1500 strides, we are talking about 2 run inside the border, not the couple hundred she probably ran outside of lane 1 on the early laps) . In instances like this, it should be left to the discretion of the judges on the field whether or not there was a net benefit or if there was an intent to gain an advantage (like in a 200/400/4X100 meter sprint where there is no rail for most of the competitors and the margin of victory is often times hundreths of a second). Quite honestly small violations of the rules like this probably occur for about 20% or more of the competitors in any given distance race, the only reason people noticed hers is she was in the spot light. I ran in hundreds of races in my college career, accidentally stepped on the rail more times than I care to admit (and believe me it hurts more than it helps) and was never once disqualified, and neither should she.

Perhaps your track federation will DQ her in about 8 months, that's about their speed, isn't it?

Happy Canada day.

The judges were looking at her butt when she ran past and didn't see her step off.

Working Stiff wrote:

Rojo,

Does it not matter that she didn't step over the railing two times with her left foot? She stumbles, right foot down inside the railing, left foot down inside the railing, next step back on the track.

"Steps on or over the curb with two consecutive steps of the left foot"

Not applicable?

Yes not applicable. I believe the first rule someone posted is the old rule.

I think it's good we are talking about this now as it shows officials use discretion all the time. If you impede someone on lap two of a 10k technicallybthats a dq but you don't call it.

nothing new wrote:

Same reason why Lebron James never gets called for a travel, carry, charge, technical foul, foul, double dribble, up-and-down, etc. Stars get better treatment.

All of those infractions carry relatively minor penalties, so under most circumstances - say, middle of the 2nd quarter - if a referee surprises Lebron by calling him for a violation in a situation where it normally wouldn't be called, it's no big deal. [different story if it's late in the 4th quarter of an important close game.]

Here the problem is that the punishment for this minor offense isn't a minor penalty - say, adding 2 seconds to the finish time - it's disqualification. And the rule is written in a way that gives no room to the race official to use discretion.

Seems like a bad way to write that rule, but as the rule stands, it seems like Coburn "should have been" DQd.

Just seems like another example of USATF having rules on their books that they enforce inconsistently. In this case, not DQing Coburn is a good outcome, but reached in what I would call a bad way.

p.s. If Leah O'Connor were coached by Alberto Salazar, I'm pretty sure Coburn would have been DQd.

According to the 2013 National Federation of High Schools (NFHS) rule book

A competitor shall be considered to be out of the lane when : Without being fouled and while running around a curve, steps on or over the inside lane line or curb for three or more consecutive steps with either or both feet.

So the NFHS is a lot more lenient than the USATF, but then the USATF has to oversee world records, and letting people take steps inside the line curb complicates that issue.

I think this is rule most people would be comfortable with.