LRC co-founder Robert Johnson didn't realize there was already a thread about this so he started his own thread. We have merged the two threads together.
PURE UTTER NONSENSE. So if the guide is unable to finish the race and the finish lane is in sight, the athlete is penalized due to no fault of theirs. What a joke!
Wait, but if they're supposed to be blind, how can the finish line be in sight? They can't see it!
Why are they so strict about the rule you must hold onto the ribbon connecting you to your guide at all times?
IN case you missed, a Spanish runner was all by herself coming in for the bronze in the marathon. Her guide was cramping up badly and it wasn't clear if he was going got make it to the finish line. She was like stopping to help him and momentarily let go for like a half second maybe 5 meters from the finish line.
No one else was close to her. Can't we have some common sense? This would be like calling pass interference on a pass that is uncatchable.
The phrase "common sense" is tossed around as if everyone, under every condition, would come to the same conclusion. If you add in "common sense" then you are bringing in a judgment call and I am for reducing those in sport rather than expanding.
Maybe a change in the rule is called for to not allow for advancement until contact is re-established. Right now the rule is clear, "common sense" would muddy the waters and increase the potential for more controversies.
Regarding the PI analogy, it is a poor one since the rule allows for PI being waved off if the pass is not catchable. There is no such amendment here.
PURE UTTER NONSENSE. So if the guide is unable to finish the race and the finish lane is in sight, the athlete is penalized due to no fault of theirs. What a joke!
Considering the runner is visually impaired, the finish line might never be "in sight".
Cheating? Where? She ran 26.2 miles in about 2:48 and beat the 4th place runner by a great distance. Where did she cheat? WoW, really?
I don't think she "cheated" but she did not follow the rules. I think of cheating as being an active thing like cutting the corners on a course. Sometimes one breaks rules in sports unintentionally like in this case.
Much like how holding happens on every American football play and it's just a matter of when and why they call it... there are likely many similar finishers who also committed the same violations but their results stood. These other runners were singled out for other reasons.
These athletes committed some other more egregious violation like doping but they don't want to pop and ban them. The technicality allows them to DQ the runners from this race for doing so without having to go as far as to basically end their careers. It's a slap on the wrist blackmail style warning.
The best and only way to ensure fair, equal and meaningful competition among athletes is to enforce all rules as objectively as possible.
This must apply at any level of competitive sport, from Special Olympic, Paralympic through Olympic competitions.
It's unfair and problematic when rules are subjectively bent or ignored (out of sympathy or other reasons). Unequal application of the rules of competition compromises the respect and dignity any and all athletes deserve.
Athletes (and people) need to be treated like athletes (and people), and that applies to athletes and people with disabilities also.
Not applying or enforcing rules of competition due to a perceived lack of competitive advantage gained would add an additional level of subjective rule interpretation by officials/referees trying to determine the relative amount of any potential competitve advantage gained.
A world class NFL football player would have his last second breakaway touchdown run disallowed if they did not cross the goal line in possession of the ball because they were avoiding an injured teammate, and their team would lose the game.
A world class MLB baseball player would have their walk off 2 run home run disallowed if they did not touch home plate to avoid their teammate/baserunner who had fallen over after crossing the plate, and their team would lose the game.
A world class Paralympic marathon runner with a large lead on fourth place would have their finish disallowed if they lost connection with their guide runner before they crossed the finish line because their guide/teammate was near collapse, and their team did not win a bronze medal.
None of the above examples should be treated differently. You can feel sorry for and sympathize with the individuals and teams involved. The media will give these incidents attention. But it would be unfair to not equally apply the rules of competitive sport in these or other situations.
Yeah I'm with you here. The competition rules are there and you need to apply them regardless of context or it becomes arbitrary. It's harsh in this case but it's the only fair way of doing it.
I think you could look at changing the rules for future competitions perhaps and come up with some sort of time penalty, but you can't give her the bronze because she didn't stick to the rules that were in place at the time.
this is the dumbest logic ever. rules are made by humans, not by god. thus they can be changed by humans when the rules are revealed to not serve the purpose they were created for. This has obviously happened many times not only in sports but in every legal level, political, social, corporate.
The Nazis had a law that stated Jews had to turn in all precious metals to the state with no compensation. Yes, let's follow every rule just because it's a rule. And no the Nazis don't have to hand back the goods they stole because those were the rules at the time! LOL. Hard to believe you have the IQ to form a sentence
I don’t get the motivation for the rule. If a runner is able to untether and continue running without guidance, why would that be against the rules? How does that advantage them at all?
Agreed. "Common sense" is one if those slippery phrases that seems to bear truth and, well, common sense. But in the wrong hands it can be misleading when the basis for the judgement call is not common or sensible. Anyone with common sense realizes that.
Just a point of order: "Visually impaired" is not the phrase that is used any more: the designations are "Blind" or "low vision." Probably the problem in competitions can be improved with language and logistics in the rules.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.