10,000 for women - D Q

wejo wrote:

Just gout out of the press conference. There will be no DQ. The IAAF official said no one filed a protest within 30 minutes so they could not DQ anyone. Then the question was asked what if someone had filed a protest what would have happened. She said that the athletes could not be DQd because the cones were not set up properly. She said all that would happen would be that any national records or PBs set would be thrown out.

All because of the cones!

First the steeple, now the cones!

What's going on with track officials these days? Did they forget how to set up a track meet?

This is BS because in the Olympics and World Championships, as well as NCAA's they do not put up cones. That is high school. This is the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP! Know your rules.

wejo wrote:

Just gout out of the press conference. There will be no DQ. The IAAF official said no one filed a protest within 30 minutes so they could not DQ anyone. Then the question was asked what if someone had filed a protest what would have happened. She said that the athletes could not be DQd because the cones were not set up properly. She said all that would happen would be that any national records or PBs set would be thrown out.

ey_4runner wrote:

You get disqualified in the 800 for stepping on the line. Is that material? No but it is enough. I'm sorry it might sound harsh but there's no way these results can stand. All those who cut across must be disqualified. Yes, the officials screwed up.....(a) not putting out the cones; (b) not calling them back. But that's tough, you CAN'T let this result stand.

What do you mean, it's tough that the officials screwed up? You can't punish athletes for the officials' f-up!

Did anyone notice where Masai positioned herself after cheating at the start? She went to DFL and sat there till she decided the racing needed to begin. Now as for DQing 1/2 the field for cutting too soon, man, that'd be a harsh call, but if going by the book, a fair one. But to think the cut had an affect on the outcome of the race, I highly doubt it.

And if you look at the video of the ladies coming around the last turn, there might be a good case that Defar cut off Masai and made her stumble a bit.

Anyway, awesome race, hope the rest of the distance program lives up to the excitement of this race.

Yessir, we agree. And I saw (and noticed) at the very start that there were no cones separating the alleys.

9,999 Meter Final!! wrote:

Ok, guess I missed it but I think you're saying then that the outside alley did run less than the inside alley. Just making sure I understand your point.

So there's no argument that there is a discrepancy in distances run by the medal winners.

We're assuming, since we couldn't quite see from the broadcast, that the officials neglected to place cones along the lane to identify the cut in point for the outside alley.

The "realities" of racing show us that this discrepancy in race distance and the officials' lack of attention would not have made a difference in the race outcome. Therefore, the results should remain the same.

hardset nipples wrote:

Um, pay attention! I've already commented on that, I'm not going to go over something that's already been covered.

I saw an official raise a yellow flag. The ruling on the track SHOULD have been that the athletes be DQed. A protest would not be necessary. The protest could be filed by the DQed runners saying the cones were not set up properly, if that is the case. Am I correct in the thinking on this?

Don't know, don't care. I'm only concerned with this particular race. As an aside, I just don't see any realistic situation where any of the hypotheticals you're suggesting could actually happen.

runamile wrote:

hardset nipples wrote:

The people calling for disqualification for violation of a "rule" that had zero impact on the actual competition are the joke here.

I understand your point that a 5 - 6m difference in the length of the race some athletes ran compared to others (and the official distance) probably doesn't materially affect the outcome.

But here's the question for you then:

What, in your opinion, is the distance some should be allowed to cut short before you would start enforcing the rules?

If 5 - 6m is ok, what about 10m? 30m? 100m? Is it ok if some athletes are given a 1 second head start? What about 5 seconds? 20 seconds? Should we look at the finishing results and the pace in the early part of the race to determine whether to enforce the rules?

They certainly do, there were cones for the alleys at the start of the 10,000 in Beijing. Know the sport.

lane D Q wrote:

This is BS because in the Olympics and World Championships, as well as NCAA's they do not put up cones. That is high school. This is the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP! Know your rules.

wejo wrote:

Just gout out of the press conference. There will be no DQ. The IAAF official said no one filed a protest within 30 minutes so they could not DQ anyone. Then the question was asked what if someone had filed a protest what would have happened. She said that the athletes could not be DQd because the cones were not set up properly. She said all that would happen would be that any national records or PBs set would be thrown out.

lane D Q wrote:

This is BS because in the Olympics and World Championships, as well as NCAA's they do not put up cones.

that is 100% correct

there is no stipulation in the IAAF rulebook for cones to be placed on the inside of the alley

they should have been DQed had a protest been filed

hardset nipples wrote:

Don't know, don't care. I'm only concerned with this particular race.

That's a somewhat silly position to take given your vehemence that the rules be ignored in this particular case.

Since you are ok with some runners cutting some of the race distance, it would be rather relevant to know how much cutting would be required before you would apply the rules.

Further, it would be of interest to know how you would codify your position in the rule book whose intent is to remove as much subjectivity as possible.

That's for red, not yellow.

yellowflag wrote:

I saw an official raise a yellow flag. The ruling on the track SHOULD have been that the athletes be DQed. A protest would not be necessary. The protest could be filed by the DQed runners saying the cones were not set up properly, if that is the case. Am I correct in the thinking on this?

uh_no wrote:

they should have been DQed had a protest been filed

I don't understand why a protest had to be filed for there to be a DQ. Officials saw the infractions and should have made the DQ. Last year in the Olympics, the officials made DQs in the 200 meters because of lane violations w/o a protest. Right?

hardset nipples wrote:

They certainly do, there were cones for the alleys at the start of the 10,000 in Beijing. Know the sport.

Since you know the sport, can you highlight for me which part of rule 162 mandates that cones be placed throughout the entire turn?

It says the cut-in point should be marked/coned/flagged as it apparently was in Berlin, but doesn't say anything about the rest of the turn.

Having cones definitely would have helped ensure this problem didn't arise, but it does appear that not having the cones is a violation of the rules (and hence a screw-up by the officials as some are declaring on this thread).

hardset nipples wrote:

That's for red, not yellow.

I think the official at the track raises a yellow flag to indicate a "situation of interest" and then discusses the situation w/ the head referee. The head referee makes the DQ. So the yellow flag indicates a situation of interest, which to me means an infraction.

Nipples,

Maybe you have never run a distance race but I do know that in any distance race and especially slow ones with tactics your starts many times mater more than people think. In these races it is all about positioning. If I am on the inside and everyone on the outside runs short and therefore comes to the break line in front of me I am going to hang back for awhile in most cases instead of mess with all the crap in the first couple of miles. What this means is that for this point in time I am being sped up and slowed down more than everyone up front. This can lead to me being more down than other people who were up front the whole time. At the same time yes I could choose to surge down the backstretch and pass those who ran the shorter distance but at the same time I will be pushing and shoving for position the whole time to get up there. Also physiologically these women never ran at a pace that would be recovery pace, due to this the entire time they are running their body is building upon any amount of hard effort they put out early in the race.

Yep. Well we have an accord then. I still believe though that there may have been a different outcome given the discrepancies but if IAAF isn't going to enforce their rules because of their officials' idiocy then let the results stand. I change my assertion that lack of DQ's delegitimizes Track and Field; in the end Track's just like every other professional sport: idiotic referees and officials.

hardset nipples wrote:

Yessir, we agree. And I saw (and noticed) at the very start that there were no cones separating the alleys.

9,999 Meter Final!! wrote:

Ok, guess I missed it but I think you're saying then that the outside alley did run less than the inside alley. Just making sure I understand your point.

So there's no argument that there is a discrepancy in distances run by the medal winners.

We're assuming, since we couldn't quite see from the broadcast, that the officials neglected to place cones along the lane to identify the cut in point for the outside alley.

The "realities" of racing show us that this discrepancy in race distance and the officials' lack of attention would not have made a difference in the race outcome. Therefore, the results should remain the same.

yellowflag wrote:

I don't understand why a protest had to be filed for there to be a DQ. Officials saw the infractions and should have made the DQ. Last year in the Olympics, the officials made DQs in the 200 meters because of lane violations w/o a protest. Right?

I'd agree. My understanding is that umpires should have written up the infraction (the yellow flag would be the indication to the track referee that an infraction had been observed).

The track ref would then take the report, discuss with the umpire(s) and make a decision on whether to DQ.

That is why it was so long before the official results were released, presumably because the track ref held them up pending their decision. Once they were released, then the 30 minute clock for protests would start (and I would have thought the Ethiopians would have filed given it would mean they'd end up with a gold and silver medal - and the US would get the bronze).

Any protest would presumably then go to the Jury of Appeal for their decision.

The one they followed for the start in Beijing seen in the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTYyi_v8ufA

9,999 Meter Final!! wrote:

I still believe though that there may have been a different outcome given the discrepancies but if IAAF isn't going to enforce their rules because of their officials' idiocy then let the results stand.

I'll ask you the same question, what rule in

did the officials not enforce (other than DQ'ing the illegal cut-ins)?

Read rule 162, specifically the part about alley starts.

It says the cut in point should be flagged/marked/coned, but doesn't say you have to mark the entire turn. Yes, it would definitely help to have done so, but before you start accusing people of "idiocy", maybe you should be familiar with what rules they are supposedly being idiotic about.