Mr. Obvious wrote:
Doesn't look at all like she was forced off the track from that, though.
I agree but we are talking about 1/16th of an inch. It's an absurd rule.
She was forced to worry about simply by the way the turn is set up.
So stupid.
Mr. Obvious wrote:
Doesn't look at all like she was forced off the track from that, though.
I agree but we are talking about 1/16th of an inch. It's an absurd rule.
She was forced to worry about simply by the way the turn is set up.
So stupid.
rojo wrote:
Mr. Obvious wrote:Doesn't look at all like she was forced off the track from that, though.
I agree but we are talking about 1/16th of an inch. It's an absurd rule.
She was forced to worry about simply by the way the turn is set up.
So stupid.
Didn't Mo Farah do the same thing in the 10K?
And I agree, there should be a rail or something. It didn't look like Quigley had a lot of room on the inside so it wasn't entirely her fault, although you do really need to focus on where you are stepping with turns like that.
You're all sitting here saying you want extremely subjective rulings going into intent (impossible to judge) and real or perceived advantages by the officials.
Yet you've all been in here for years bitching and moaning about IAAF and Olympic's favoring certain athletes and being super corrupt.
So you're all begging for these officials you hate to get more subjective power to pick and choose the winners they want. You think Makwala was banned to help van Niekerk, what do you think will happen when they start DQ'ing people for intent? They'll let them run then just DQ anyone in front of the favorites.
Just remember this is what you're begging for right now just because a hot girl didn't win
Millennial Y wrote:
I demand a walk of atonement, the for her to be re-instated in the finals.
This is a win-win situation for everyone.
I find it amazing that DQ's happen all the time like this, but when an attractive model / steeplechaser gets DQ'd like this, it's a 164 post thread within a couple hours time.
Make that 165.
People need to be looking at Kirui's foot placement just before Quigley stepped on the line. Kirui had moved to the inside half of the inside lane and her foot placement for those strides forced Quigley to shift inward to maintain balance. Quigley was "forced" to move into the line or tangle with Kirui's inside leg.
How hard is it to simply stay in the lane? DQ people who try to shortcut.
rojo wrote:
Mr. Obvious wrote:Doesn't look at all like she was forced off the track from that, though.
I agree but we are talking about 1/16th of an inch. It's an absurd rule.
She was forced to worry about simply by the way the turn is set up.
So stupid.
The boundaries of the track have to be somewhere.
She clearly can't be allowed to run all of her steps 1/16th of an inch inside the curve. We'd then be changing the size of the track.
So what is your alternative, some sort of formula combinining number of steps and distance inside the boundry?
And yes, there should be a rail, but if there isn't, the athlete needs to be careful near the curve.
norphxc wrote:
The boundaries of the track have to be somewhere.
She clearly can't be allowed to run all of her steps 1/16th of an inch inside the curve. We'd then be changing the size of the track.
So what is your alternative, some sort of formula combinining number of steps and distance inside the boundry?
And yes, there should be a rail, but if there isn't, the athlete needs to be careful near the curve.
but there is no curve. She stepped on a straight line.
Chubby Checkers wrote:
Seriously, why don't they put up a plexiglass fence so going out of bounds is not even possible? The rule is a farce.
Everyone acting like this is the only lane violation/DQ that has happened so far. I saw multiple men dq'd in the 200m qualifications (one a medal contender - unlike quigley) and others throughout competition (although the events escape me now). They've been strict about stepping on the line around the turns - be a professional and make a conscious effort not to do so.
Macdaddy wrote:
Chubby Checkers wrote:Seriously, why don't they put up a plexiglass fence so going out of bounds is not even possible? The rule is a farce.
Everyone acting like this is the only lane violation/DQ that has happened so far. I saw multiple men dq'd in the 200m qualifications (one a medal contender - unlike quigley) and others throughout competition (although the events escape me now). They've been strict about stepping on the line around the turns - be a professional and make a conscious effort not to do so.
except in the DQs you referenced the athletes had a lane all to themselves with nobody interfering with them. in the steeple, you don't have your own lane and you have people elbowing you and cutting you off. it's not a fair comparison. how hard is it to put up a temporary barrier on the curved portion after the water barrier?
It does not matter how many times you step on the line. Why do so many people think this? Is it some kind of high school league rule?
It does matter if it's on the straight or the curve. Straight, no advantage, no foul. Curve, not forced, foul. It's not complicated.
rojo wrote:
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.
It's not a 1/16th of an advantage though. Other athletes are much further inside to make sure they aren't hitting the lines.
Honestly I like Quigley but there's no excuse for giving the referees a reason to DQ you.
and notice how the cone is out of position! The orange cone should be covering the white line and it is not. grounds for a protest there too. However, the time limit for Quigley or coach to file a protest is long past.
Macdaddy wrote:
Chubby Checkers wrote:Seriously, why don't they put up a plexiglass fence so going out of bounds is not even possible? The rule is a farce.
Everyone acting like this is the only lane violation/DQ that has happened so far. I saw multiple men dq'd in the 200m qualifications (one a medal contender - unlike quigley) and others throughout competition (although the events escape me now). They've been strict about stepping on the line around the turns - be a professional and make a conscious effort not to do so.
I'm assuming you have never run a steeple. This DQ is BS bc there is no advantage gained by her stepping ON the line (mind you, not over)
you CANNOT compare this to a race like a 200m, where each athlete has their own lane. The steeplechase and the 5k/10k are completely different. That being said, it's unfair to DQ her and NOT Mo Farrah
gdm wrote:
but there is no curve. She stepped on a straight line.
She stepped on the line more than once. One was on the curve.
If the only step on the line was on the straight just after coming off the water pit, I think it is likely she would not have been DQ'ed.
USAkarma wrote:
If you're comparing Mo being shoved to someone voluntarily running on the line then you're probably retarded and should kill yourself to preserve the gene pool
Mo was not shoved.
Bad Wigins wrote:
It does not matter how many times you step on the line. Why do so many people think this? Is it some kind of high school league rule?
It does matter if it's on the straight or the curve. Straight, no advantage, no foul. Curve, not forced, foul. It's not complicated.
Years ago there was a multiple step rule. That may must have changed.
But I always saw that explained in 400m races on TV at the pro level.
As far as straight or curve, Robby Andrews went inside the rail at the 1500 semis last year on the straight and was DQed.
They need a two part judgement.
One that is objective - went over the line or not.
Then a subjective judge to determine if there was an advantage gained.
Quigley gained no advantage. There should be no foul.
They need to be human about these things.
Even though it was a straight, Andrews did gain an advantage because he couldn't pass without going over the rail.
Quigley might not have gained an advantage, but she does seem in the still shot to be trying to run on the inside of the runner in front of her. There wasn't any room, so she didn't gain an advantage, but it sure seems like she was trying to squeeze into there. I would say that she gained no advantage, but the problem with touching the line on a curve versus the straight is that you theoretically save distance by hugging the line on the curve. So even if she doesn't pass her with an obvious advantage, the rule is in place to make sure people aren't saving distance by abusing the line.
looked pretty minor wrote:
How was that more egregious than Farah stepping over the line?
And can someone explain why there is no rail inside the track on water barrier cut-ins?
They do it purposely knowing athletes will step on/over the line then they can selectively decide who to disqualify. Its called "British Hospitality".