Vinny strikes again

It seems that the crybabies on this board (you included) might offer to put on these Regional Meets. Unlikely, because you can probably count your school's track fans on the fingers on your hands.

Anyone who has such a paranoid outlook usually comes of it from personal practices (look into the mirror).

Lananna, along with Pat Henry, is one of the few visionaries in the sport. I have never seen a "winner" in sport who isn't visionary, passionate and fierce. Crybabies whine on LR -- guys like Lananna create and produce.

Yeah all those academic scholarships in lieu of athletic scholarships allowing Vinnie Lananna to circumvent Title IX and have 35-40 distance guys on Stanford's or Oregon's roster. His wife worked in Stanford's grant office.

Sure, sure, it's not shady at all. I assume you are one of those entitled Lananna runners who has a sense of entitlement and is Ok with being a heater.

That's one of the problems with USA track and field, they have a low bar for integrity.

And I'll assume that you have to resort to attacking grammar and making vague non-specific arguments not related, and most importantly not relevant, to the topic or the points that myself (and other posters) have brought up ("but lets not get into that"-fag) And If by jealousy you mean feeling cheated as a fan, than you're correct. but obviously reading comprehension isn't your strong suit either. And my day is going great. Go F5ck yourself.

Protest was filed over an incident approx 100-150m from the finish in which the Oregon runner claims his shoe became dislodged.

Photos at the finish clearly show the shoe on the runners foot.

Runner later claims that the shoe "slipped back on". (From an article posted to LetsRun.com home page)

Video of the race shows no such incident.

The officials that advanced the runner were Oregon officials.

The supposed impedence by BYU in the last few meters was not part of the protest and as such not part of this discussion.

Furthermore the advanced runner was then placed in a middle lane, contravening normal regulations.

The rules were not followed by the officials. Vin can do what he likes, but in the end the result is the outcome of poor oversight and meet management. The blame firmly rests with them for the outcome, but this doesn't negate the fact that Vin acted in an inappropriate manner.

First off, I am going to assume that all the whiny posters on this thread are one (perhaps two) jealous and disgruntled individuals. Comments that follow show the kind of person(s) we are hearing from:

"Protest was filed over an incident approx 100-150m from the finish in which the Oregon runner claims his shoe became dislodged." Show any of us where the runner claimed anything about a dislodged shoe. That wasn't the complaint of the athete so stop making up crap.

"Photos at the finish clearly show the shoe on the runners foot." Do the photos show the back of the runner's foot? Answer is no, so no one of us can assume anything about the damage done to the runner's foot. So stop making up crap.

"Runner later claims that the shoe "slipped back on". (From an article posted to LetsRun.com home page)". Show us where the runner (not a LR poster) ever claimed this. So stop making up crap.

"Video of the race shows no such incident." Give us the link to your video. Stop making up crap.

"he officials that advanced the runner were Oregon officials." Who were the officials names (could one have been named Chaplin?) ...stop making up crap.

The supposed impedence by BYU in the last few meters was "not part of the protest and as such not part of this discussion." Correct...Lananna did not protest the action of the BYU runner.

"Furthermore the advanced runner was then placed in a middle lane, contravening normal regulations." Please cite the regulation regarding a Regional championship seeding and stop making up crap.

"The rules were not followed by the officials. Vin can do what he likes, but in the end the result is the outcome of poor oversight and meet management. The blame firmly rests with them for the outcome, but this doesn't negate the fact that Vin acted in an inappropriate manner." Meet management was primarily Michael Reilly, a guy respected enough that he will be a main cog for the London Olympics. Please explain how Vin acted in an inappropriate manner...and yes, stop making up crap.

How is losing a shoe grounds for advancement? Wouldn't that just be deemed a natural part of racing? I've seen plenty of shoes lost in racing and never before seen someone get advanced because of it.

There has to have been some kind of impeding incident doesn't there? I would love to see a video of this race so we don't have to form opinions based on both sides heresay.

"The Facts" in his post claims to have watched a video of the race. I have asked him to put up or shut up. Not the first time a LR poster has stooped to lying. I do expect that when a video shows up, it will show a pretty egregious impediment (nothing to do with a missing shoe) taking place on the corner about 120 meters from the race finish.

Willy Nilly wrote:

It seems that the crybabies on this board (you included) might offer to put on these Regional Meets. Unlikely, because you can probably count your school's track fans on the fingers on your hands.

Anyone who has such a paranoid outlook usually comes of it from personal practices (look into the mirror).

Lananna, along with Pat Henry, is one of the few visionaries in the sport. I have never seen a "winner" in sport who isn't visionary, passionate and fierce. Crybabies whine on LR -- guys like Lananna create and produce.

Pat Henry was one of the most vocally upset coaches about this situation, as he had a runner in the 9-man 800m heat, so was the UT coach who did put on this meet last year without biased officials. I know the Sac St coach had an athlete involved and they have put on plenty of heavily attended NCAA and Olympic Trials without bias...just because you are a visionary doesn't mean you have to be a tyrant.

Seriously...this whole thing will be done when someone posts the video of the race and everyone sees that the Oregon runner was not impeded at all until those final few strides with the BYU runner...so whoever has it...post it...then we will all be able to move on and not have to listen to the Oregon defenders BS rhetoric anymore.

Or...not have to listen to the typical Vin haters BS rhetoric any more. I'm confident (I was there to watch it) of what the video will show on the North curve. At least one hater has already said he saw the "non-existent" video, but won't link us to it--just shows what liars his ilk are.

Folks, remember all the bitching about the Regionals last year? Funny, how the story changes over the course of a year. Pat Henry and Vin are good friends and Henry has all the respect in the world for Vin. I seriously doubt he was fuming over Vin exercising his right to file a legitimate protest. It seems the only "excited" ones are a few hater LR posters.

And what about all the academic schollies that were brought up? That sounds way worse than a lane violation.

I'm still waiting to learn what is the problem with bringing academic scholars onto the team. For instance, why would a coach waste a limited athletic scholarship on a kid like Jordan Hasay who was a near 5.0 high school student and could pay her way with academic scholarships? I am assuming that Jordan is on academic, but could be wrong. I also know for a fact that several other Oregon kids were straight A high school students with very high SAT scores...why wouldn't they accept full or partial academic scholarships, supplementing them with partial athletic scholarships, as needed? From what I know, Vin is no fool, the NCAA allows academic scholars to compete, and Oregon has a history of lots of academic honors for members of its track team (primarily its distance type runners). Please explain the problem -- other than hate/jealousy for Oregon?

who cares now - "the shoe losing runner" did not advance, and now the officials that made that weak decision should be passed over the next time they are looking for meet officials. this will probably make a NCAA rule that the meet officials can't be a puppet of the hosting head coach

Mucho Tacos wrote:

I'm still waiting to learn what is the problem with bringing academic scholars onto the team. For instance, why would a coach waste a limited athletic scholarship on a kid like Jordan Hasay who was a near 5.0 high school student and could pay her way with academic scholarships? I am assuming that Jordan is on academic, but could be wrong. I also know for a fact that several other Oregon kids were straight A high school students with very high SAT scores...why wouldn't they accept full or partial academic scholarships, supplementing them with partial athletic scholarships, as needed? From what I know, Vin is no fool, the NCAA allows academic scholars to compete, and Oregon has a history of lots of academic honors for members of its track team (primarily its distance type runners). Please explain the problem -- other than hate/jealousy for Oregon?

You are correct in that an athlete on an academic scholarship can compete; however there are NCAA rules that apply here. If a coach is recruiting an athlete and then they are put on an academic scholarship, that would count towards their maximum allowable number of scholarships (12.6 for men, 18 for women).

Just think about this logically. Many runners are very good students and could therefore be eligible for academic scholarships. A coach could work with the admissions office and every good student he recruits he could tell them to give them an academic scholarship. Therefore a coach could have dozens of recruitable kids on scholarship and be at a huge advantage. That is why this is not allowed by NCAA rules, although some schools still manage to get away with it. At my school, our compliance officer watched this very closely, at others they may look the other way.

misplaced wrote: Its obvious you have a clear bias toward oregonr, as does anyone defending lananna here.

That pretty much sums it up, I guess. You assume that anyone who disagrees with you automatically has a "clear bias." Not much point in arguing with you then, since you're not actually willing to listen to any other opinions.

I'm not even from the U.S., and have never even visited Oregon, but I find the level of petty jealousy and sniping to be ridiculous.

Willy Nilly wrote:

It seems that the crybabies on this board (you included) might offer to put on these Regional Meets. Unlikely, because you can probably count your school's track fans on the fingers on your hands.

Anyone who has such a paranoid outlook usually comes of it from personal practices (look into the mirror).

Lananna, along with Pat Henry, is one of the few visionaries in the sport. I have never seen a "winner" in sport who isn't visionary, passionate and fierce. Crybabies whine on LR -- guys like Lananna create and produce.

You can ad hominem all you want. You can say we have no right to criticize Vin because he's done more for track than we have. He has, and no denying it, but that doesn't give him the right to abuse the rules, or to be criticized for doing so. (Ever criticized a President for something he did? Of course you have.)

All I said was: if what the other poster said is true, it confirms the anti-Vin sentiment. That's not really debatable. Someone post the video and we'll see who is right. If there was legitimate contact or whatever, I'll admit to being wrong.

Compare the NCAA D1 manual, quoted below, to what was posted by Rules Follower. He's quick enough to blast Vin; is he just as quick to admit his error and bias?NCAA Division I Manual15.5.3.2.1 Exceptions.15.5.3.2.1.1 Academic Honor Awards. Academic honor awards that are part of an institution’snormal arrangements for academic scholarships, based solely on the recipient’s high school record andawarded independently of athletics interests and in amounts consistent with the pattern of all suchawards made by the institution, are exempt from an institution’s equivalency computation, providedthe recipient was ranked in the upper 10 percent of the high school graduating class or achieved a corecoursegrade-point average of at least 3.500 (based on a maximum of 4.000) or a minimum ACT sumscore of 105 or a minimum SAT score of 1200. (Adopted: 1/12/99 effective 8/1/99)15.5.3.2.1.1.1 Additional Requirements. The following additional requirements shall bemet: (Adopted: 1/12/99 effective 8/1/99)(a) The awards may include additional, nonacademic criteria (e.g., interviews, essays, needanalysis), provided the additional criteria are not based on athletics ability, participation orinterests, and the awards are consistent with the pattern of all such awards provided to allstudents;(b) No quota of awards shall be designated for student-athletes;(c) Athletics participation shall not be required before or after collegiate enrollment;(d) No athletics department staff member shall be involved in designating the recipients of suchawards;(e) Any additional criteria shall not include athletics ability, participation or interests; and(f ) There must be on file in the office of the director of athletics certification by the financial aiddirector or the chair of the financial aid committee that such awards are part of the institution’snormal arrangements for academic scholarships, awarded independently of athleticsability, participation and interests and in amounts consistent with the pattern of all suchawards made by the institution.

I started this thread and haven't posted since. I really don't know how the UO defenders can't see that Vinny B has guys advance on technicalities all the time.

Jon Riley lost his shoe in the 5k prelim at the 2000 Trials, advanced.

Grant Robison was advanced to either the semi or the final at the 2004 trials

AJ Acosta was advanced at the 2008 trials.

This years 800m guy was advanced.

I know a coach who was told by Vinny not to file a protest when his runner was pushed off the track indoors in the mile prelim back in the early 2000s, "it's the unfortunate part of racing." The coach did file the protest and it was nearly denied until Harry Groves heard of the situation and talked to a few people. Runner was advanced.

The point being, only certain coached can get their protests read and approved and THAT is the biggest travesty.

To "if you really wanted to know", did you even read my post? Did you even try to put two and two together and come up with four?

First of all, where did I blast Vin? Can't find it can you? I posted a general statement for people that were interested. I have no idea if Vin does anything wrong in terms of academic scholarships.

As far as interpreting the rules, maybe you should leave that to the compliance people since you clearly don't get it. I do appreciate however posting the link so I can show more clearly what I was talking about, since I will admit I was just generalizing and didn't bother to post the actual rules.

-First of all, it says "awarded INDEPENDENTLY of athletics interests."

-In section B it says no quota of awards shall be designated for student-athletes.

-In section C it says athletics participation shall not be required before or after collegiate enrollment.

-In section D it says no athletics department staff member shall be involved in designating the recipients of such

awards.

-Lastly, in section E it says any additional criteria shall not include athletics ability, participation or interests.

Do you understand why all these rules were put in place? Obviously not. If they weren't, the system would get abused, just like in the example I stated about a coach working with the admissions office. Once the coach gets involved, or the admissions office "saves" a certain amount of academic scholarships for student-athletes, or athletics participation is "understood" by all involved, that is where the compliance issue comes in.

As I stated, our compliance officer at my school was very dilligent in following all of these rules and made sure the coaches were not getting special favors from the admissions office.

Was that really difficult to comprehened, especially since you were the one to actually post the rules.

And one more time, where did I blast Vin or show any bias?