Idiot- her DQ was still up for review, talking to press would not be appropriate at that point.
Njj wrote:
She didn't even come to the interview after her race.. what a sore loser.
Idiot- her DQ was still up for review, talking to press would not be appropriate at that point.
Njj wrote:
She didn't even come to the interview after her race.. what a sore loser.
Piss off. You don't know this. And you're wrong.
portable IAAF potty wrote:
if Quigly or Coburn or Frerichs got a silver medal and the gold medal winner stepped on the line after the last water jump you wouldn't be making the same arguments, you'd be saying, "rules are rules, and she broke em....etc, give her (USA) the gold."
Space Ghost wrote:Multiple reasons why the whole situation is stupid.
1. No measurable advantage gained.
2. No intent to gain advantage.
DQ infractions should involve one or the other or both.
"
Hotness personified wrote:
Ratings for the women's steeple just took a hit in the key demographic of men aged 12-100.
What about the female 8-70 demographic?
Paul Swangard†@PaulSwangard · 5h5 hours ago
Replying to @letsrundotcom @steeple_squigs
That's not the infraction. Also stepped on the line later on the return to the main straightaway.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
scorpio baby wrote:
It's on a straight path. No advantage gained. This is stupid.
Wrong. If everyone else is following the rules and running in a small congested area, then going out of that area to get more space is an advantage.
USAKarma wrote:
scorpio baby wrote:It's on a straight path. No advantage gained. This is stupid.
Wrong. If everyone else is following the rules and running in a small congested area, then going out of that area to get more space is an advantage.
Not if you're off balance trying to stay in....
Space Ghost wrote:
Multiple reasons why the whole situation is stupid.
1. No measurable advantage gained.
2. No intent to gain advantage.
DQ infractions should involve one or the other or both.
Additionally, no other sport requires you to FORFEIT the contest because of the most minor rules infraction. You go over the line in gymnastics, you get docked points, you don't get DQ'd. In tennis, you lose a point, not the match. Etc. A football team doesn't lose a game if a lineman jumps offsides.
Additionally, this was a qualifying heat. The infraction played absolutely zero role in her placing top 3. The officials should have leeway to determine that the infraction was of no consequence so what's the harm and advancing her. Hell, sometimes they advance someone to final who got knocked down and didn't place high enough.
Additionally, the way this water pit was laid out, the pack spreads out for the pit, then collapses back to lane one at the corner, where Quigley stepped on the line. There may not have been contact, but there were people collapsing down on her. She moved to the inside in response.
A sane system would allow the head referee to say "no intent, no effect on the race = no penalty."
Bingo. Judges need to use discretion. And there needs to be a rail there, that's just poor facility management.
USAKarma wrote:
Wrong. If everyone else is following the rules and running in a small congested area, then going out of that area to get more space is an advantage.
Wrong. Not if you're cut-off like Quigley clearly was. Kenyan came down to the line without being clear. In retrospect Quigley should have held her ground and if heels got clipped and the Kenyan went down, so be it.
Did anyone else have the two inside step rule in college? That you had to have more than one step inside the line/rail to be penalized?
A single footfall inside is really not an advantage.
yjhkjhb wrote:
Wrong. Not if you're cut-off like Quigley clearly was. Kenyan came down to the line without being clear. In retrospect Quigley should have held her ground and if heels got clipped and the Kenyan went down, so be it.
Exactly. They're essentially forcing athletes to choose between falling or getting disqualified if they're not going to pay attention to section 4 (a) of the rule:
4. An athlete shall not be disqualified if he
(a) is pushed or forced by another person to step or run outside
his lane or on or inside the kerb or line marking the applicable
border
USAkarma wrote:
If everyone is congested staying in the lines and someone goes out of the line because there's more room that's an advantage. She doesn't get to play by a different set of rules than everyone else.
Why not?! She is a blue-eyed, blonde woman from America! That should count for something!
Gid E Up wrote:
The USATF not appealing this is a travesty.
People are more upset about Quigley's DQ than they are about unarmed people getting shot and killed by police officers. In those situations, a common response on here is, "If you don't want to get shot, follow the rules. It's that simple."
I don't see why the response should be any different in this case.
Does anybody have a good video shot of the whole sequence? I have seen various screenshots and the Letsrun gif. I'd like to see the whole thing to evaluate if I think the Kenyan came over on her. I did not see that when I watched it originally and I can't see it on the stills and short clips I've seen. Honestly when I saw it live it looked like Quigley got off balance coming out of the water jump and never regained her equilibrium.
yjhkjhb wrote:
Wrong. Not if you're cut-off like Quigley clearly was. Kenyan came down to the line without being clear. In retrospect Quigley should have held her ground and if heels got clipped and the Kenyan went down, so be it.
Two thoughts - 1) There has to be a rail. You are asking for negligence if there is not one. Not having a rail is like a major league baseball park with foul poles that end 5-feet above the top of fence.
2) Athletes have to take over the USTAF. For that group not to file a protest for her is also negligence. Nike is the big boy in the room. They could insist on more representation by active athletes and it would be done.
Track does these pointless gotcha DQs. Obviously, if he had not done that she still would have qualified. The judging should be like soccer, if in the referee's view the infraction matters then you call it. Otherwise, let it go.
Although in fairness, this has been better than Rio, which was absurd.
Stupid rule and application of it. In the final steeplechase heat a girl in the back of the pack fell over the water jump hurdle at the 1:35 mark and had to desperately keep her feet and hands off the line while her knees were on the ground.
The runners so left or right so often off that hurdle, without intention or obvious beforehand to anyone next to them. There needs to be more room and a more sensible design of those water pits and entrance/exit from them, instead of slapped in there as mostly an annoyance.
Swimming changed the Lochte Rule a few weeks ago after an absurd DQ in the women's 400 IM at trials that took Ella Eastin off the national team. The shot put rule that claimed Crouser is apparently going to be altered. Sensibility needed here also.
Mr. Obvious wrote:
Does anybody have a good video shot of the whole sequence? I have seen various screenshots and the Letsrun gif. I'd like to see the whole thing to evaluate if I think the Kenyan came over on her. I did not see that when I watched it originally and I can't see it on the stills and short clips I've seen.
Honestly when I saw it live it looked like Quigley got off balance coming out of the water jump and never regained her equilibrium.
I have the full sequence. I'll certainly say it doesn't look like she was violently forced in or anything. I could email it to you privately if you like but can't put it up on youtube due to copyright claims. They have algorithms that will immediately block it. Email me at
robertjohnson@letsrun.comAnother poster said he or she wasn't convinced she stepped on the line on the curve as the overhead stills shown on twitter might be a shadow. While I thought she probably did step on it, I agreed with his or her logic that it might be true and as the OJ trial taught us, "If it might be true, you don't DQ."
However, I've enhanced the video of her on the turn in slow mo and magnified and think it is clear she did touch the line on the turn.
Take a look for yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x41fPUtNfTwHowever, to me, we need to think how absurd these rules are. There are dopers competing. There are people with internal testes competing in the women's division. And yet we are going to DQ someone in a nearly 2 mile race for that??
I think we are going to update our article.Considering how liberal the world has become, in honor of Bill Clinton who argued "It depends on what your advantage of is is", I think it should be argued that it depends on what your definition of "material advantage"is. I'd argue Is 1/16th of an inch isn't a material advantag in a nearly two mile race. So you argue, yes there wasn't big contact but she was forced inside by the laws of geometry and people having to take a hard left. So people were by rule amost forced to cut in without the proper advantage so she went inside and nicked the line.
Can't see the feet because of the cropping.
rojo wrote:
However, I've enhanced the video of her on the turn in slow mo and magnified and think it is clear she did touch the line on the turn.
Take a look for yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x41fPUtNfTw
Doesn't look at all like she was forced off the track from that, though.
rojo wrote:
However, I've enhanced the video of her on the turn in slow mo and magnified and think it is clear she did touch the line on the turn.
Take a look for yourself.
So you argue, yes there wasn't big contact but she was forced inside by the laws of geometry and people having to take a hard left. So people were by rule amost forced to cut in without the proper advantage so she went inside and nicked the line.
Seriously, why don't they put up a plexiglass fence so going out of bounds is not even possible? The rule is a farce.