I know it is off the topic, but why are the brosjo unable to spell or make a grammatically correct sentence? Seriously, why?
I know it is off the topic, but why are the brosjo unable to spell or make a grammatically correct sentence? Seriously, why?
What is the DQ for mutai in this race?
Counter example (no DQ) Ovett 1980 Olympic 800m
Dope police wrote:
First off, I tip my hat to wejo for starting this great thread. I think it illustrates exactly what many of us are struggling with - for those who say the DQs were justified (and there seem to be quite a few here), it would be helpful to provide one example on the professional level that something like this has ever happened before.
We are 30 something posts into it and no good examples have been provided yet.
Personally I think it's a dumb thread and I can't be bothered.
Of course people have been DQ'd before. Of course there are rules against fouls. To try an argue there's a tree in the ground with someone who refuses to see is a fruitless endeavor.
800 analyzer wrote:
Most such events are never protested but that doesn't mean they might no have resulted in a DQ had the coach been as diligent as Al Sal.
they might not have resulted in a DQ had the coach been as douchey as Al Sal.
corrected.
J.R. wrote:
[quote]D
Of course people have been DQ'd before. Of course there are rules against fouls. To try an argue there's a tree in the ground with someone who refuses to see is a fruitless endeavor.
So, post the video.
If you said there was a tree in the ground and someone said there wasn't, you could produce a picture of a tree quick, right?
Well, post your evidence.
You've been trying to act like this thread is beneath you, yet you've posted more than anyone and have added nothing but self important drivel.
Since " Of course people have been DQ'd before" show wejo and rojo.......or STFU.
AMEN! Now go to bed Juniorcnzx wrote:
J.R. wrote:[quote]D
Of course people have been DQ'd before. Of course there are rules against fouls. To try an argue there's a tree in the ground with someone who refuses to see is a fruitless endeavor.
So, post the video.
If you said there was a tree in the ground and someone said there wasn't, you could produce a picture of a tree quick, right?
Well, post your evidence.
You've been trying to act like this thread is beneath you, yet you've posted more than anyone and have added nothing but self important drivel.
Since " Of course people have been DQ'd before" show wejo and rojo.......or STFU.
Figures, too stupid to do anything waste peoples time and troll.
See.... you still can't see it.
cnzx wrote:
J.R. wrote:[quote]D
Of course people have been DQ'd before. Of course there are rules against fouls. To try an argue there's a tree in the ground with someone who refuses to see is a fruitless endeavor.
So, post the video.
If you said there was a tree in the ground and someone said there wasn't, you could produce a picture of a tree quick, right?
Well, post your evidence.
You've been trying to act like this thread is beneath you, yet you've posted more than anyone and have added nothing but self important drivel.
Since " Of course people have been DQ'd before" show wejo and rojo.......or STFU.
There is several videos posted in this thread. Why aren't you looking at them. YOu can't see the evidence if you don't look. dummy
Ironically in your editorial opposing bullying of (not by) Bumbalough on the the hand (bullying by GG only counts if JH does fall, after all), you confuse Hill and Bumbalough and Rupp: "It’s easy to see how the mistake happened. The referee was told there was a foul involving Bumbalough/Rupp near the 2k mark. He goes back and watches the tape, sees contact and disqualifies Bumbalough, failing to realize that the runner making contact was Bumbalough, not Rupp." Lots needs to be done more appropriately, yes. One of your biggest fans, I think you have lost perspective on the women's 3000 and now linked it to the men's. Worse, if we can find examples of more flagrant fouls that were not DQ'd (by other officials in other years and likely without replays), you will be happier? Can we write more about the amazing recent vault record, and less about this? See what I mean about loss of perspective?
wejo wrote:
Ok, it now seems pretty certain the official got confused and meant to DQ Ryan Hill and not Andrew Bumbalough in the men's 3k.
I've heard a few people post that Gabriele Grunewald should have been DQd.
My reaction after watching both videos is "Absolutely not a DQ."
My second reaction is "I've never seen someone DQd for something similar to whay both the officials tried to DQ Grunewald and Hill for."
My
challenge to the people who believe in the DQ for either/both runners is post past examples
(video preferred) of any pro race where people were DQd for such
incidental contact. I can come up with a bunch of examples where people
aren't DQd for siilar and much more egregious contact but I'd like to see at least one example
for where they were.
If you haven't seen the races:
Gif of men's 3k here:
Full video at 5:40 mark here:
Women's
3k at 10:09 here
Seems to me he was asking JR to post the specific evidence he claimed to have.
If you want to observe a dummy, check the closest mirror.
I posted the tree and he still couldn't see it.
Good post
ERF wrote:
I agree that what happened last weekend was a disturbing event for the sport. That said (I know this is off-topic), in terms of reporting information, I believe you guys sometimes overdo it. It's fine to report the information and want to get to the bottom of something, etc.. As track and field enthusiasts, that's exactly what we want. We want all of the information, every single detail.. The problem is that you often report information with very obvious emotion and bias. Consistently revealing this bias/emotion, in my opinion, lessens your credibility as reporters and makes this site seem a little more tabloid-esque. Sometimes I can't tell if your goal for this site is for it to be a reliable resource for track and field news or for it to be a platform for enacting change in the sport. Personally, I'd prefer to just get the information. I can form opinions and get outraged about something on my own. I don't need it to be embedded in the writing of the story. That being said, I generally enjoy what I read here and appreciate the work that you do.
J.R. wrote:
I posted the tree and he still couldn't see it.
You posted "Gabe Grunewald in the 3K" as an example. In this thread.
I filed a protest with the mods to have it removed for being so stupid, and it's gone now, so maybe that's why he couldn't see it.
Thanks for proving my point.
There are none so blind, as those who won't see.
A better question would be "Have you ever seen anybody actually beat a dead horse?"
I didn't want to start a new thread just to ask that question like EVERYBODY did about the DQ so I'll ask it here.
Hulk wrote:
Eric Jenkin's DQ at the NCAA 3k last year?
+1
Just an inconsequently tug on a jersey got Jenkins DQ'd (couldn't find the vid)
There are no perfect examples.
Usually the issues occur when there is traffic. You rarely see someone trip up another runner when they are in single file - the point is that people usually just go around in lane 2. Similarly,Hill was not going to be boxed. He could have gone around Rupp to take position. Protesting is ok. Undue influence is not. I was ok with the decisions going either way so long as there was no influence.
TM was rougher at the Olympics than Hill was. Haile G tool off tanuis shoe in a championship without a DQ.
Another example is the 2011 world champs where the Spanish runner tried to pass in lane 1 and knocked the fading Ethiopian off balance. Rowbury ended up greeting the bronze. The Ethiopian had position and was in the middle of lane 1 . It was clear the Ethiopian was going backward and not going to win but the Spanish runner squeezed by her and the Ethiopian went down. He Spanish runner won but was dQD.
Why are you guys responding to common LRC troll J.R.? No one takes that clown seriously.