CONTROVERSY at USATF Club Nationals - Tinman cheats

Sesamoiditis wrote:

No one would look at Pearson and the rest of the Tinman runners and say that their uniforms are basically identical which is what the rules states:

“The jersey or singlet worn by the members of a team (i.e., Club Northwest Men Open “A” team) shall be basically identical for each member in color and style.”

They are the same color but not the same style. No one watching the race would have thought Pearson and the others were on the same team based on their uniforms. Every other club respected the rules and wore the same uniform. It kind of just makes sense that a team would wear the same uniform. Every other team at every level tries to wear the same uniform but somehow Tinman Elite thinks they are above the rules and spirit of the sport.

I thought that they were basically the same in color and style. Apparently others in this thread agree. So your statement that "no one would look at Pearson and the rest of the Tinman runners and say that their uniforms are basically identical" per the rules is categorically false.

I think the issue is bigger than a uniform violation.

WHY DOES EVERYONE HATE TINMAN?

This team is disliked because of how they handle themselves.

They act like middle schoolers. Their coach is laughed at and mocked at the Tech meeting. They view themselves much differently than everyone else including potential sponsors.

I can confirm that the jerseys definitely do not have to be the same brand. Lots of clubs have athletes with differing personal sponsors, and they find ways to get everyone in nearly identical jerseys. The intent of the rule is that when you look at the athletes, you can tell they are on the same team. Sometimes athletes have additional logos on their jerseys representing personal sponsors and that is not a problem.

The issue from a past year that was mentioned previously in this thread, involved athletes with jerseys that were totally different colors. It was a far more egregious violation of the rule.

This case is borderline, IMO, because Pearson's jersey is only half white on the front, while the rest of the team was mostly white on the front.

It probably would have helped Tinman's case if they had put "Tinman" or something of the sort on all of the jerseys, but the rules do not require that a club name or logo be on the jersey.

It looks like the powers that be judged the jerseys ahead of time and found them to be acceptable. If people don't like how the rule was enforced, complain to the cross country council.

Keep in mind that even if Pearson's uniform was found to not be nearly identical to his teammates, the penalty would simply be that he could not score for his team... and they still win by a landslide. It looks like the rest of the team was matching?

People also made allegations in this thread that not all of the runners actually live in the right association? If you suspect that is the case, please reach out as far ahead of the meet as possible. If someone lies about their address, it won't stand out when addresses are being checked and may get overlooked if no one raises a concern.

And to whoever said the LOC is the one checking on athletes' eligibility, that is not normally the case.

Yeah I don’t agree with your characterization of their team.

I’m going to venture a guess that you were not in attendance at this years tech meeting.

Feel free to educate me on what I missed that qualifies them “acting like middle schoolers” and “view themselves much differently” than other programs.

I knew you didn’t see coach schwartz in action.

It was special. Talk with any Club coach that was there.

They will never pick up a major sponsor. He has no idea who was in that meeting. It was a major discussion at the No Name Bar in the hotel lobby afterward with how inappropriate he was.

midwestern roll wrote:

Feel free to educate me on what I missed that qualifies them “acting like middle schoolers” and “view themselves much differently” than other programs.

Bump because you didn’t educate me with any details of how the above are accurate statements. All you have done are make attacks without examples. I’m open to changing my mind if you can support your accusations.

I’ve already said too much. I will say that there were some important money men in the room and I guarantee that coach schwartz had no idea as well.

People will continue to wonder why other groups receive hundreds of thousands of dollars in sponsorships and Tinman receives zero.

I no longer wonder.

I’m sure that they walked away from that Meet thinking they were successful. They lost a lot.

Got it. You are unable to support your statements that the team "acts like middle schoolers" and thinks they are "view themselves much differently than everybody else" other than just saying the coach (not the team) embarrassed himself at the tech meeting, without being able to provide any such example, because that would be "saying too much" and reveal you as one of dozens of individuals that was at said tech meeting.

Given that, I am still unable to agree with your characterization of the team.

I wish The Army sent a full team, so this thread would not exist.

hofst wrote:

L'avvocato del diavolo wrote:

Not saying they should be DQ'ed, but how would anyone watching the race have any idea Pearson was part of Tinman Elite?

Yes. I was aware Pearson was a part of Tinman Elite before, during and after the race. A lot of people are like me.

My point, of course, was that someone watching the race who didn't know that beforehand would have a hard time figuring out Pearson was a part of the team (or any team). You wouldn't say the same thing about the Aggies, NJNYTC, BAA, etc., because they wear a uniform that, you know, has some words and/or symbols that indicate what team they are.

Again, I'm not saying he (or the team) should be DQ'ed. And I understand the sponsorship issues involved. But if we care at all about spectator enjoyment/meet presenation, it's something that should be looked at for the future.

Tinman getting hyped about winning this meet is like the Suns being stoked about winning a pickup game at the Y. Like cool, you beat a bunch of dads, but you’re still the Suns.

polevaultpower wrote:

People also made allegations in this thread that not all of the runners actually live in the right association? If you suspect that is the case, please reach out as far ahead of the meet as possible. If someone lies about their address, it won't stand out when addresses are being checked and may get overlooked if no one raises a concern.

And to whoever said the LOC is the one checking on athletes' eligibility, that is not normally the case.

A few people have mentioned that a club is allowed to have one runner from outside their association. Is that an actual rule?

Sesamoiditis wrote:

polevaultpower wrote:

People also made allegations in this thread that not all of the runners actually live in the right association? If you suspect that is the case, please reach out as far ahead of the meet as possible. If someone lies about their address, it won't stand out when addresses are being checked and may get overlooked if no one raises a concern.

And to whoever said the LOC is the one checking on athletes' eligibility, that is not normally the case.

A few people have mentioned that a club is allowed to have one runner from outside their association. Is that an actual rule?

If that runner has represented the club in the past for three years, moved somewhere else, then never represented another club then yes.

yeahh idk bud wrote:

I don't think it really matters. The only reason why they weren't wearing the same kit is that some of them are sponsored and some aren't. They aren't doing it to try and get an edge. The guys are just trying to make a living.

That really isnt an argument for them keeping a team title.

They are all welcome to run as individuals in different uniforms. If you want to compete as a team, you need to wear a team uniform. It seems simple.

Typically, this race isn't really about elite clubs forming a team and competing, it's really more about amateurs of all levels. I see nothing wrong with a team of professional runnings swooping in and taking the title, but they need to follow the rules still.

Do they even care about the team title? I wouldn't imagine that was really even something they would care about. This club of early 20s guys trying to make it as professional runners is at a different level from the majority of the field that is guys with day jobs of all ages, many of them masters runners.

Basic Ethics wrote:

I think the issue is bigger than a uniform violation.

WHY DOES EVERYONE HATE TINMAN?

This team is disliked because of how they handle themselves.

They act like middle schoolers. Their coach is laughed at and mocked at the Tech meeting. They view themselves much differently than everyone else including potential sponsors.

Yep, this team is disliked by the Basic Ethics of the world because of how they handle themselves. Despite the deep mud of XC courses, they are not sticks in the mud, like so many others at high levels of the running community. They have FUN and appeal to a ton of runners. They don't pretend to be world-beaters, but they don't cower down in fear of anyone. They have a sense of camaraderie that is refreshing, and appealing to a broad spectrum of runners.

We should all act more like middle schoolers.

Their coach is laughed at and mocked by the likes of Basic Ethics, who probably mocked "different" kids in school, because it was cool to mock those who are "different".

If potential sponsors frown at them, like Basic Ethics frowns at them, then there are a few potential sponsors who need to stop and smell the roses...and laugh at themselves...and look at how popular these guys are. Cha-CHING!

They had 2 guys > 20 seconds up on Hilary Bor and Lawi Lalang, and a minute up on guys like Daniel Winn. I would hope they’d be excited. Hate all you want, the team showed up in shape and clearly is doing something right.

Ballad of a Tinman, by Bob Dylan wrote:

They don't pretend to be world-beaters, but they don't cower down in fear of anyone. They have a sense of camaraderie that is refreshing, and appealing to a broad spectrum of runners.

We should all act more like middle schoolers.

Their coach is laughed at and mocked by the likes of Basic Ethics, who probably mocked "different" kids in school, because it was cool to mock those who are "different".

If potential sponsors frown at them, like Basic Ethics frowns at them, then there are a few potential sponsors who need to stop and smell the roses...and laugh at themselves...and look at how popular these guys are. Cha-CHING!

While it isn't a perfect metric of success, look at their IG numbers compared to most any other clubs or groups. Obviously sometimes sort of different demographics, but they found a niche and it shows. Kids line up to see them at meets, tons were wearing their gear at our state meet, and they sell out of merch almost instantly. They don't appeal to a lot of the LRC crowd, but they're making a lot of younger people excited about running.