Amen!
Amen!
The honest effort rule is the most subjective in the sport.
And impossible to fairly officiate.
Makhloufi was DQed and reinstated and his offense was much more obvious.
Bannister's rabbits had to finish the race to make it an honest effort but they got rid of that rule. Too hard to enforce.
The medical excuse thing is dumb. You can't tell exactly what was happening or could have happened during the race that may lead to injury.
But getting a doctor's note makes it OK. Even if it is made up.
The only objective way to do it is to make the fields based on how people enter and let them race or not race anyhow they want. Scratch. Drop out. Whatever.
Tracky wrote:
Take a few minutes to go back through the thread and read closely the posts by the people who actually understand the process and have explained it clearly.
I already know what I said; thank you very much.
webfoot wrote:
Tracky wrote: Hopefully you actually read this and if so, it really is pretty simple. I personally feel bad for the kid, but the honest effort rule is an important one in track & field.Interesting that the spirit of the rule takes a back seat to overreach and manipulation of the rule. I suppose the guy should have faked an asthma attack like your athlete.
In our legal system it is possible for an innocent person to be convicted even when given a fair trial. This does not make the conviction morally right or "fair", but I suppose it follows your "rules".
+++
Totally unsportsmanlike act from Harvard. That's just a hint of what your corporate overlords will be doing to you in the labor market.
Come on, how many people have ever heard that if they drop out of a track 10k near the end, they will be dq'd later on for another race entirely???
But that going to the NCAA trainers, not your own, afterwards makes it all better???
This isn't about interpretation of the honest effort rule. No one said he didn't give an honest effort. What he didn't do is go to the medical tent and get cleared. Has anyone ever been denied who asked? He could have stopped at 3k and still been allowed to advance.
jjjjjjjjj wrote:
But that going to the NCAA trainers, not your own, afterwards makes it all better???
100% of NCAA division 1 track coaches have heard about the honest effort rule and the need to get clearance from the medical staff from the meet; some just choose to ignore it, like the VT coach. It really is just basic knowledge of coaching. I dealt with it EVERY conference meet as I planned my strategy of who to enter in what races, knowing I couldn't have athletes drop out or not start a race and then be eligible for the rest of the meet unless it was for a proven medical reason. Only once did I have to use the medical clearance, for an athlete with a severe asthma attack. Only once did I have someone not be able to compete in his later race because he dropped out of his first race while having a bad race. He knew he was out of the rest of the meet, because all my athletes knew this. Basic coaching 101.
"The rule is hard to enforce because it is hard to determine honest effort. Therefore Le should be allowed to run." This is a terrible argument.The fact that it's easy to circumvent a rule doesn't mean the rule is less enforceable, in fact, this cuts in favor of the DQ. All they had to do was march Le to the tent or bring an NCAA official over to the Va Tech trainer and get him cleared before the start of the 5k and this would never have be an issue. It was that easy. Apparently, they weren't clear on that protocol (From the initial post)
There was also speculation because he did not see the NCAA’s medical staff after dropping out of the 10k, as if that was standard procedure.
Well actually...
And finally, do we even know for certain it was a Harvard coach who lodged the protest? The original post is a tear-jerker (literally!) but doesn't strike me as the most unbiased source. If this came from meet management (which had 100% the authority to do so), would people still be complaining as much? Don't shoot the messenger..
You can,t drop out of a race at regionals and line up again in another race without medical clearance from meet medical staff
It should have been caught by clerks/meet officials but was not
Once those 2 errors were made it was up to a coach to protest the result to correct the error
The harvard athlete was the one most effected
Many coaches came to harvard coach to make him aware
The rules were broken, the rules were not enforced, and many many people knew it once the race started.
This was the correct outcome and could have been avoided.
Every other coach in the field would have and were prepared to file the protest if their kid was 13th. Everything else is sour grapes
So I think we are all in agreement that the Va Tech coach is incompetent and the Harvard coach is morally bankrupt.
What do you expect for $48,000 a yr. Based on the salary spread sheet posted yesterday the guy makes less than a HS coach in VA.
The VT coach has no control over stupid officials.
Requiring someone to get medical approval for a hamstring cramp after running 8km of a 10k is assine.
stupid people wrote:
The VT coach has no control over stupid officials.
Requiring someone to get medical approval for a hamstring cramp after running 8km of a 10k is assine.
I know, I hate those people that feel the need to follow rules. We should all be able to do whatever we want.
Of course we are all 100% sure that the VT runner dropped out because his hamstring was hurting. Nobody lies in this world so if he says it is so, then we should believe him. It would be way too hard to go to a medical person, have him look at the hamstring and explain what happened and get clearance to compete in the 5k. Even though every coach knows this is the rule designed to prevent cheating, it just makes too much sense and VT would rather just hope after the fact that everyone believes them instead of doing the simple thing.
So on a more serious, mature level, you do know that by entering the 10k the VT runner took a spot from someone hoping to run in the regionals? Fair enough, he ran faster and deserves to run. But the idea of the honest effort rule is so he doesn't just enter both and see which one he has the better chance of making it. From an outsiders perspective, it seems like the VT runner tried to make it to nationals in the 10k, but by 8k realized he wasn't going to make it so he dropped out to save himself at least somewhat for the 5k. Now we hear he had a hamstring injury. Okay, if that is true, then most of us would like that documented as the rules state, since he took a spot away from someone else and didn't finish the race. His coach knew this was the rule (unless of course he has the intelligence level of J.R.), but they chose not to do this. Now people like J.R. think we can just take the VT runner at his word and go against the basic rules that have been in place for years and reinstate him with no evidence of why he dropped out.
Even though every coach knows this is the rule designed to prevent cheating, it just makes too much sense and VT would rather just hope after the fact that everyone believes them instead of doing the simple thing.
Tracky, Bleu, all you other Dwight Schrute's of the t&f world;
Please cite from the NCAA pre-regional technical or participant manual OR the NCAA rule book "this rule all coaches should know" that applies so clearly to Le Degfae's DQ.
assinine
tard detector wrote:
Even though every coach knows this is the rule designed to prevent cheating, it just makes too much sense and VT would rather just hope after the fact that everyone believes them instead of doing the simple thing.
Tracky, Bleu, all you other Dwight Schrute's of the t&f world;
Please cite from the NCAA pre-regional technical or participant manual OR the NCAA rule book "this rule all coaches should know" that applies so clearly to Le Degfae's DQ.
I no longer am a coach and therefore do not have the rule books or information that was given out from the conference and/or NCAA, but I did find one conference meet information that explains things pretty clearly.
Participate Rule which was adopted by the NCAA (Rule 4-2-2):
1. Athletes must partipate honestly in all trials and finals of all track or field events in which they legally are declared or they
shall be barred from all
remaining events in the current meet. Athletes must compete with maximum effort and/or qualify from trials into the finals.
2. Athletes must participate honestly in the finals of all events in which they are legally declared and qualified, and in which
such participation is criteria
for entry in a subsequent meet.
Note 1: It is understood that passing on trials in field events is a strategy available in those events and is not considered a
question of honest effort,
provided at least one trial has been made.
Note 2: Failure to complete a combined event competition shall not affect subsequent participation in an open event.
Enforcement of the Honest Effort Rule will be administered as
follows:
1) The medical doctor/certified trainer shall examine injured competitors and make recommendations to the competitor, the
competitor’s coach and the representative of any sponsoring organization as to the advisability of continued participation by
the competitor in the meet. Such recommendations shall be considered in the application of the Honest Effort Rule.
2) Should the decision be made to withdraw the competitor from the current event, the competitor shall be scratched from any
subsequent event(s) in the meet, unless otherwise approved to continue participation by the medical doctor/certified trainer.
Note 3: If during the combined event an athlete participating in the combined event fails to participate in another open event for
which they are declared, that athlete will be allowed to finish the combined event, but will be barred from participation in any
further event in the meet. The combined event will be treated as one continuous event.
Note 4: If an athlete is declared in more than one event that is simultaneously being contested and fails to participate in one of
the events, the athlete will be allowed to finish the event(s) they have been participating in, but will be barred from further
competition at the meet.
Note 5: The Honest Effort Rule implies that competitors will compete honestly and with maximum effort. This is a judgement call
made by the Umpires/Judges and directed to the Head Event Referee for a final ruling. If it is ruled that the athlete did not
compete honestly and with maximum effort, the Head Event Referee shall warn and/or disqualify the athlete from the event and
from the remainder of the meet. If the athlete is disqualified, a “DQ” will be posted in the results.
Note 6: There are times when an athlete will not finish an event for legitmate reasons. Examples would include a false start or a
fall. This should be noted in the results as “DNF” (did not finish) and not confused with the Honest Effort Rule. However, all
competitors who do not finish because of an injury must re-enter the meet through the medical re-certification process.
Note 7: A “DNS” (did not start) in the event heat/flight reporting sheets will indicate that the athlete failed to report to the start
of an event and will be listed in the final results as a “DNS.” A “DNS” means the athlete will be barred from further competition
at the meet unless approved for further competition by the respective Head Event Referee.
Note 8: Once the championship has started, if a Games Committee decision to alter the meet schedule causes a conflict for an
athlete declared in another event, the athlete will not be penalized for missing the other event
To everyone who wasted time arguing and debating on this thread: LEE DEGFAE HAS BEEN REINSTATED!!!
Justice has been served. Boo ya!
#FreeDegfae