He is running for BYU, that article is about his 5k record beating ed eyestone's record etc. He ran unattached at stanford because it is school policy not to compete on sundays. so he ran unattached etc.
happy valley wrote:
He ran unattached at stanford because it is school policy not to compete on sundays. so he ran unattached etc.
Not much of a Mormon, is he?
Just an unattached Mormon.
duh... wrote:
Just an unattached Mormon.
A Mitt Romney, eh?
He is listed in the NCAA rankings now with his time from Stanford and as BYU:
2 Josh Rohatinsky SR BYU 27:55.86 W 04-29
Can you have it both ways?
? wrote:
He is listed in the NCAA rankings now with his time from Stanford and as BYU:
2 Josh Rohatinsky SR BYU 27:55.86 W 04-29
Can you have it both ways?
interesting.
your comments on the front page are wrong. he broke eyestones 5k record at the cardinal meet but ran unnattached when he ran the 10k at peyton jordan invite. just wanted to let you know.
Is Rohatinsky actually a Mormon?
yes
Wejo,
This issue comes up often during March Madness when BYU makes the tourney- the school simply won't sanction competition on Sunday. It can cause some scheduling nightmares for the Committee. Since he was competing on Sunday, Rohatinsky had to pay his own way to get to the meet and he wouldn't be allowed to wear a BYU jersey.
It doesn't necessarily make him a "bad" Mormon, either. There are plenty of Mormons that work on Sundays, the most visible being Steve Young and the other professional football players. If your livlihood depends on you working on Sundays (surgeon, police officer, etc), nobody objects.
I'm not sure how it works that his 10k time counts for an NCAA qualifier since he was running unattached, however... maybe someone could shed some light on that.
happy valley wrote:
"He ran unattached at Stanford because it is school policy not to compete on Sundays. So he ran unattached etc."
So that begs the question, what is the NCAA rule on this. It was not a mistake for him to register as an unattached athelete, as he was not sanctioned by his university or team to be competing at the meet. That means he took the time to get an unattached runner account on direct athletics so that he could get in the meet. Did he pay his own way? Was Ed there watching? I know that Josh was in uniform, but he was originally registered and listed as an unattached runner, then it was apparently changed after the fact.
Josh was NOT wearing a BYU uniform in the 10,000m
I would assume the NCAA would make allowances for religious reasons...
Oh, my mistake, I thought he had one on in his Flocast interview. If not then there is no way it(the time) should have been put on the national list. There will be coaches who question it, especially if you have an athlete on the bubble. The rule is in place to insure that the school is sure of it's intent to compete the athlete at that meet, which implies that the school is aware that eligibility is being used. For instance, a school can compete a redshirt athlete unattached in a meet, but if the athlete produces a great mark, the school can't change it's mind and say, "Oh we meant to have them in uniform," and then try to enter that mark as a regional or national mark on the list, it won't fly. I don't think the committee that will meet after the regional meets end, will accept the mark if anyone protests the circumstances of the mark.
byunat. wrote:
Josh was NOT wearing a BYU uniform in the 10,000m
the rulebook clearly states that athletes must compete in school issued attire in order for them to compete for the school.
Josh was NOT wearing a BYU uniform in the 10,000m
He WAS!! in BYU uniform, white with blue lettering. check flocasts and you will see for yourself. 100% garuntee he was in uniform.
byunat. wrote:
Josh was NOT wearing a BYU uniform in the 10,000m
Josh was wearing his BYU singlet inside out, with the BYU lettering/logo not at all visible.
Ravager71 wrote:
happy valley wrote:"He ran unattached at Stanford because it is school policy not to compete on Sundays. So he ran unattached etc."
So that begs the question, what is the NCAA rule on this. It was not a mistake for him to register as an unattached athelete, as he was not sanctioned by his university or team to be competing at the meet. That means he took the time to get an unattached runner account on direct athletics so that he could get in the meet. Did he pay his own way? Was Ed there watching? I know that Josh was in uniform, but he was originally registered and listed as an unattached runner, then it was apparently changed after the fact.
It doesn't beg the question. It raises the question. Begging the question is a logical fallacy where one presents an argument as true without any evidence other than the argument itself.