I'm probably missing something, but why is the South Africa 4x4 relay being allowed to advance without a finishing time? Is that the standard procedure when a team gets knocked over? Would the appeal have had the same outcome if it was an individual race?
Yup. Otherwise, we could have a lesser runner take out a Rudisha type runner in the early heats in order to improve the medal chances for his country.
Oh, I suppose that makes sense. Thanks for the response!
Lucky they have a 9-lane track, otherwise South Africe would be watching.
The team that knocked them out was DQ'ed because of their actions. The deprived RSA of any opportunity to compete and it was no fault of RSA at all. Appropriate decision in my mind. The IAAF has been more 'generous' in this regard compared with their policy back in, say, 1972 when Ryun was tripped and eliminated when they could easily have added him to the next round.
Here, they have the advantage of having a ninth lane. The do get the unenviable position of Lane, which they have to run for three turns.
It took a while to do because the only group that can add them is the Jury of Appeals, which is the group that made the decision. [Since they were DNF, which is not surprising because the RSA guy was pretty substantially hammered.]
It's happened before, just like Nixon Chepseba being advanced after being impeded in the 1500.
NBC probably raised a stink too because they want to show the handicapper one more time.
Ahhh.. so now he is handicapped? Which is it? He either has an advantage or he is handicapped. He cannot be both now, can he?
lanes wrote:
Lucky they have a 9-lane track, otherwise South Africe would be watching.
That's a major point.
They couldn't do this if there was a normal 8 lane track.
In that case, SA would be SOL.
26mi235 wrote:
Since they were DNF, which is not surprising because the RSA guy was pretty substantially hammered.
If the guy was that drunk it was probably his fault he fell over. SA shouldn't be in the final.
I'm surprised that they were advanced in spite of not finishing the heat. It did look like the guy who went down was injured pretty badly, though. He might not be ready to go for the final.
I just re-watched the Kenyan DQ/ SA fall.
I think it was VERY generous. They Kenyan definitely moved out in front of the South African and they subsequently both went down. But it wasn't egregious. The Kenyan was clear in front, just not the full stride. They enforced this rule to the letter, which they rarely do. Plus the Kenyan wasn't cutting in, he was moving out. I don't think he was passing on the inside, then moving out. The best I can tell is that the Kenyan was being passed, didn't see the South African coming up on his outside when he moved out.
If you run up the back of someone and fall that doesn't warrant an automatic berth in the final in my opinion.
This is the rule from the IAAF competition rule book:
Any competing athlete who jostles or obstructs another athlete, so as to impede his progress, shall be liable to disqualification from that event. The Referee shall have the authority to order the race to be reheld excluding any disqualified athlete or, in the case of a preliminary round, to permit any athlete(s) seriously affected by jostling or
obstruction (other than any disqualified athlete), to compete in a subsequent round of the event. Normally, such an athlete should have completed the event with bona fide effort.
The move by the Kenyan athlete was pretty severe and came out of nowhere. I have no idea what he was thinking he had no room to move clear to the outside and he impeded the RSA athlete and in fact caused him to fall and dislocate his shoulder. This does not seem generous to me, but rather within the guidelines of the rules you were kind enough to post for us all to read. The RSA athlete did not complete the event, but the rule only says normally, and he was severely injured.