Just the facts wrote: "I could live with meet management having their own videos of the finish line, exchange zones, and field events, but agreeing to view one handed to them from someone else is a slippery slope with many potentially negative unintended consequences."
I misinterpreted "slippery slope" and "unintended consequences" to mean he was suggesting people would manipulate photos. I apologize as apparently I was wrong. Cut me some slack though, I did say "you seem to be implying" in my post. It's not like I jumped down his throat.
"Just the facts" and others have posted some fair arguments against using submitted video and photo evidence. This post however is just silly. Parents "packing the turns" trying to get photos of handoffs? Please. I ran XC/track all through HS and college, post-collegiatly and I cover it as my profession and my parents are just as clueless as anyone else when it comes to the finer points of T&F. Do you think all these parents will be up to date on the latest state association rule book changes?
The only people who will know or care will be the coaches. I don't think making a rule change like this would turn every coach into an obsessive maniac trying to get photos of his team and all the other teams to double check the handoffs. Not every coach is Alberto Salazar.
Personally, I would just like that if in a situation where clear evidence exists that the wrong call was made, then it could be overturned. If they won't consider photo evidence, then what evidence will they consider? Under what circumstances would they EVER overturn a DQ like this? There were witnesses who stated it was a fair exchange, but the petition was still rejected. Of course witnesses could be biased. What if Obama or the pope were there and swore that they saw a fair exchange. Would the officials overturn the DQ then? It's pointless to have a review process at all if they're not even open minded to changing the initial ruling.
All that said, there were some good points made about why you shouldn't consider non-official video or photo evidence. And if there was any official video I would agree. However, in a situation where there isn't any, I'd be fine with outside evidence being considered, especially to overturn a DQ.
The whole thing upsets me because as I stated earlier, officials should always error on the side of not-DQing rather than DQing incorrectly. With a call this close, what was this official thinking DQing in the first place? How could he have been confident enough to do that? And when there was a petition with multiple eye-witness accounts, he should have admitted he could have been mistaken.