It's actually a shame that he wasn't more patient once he found himself in that spot. One more second and that gap would have been significantly wider, as Farken was dying.
OBVIOUSLY HAD NO EFFECT ON ROLLED FARKEN WHO WAS ALR SWIMMING
it doesn't matter if it had no effect on him. he either broke the rules or he didn't, the impact of him breaking the rules isn't relevant as to whether he is dq'd or now. it's only relevant for whether or not Farken will auto q for the final.
he clearly broke the rules here. only himself to blame. he seems to think that because he got a lucky gap in the olympics once that this is now some sort of law of physics and he will get one every time. his own fault
Actually, it does matter if his actions had an effect because the rules require physical contact that causes an "unfair advantage" or "physical harm."
Anyway, it's pretty silly to act as though the definition of "jostling" is clear and obvious. The rules, including their guidance, are incredibly vague, leaving officials with tremendous discretion. Athletes rely on past practice to determine what's allowed, and what Hocker did almost never results in a DQ at an elite level.
It's actually a shame that he wasn't more patient once he found himself in that spot. One more second and that gap would have been significantly wider, as Farken was dying.
That's what I though after the race, all he had to do was wait a bit more. Hock panicked and it cost him the Finals.
It wouldn't result in a DQ at the start... but in the last 100, c'mon... he clearly ruined that guys race and pulled himself into the spot. It was bad tactics, racing up the inside has always been his game. Pretty bad tactics for the Olympic Champion running heats.
Reminds me of the 2016 DQ of Robby Andrews. Andrews had no room so used the inside of the track. No way out of a bad situation except to act and beg for forgiveness. But clearly an infraction.
I honestly think it can be simultaneously true that Hocker's move did not really have much of an actual impact on Farken's performance and it being correct to disqualify him nonetheless.
What??
the intent of rules is not for the sake of rules. Rules are to protect the outcome on performances.
If our impacted athlete was able to give his best effort and he admits regardless of impact it would not have effected the result. Then there is no infraction to the impacted athlete’s performance. And no foul to fair play
Sort of true, but the rules also act as a disincentive to behavior in future races. From the judge's perspective it's hard to say definitively that Farken wasn't affected, but it was such a dangerous move that someone could have easily gotten tripped and fallen, which is the last thing anyone wants. So enforcing the rule based on a clear violation, even if it -probably- didn't affect the outcome of -this- race, helps ensure proper tactics in future races.
I must not be seeing what everyone else is. He just slipped through a gap with minimal contact as the German runner drifted away from the rail leaving no room. No one was impeded and no one would have been upset by a non DQ. Silly, technical application of a rule by overthinking officials. Don’t people actually want to see the best runners in the final?