New Mexico coach, among others, should be protesting the course cutting.
Official 2025 NCAA Cross Country live discussion thread (+live reaction show at 1 pm ET)
College Running
D1
-
672
-
Hansen 2nd - gonna be a beast this year in track. Oh man oh man.
Martin 7th - strong for the second year in a row.
Sahlman 16th - has he finally taken a step up for good?
Aiden Smith 25th - top 30 for the second year in a row
Ethan Coleman 28th - big step up from 46th last year
Sam Lawler 31st - he was 28th last year
Tayvon Kitchen 32nd - excellent run for the true freshman
Simeon Birnbaum 33rd - HUGE improvement on 76th last year
704 -
I Chose D2 wrote:
I Chose D2 wrote:
Athletes who cut the course and should have been DQ'd at 7.5-7.7k:
Messaoudi - OSU
Kipkosgei - Hofstra
Chesondin - Arkansas
Kipruto - Alabama
Kogei - Cincinatti
2 Iowa State Runners
Kipkosgei, Chesodin, and one of the Iowa State runners were the worst offenders - over 100 meters on the wrong side of the haybales around the turn.
If that had happened at a HS meet, they 100% would be DQ'd. Weird that it probably won't happen at an NCAA championships.
D3 fans will remember the outdoor 10K champ in the spring was DQ'd for a couple accidental stumbling steps inside the line. Meet officials are so picky on the track, but we're just gonna let this go? Wild
723 -
Habtom Samuel is Eritrean…
204 -
BadDucks wrote:
What were these Oregon guys thinking? The ran like high schoolers. With all that talent, how on Earth they could lose to that Syracuse team is mind boggling. Outcoached. Outraced.
Obviously you haven’t been paying attention. Syracuse has enormous depth as a team and won regionals and were second at ACC. And were ranked 4th!! THAT Cuse team shined due to their depth and strategy. You’re welcome.
321 -
From the NCAA rulebook:
SECTION 5. RUNNING VIOLATIONS
The referee, upon receiving the report of a perceived rule violation from a
competition official after review of official meet video, if available, and consulting
with the appropriate officials, shall disqualify a competitor who:
f. Gains a meaningful advantage by failing to complete the prescribed course
that is defined by a legal marking system.
Note: The referee, after consulting with the appropriate officials, shall not disqualify
a competitor who is pushed or forced by another runner to briefly step off the course
without material advantage gained.SECTION 8. VIDEO
Official Meet Video
ARTICLE 1. Video declared by meet management as official meet video prior
to the start of the competition shall be the only video used by any competition
official.
Video Review
ARTICLE 2. Video review, when available, shall be used by the referee for the
sole purpose of either confirming or denying a perceived rule violation reported
by a competition official; or used by the referee(s) and/or jury of appeals to
address a submitted protest or appeal regarding the referee’s decision to a
perceived rule violation reported by a competition official or a decision rendered
by a competition official.292 -
wqertyui wrote:
From the NCAA rulebook:
SECTION 5. RUNNING VIOLATIONS
The referee, upon receiving the report of a perceived rule violation from a
competition official after review of official meet video, if available, and consulting
with the appropriate officials, shall disqualify a competitor who:
f. Gains a meaningful advantage by failing to complete the prescribed course
that is defined by a legal marking system.
Note: The referee, after consulting with the appropriate officials, shall not disqualify
a competitor who is pushed or forced by another runner to briefly step off the course
without material advantage gained.SECTION 8. VIDEO
Official Meet Video
ARTICLE 1. Video declared by meet management as official meet video prior
to the start of the competition shall be the only video used by any competition
official.
Video Review
ARTICLE 2. Video review, when available, shall be used by the referee for the
sole purpose of either confirming or denying a perceived rule violation reported
by a competition official; or used by the referee(s) and/or jury of appeals to
address a submitted protest or appeal regarding the referee’s decision to a
perceived rule violation reported by a competition official or a decision rendered
by a competition official.So was the broadcast declared as official meet video?
152 -
Anyone with 2 violations should be DQed
232 -
Great job NCAA. Next year they’ll be taking the spectator paths.
253 -
wqertyui wrote:
From the NCAA rulebook:
SECTION 5. RUNNING VIOLATIONS
The referee, upon receiving the report of a perceived rule violation from a
competition official after review of official meet video, if available, and consulting
with the appropriate officials, shall disqualify a competitor who:
f. Gains a meaningful advantage by failing to complete the prescribed course
that is defined by a legal marking system.
Note: The referee, after consulting with the appropriate officials, shall not disqualify
a competitor who is pushed or forced by another runner to briefly step off the course
without material advantage gained.SECTION 8. VIDEO
Official Meet Video
ARTICLE 1. Video declared by meet management as official meet video prior
to the start of the competition shall be the only video used by any competition
official.
Video Review
ARTICLE 2. Video review, when available, shall be used by the referee for the
sole purpose of either confirming or denying a perceived rule violation reported
by a competition official; or used by the referee(s) and/or jury of appeals to
address a submitted protest or appeal regarding the referee’s decision to a
perceived rule violation reported by a competition official or a decision rendered
by a competition official.SECTION 2. COURSE LAYOUT
f. Turns shall be gradual. If a course layout requires a sharp turn, any such turn
shall be clearly marked. The runner shall be provided with a distinct barrier
through that turn.SECTION 3. COURSE MARKINGS
a. The entire course shall be clearly marked using either natural or artificial
boundary markers.
b. The boundary markers shall be continuous throughout the entire length of
the course clearly designating both the inside and outside boundaries.131 -
That Cuse team can be excellent, but still should have a significant disadvantage to the mega-funded Oregon team, who can recruit anyone they want. My comment was not to disparage Cuse's outstanding program, but to point out that Oregon fails to perform year-after-year, despite every advantage.
321 -
ChatLRC wrote:
Kobbs Hessler wrote:
7th for Gary Martin
Top 1500 guy by a long way. A freak of nature.
And he always looks like he loping along pushing a baby stroller or something. I've never seen a guy that fast look like he's out for an easy jog.
351 -
wqertyui wrote:
From the NCAA rulebook:
SECTION 5. RUNNING VIOLATIONS
The referee, upon receiving the report of a perceived rule violation from a
competition official after review of official meet video, if available, and consulting
with the appropriate officials, shall disqualify a competitor who:
f. Gains a meaningful advantage by failing to complete the prescribed course
that is defined by a legal marking system.
Note: The referee, after consulting with the appropriate officials, shall not disqualify
a competitor who is pushed or forced by another runner to briefly step off the course
without material advantage gained.SECTION 8. VIDEO
Official Meet Video
ARTICLE 1. Video declared by meet management as official meet video prior
to the start of the competition shall be the only video used by any competition
official.
Video Review
ARTICLE 2. Video review, when available, shall be used by the referee for the
sole purpose of either confirming or denying a perceived rule violation reported
by a competition official; or used by the referee(s) and/or jury of appeals to
address a submitted protest or appeal regarding the referee’s decision to a
perceived rule violation reported by a competition official or a decision rendered
by a competition official.I went to the 2025-2026 D1 pre-championships rule book as well. Based upon information in the rule book, I sent an email to Demetria Young, Jeff Mlynski, Mark Kostek and Jay Fitzwater alerting them to the alleged cheating matter and asking for clarification. I got an out of office bounce back from 3 of 4. I assume they will bury their heads in sand but I will let everyone know if any of them respond.
Update #1 Note that one of the people listed had their cellphone on the rules book. He is involved with the rules but not the decision maker. I know this because I just called his phone number. I told him that runners had cut the course and asked him if they were looking at it. He said "that's the referee's decision" and then hung up.
I then sent him a text that stated "kindly please ask the meet referee to review the race footage as per the rules he is allowed to look at the race footage. There were several clear cases of runners cutting corners / running outside the lines. Thank you."
This post was edited 16 minutes after it was posted. Reason provided: Added follow up281 -
freekiprop wrote:
mictlantecuhtli wrote:
Far and away his best finish in NCAA xc. Very impressive to pivot from USA 800m finals over summer to top 20 in XC.
Anyone off the top of their head know other 1:44 guys who have finished top 20?
my only guess is MAYBE jim ryun? Not sure what his range in XC was but i feel like he had gotten top 20 at some point?
03 -
If this were the NCAA outdoors T&F Champs and you had a bunch of guys running inside the rails, I would hope they would be DQ'd. NCAA needs to enforce the rules -- there were many course violations, and there is no excuse. It's each runner's responsibility to stay within the boundaries of the course.
312 -
rbtrackfan wrote:
runnerdave wrote:
Jane is a true phenom and ran some truly astounding races, but I think we might have all overhyped ourselves. It wouldn't be the first time. Or the last.
people forgot just how good Doris is. She blew away 2 14:5x 5000 m runners in last 400 last year.
As good as Doris is, I do not think we saw Jane's A race today. I thought Jane looked almost a little stressed from the start; maybe the poster here a few days ago who said Jane raced too hard last week was correct, or maybe just some nerves or something, but I don't think today's Jane was the one we saw last week. Just a feeling.
3110 -
A quick AI search reveals:
"Dave Wottle had a successful NCAA cross country career with Bowling Green State University, highlighted by a 12th-place finish at the NCAA Championships in 1971, which earned him All-American honors. He helped lead the Bowling Green team to four consecutive top-10 finishes at the national championships, placing ninth in 1969, eighth in 1970, seventh in 1971, and sixth in 1972. During his collegiate career, he also won the MAC cross country championship in 1971 and was a key part of the 1969 team that won the MAC team title."
Pretty solid running for an Olympic Gold medalist in the 800M.
106 -
Dopers r us wrote:
runnerdave wrote:
Aren't you missing your KKK meeting?
This whole thread has this energy it’s crazy
Yep. Just bypass the cretinous slop and direct yr $ beyond LRC.
32 -
superstriker wrote:
wqertyui wrote:
From the NCAA rulebook:
SECTION 5. RUNNING VIOLATIONS
The referee, upon receiving the report of a perceived rule violation from a
competition official after review of official meet video, if available, and consulting
with the appropriate officials, shall disqualify a competitor who:
f. Gains a meaningful advantage by failing to complete the prescribed course
that is defined by a legal marking system.
Note: The referee, after consulting with the appropriate officials, shall not disqualify
a competitor who is pushed or forced by another runner to briefly step off the course
without material advantage gained.SECTION 8. VIDEO
Official Meet Video
ARTICLE 1. Video declared by meet management as official meet video prior
to the start of the competition shall be the only video used by any competition
official.
Video Review
ARTICLE 2. Video review, when available, shall be used by the referee for the
sole purpose of either confirming or denying a perceived rule violation reported
by a competition official; or used by the referee(s) and/or jury of appeals to
address a submitted protest or appeal regarding the referee’s decision to a
perceived rule violation reported by a competition official or a decision rendered
by a competition official.I went to the 2025-2026 D1 pre-championships rule book as well. Based upon information in the rule book, I sent an email to Demetria Young, Jeff Mlynski, Mark Kostek and Jay Fitzwater alerting them to the alleged cheating matter and asking for clarification. I got an out of office bounce back from 3 of 4. I assume they will bury their heads in sand but I will let everyone know if any of them respond.
Update #1 Note that one of the people listed had their cellphone on the rules book. He is involved with the rules but not the decision maker. I know this because I just called his phone number. I told him that runners had cut the course and asked him if they were looking at it. He said "that's the referee's decision" and then hung up.
I then sent him a text that stated "kindly please ask the meet referee to review the race footage as per the rules he is allowed to look at the race footage. There were several clear cases of runners cutting corners / running outside the lines. Thank you."
Update #2. I received a text back. "The referee is aware"
341 -
The weakness of Oregon was supposed to be there four and five. They beat BYU by one and only gave up eight points to nc state. 1-3 cost them. That was supposed to be their womens strength.
30
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.