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.
Yeah, exactly. Whether Hocker would have gotten by eventually or not, at the moment of the infraction he was in big trouble. He was outside of a qualifying position and boxed in behind a guy who was starting to move backwards. That's really unfortunate, but it's also the risk you take letting yourself get boxed in.
Pulling yourself past the guy is exactly the situation the rules are designed to prevent: you can't push your way into a final your legs and tactics weren't good enough to make. "No worries if you get boxed in; if you're faster than the guy in front of you, just push your way through." It's just the worst possible incentive.
Sucks not to have Hocker in the final though. It really was partially bad luck; if he had chosen another lane, there might have been no need to push past at all. A good reminder of why last year's final was so special: it's not common to have all the best guys there at once all having their best day.
We need Farken. We need to get him on the record calling for Hocker's reinstatement. If the guy who was supposedly wronged says no foul, then the case falls apart.
Cole Hocker barely taps the guy on the chest and loses his place in the finals, but Shacarri can slam her boyfriend repeatedly into a concrete pillar and is allowed to compete in the final?!?
This post was edited 48 seconds after it was posted.
Cole Hocker barely taps the guy on the chest and loses his place in the finals, but Shacarri can slam her boyfriend repeatedly into a concrete pillar and is allowed to compete in the final?!?
Richardson didn't impede the forward progress of the boyfriend, who was moving toward the concrete pillar to begin with.
Just woke up. It didn't look awful from the video on the front page.. and then I watched the full replay. Oh man. That was egregious. Absolutely no excuse for that. Hopefully he learns from this in the future, and maybe it will give him an extra boost for the 5k.
Too many bodies on the track leads to this stuff. Fifteen runners in the heats is especially ridiculous. Go back to the old competition format with more heats and 10 or fewer runners in each race. Hell, there used to be only nine in the final.
I absolutely hate to see Hocker gone, but that was a pretty egregious move.
It just wasn't. Like what is wrong with you people? He literally just snuck around him, this DQ is so bad. It's bad for the sport and it's blatantly wrong.
He very clearly made contact with the guy he cut off and completely killed his momentum. It seems pretty textbook. I’d be ok with changing the rules to allow those kinds of moves, but I think people need to understand that if moves like that are allowed, there are going to be a ton of nasty falls where half the field gets wiped out in the last 100m.
Personally, I’m ok with that because it incentivizes people to run from the front/push the pace to avoid the jostling, but I think the first time half the field got wiped out because someone tried to cut like that, there would be SO much outrage.
Hocker using his slippery weasel method to try to wriggle through traffic, without having to run wide. Usually gets away with the "argie bargie" cause he's a little dude. Not this time I guess.