Relay team DQ'd

Was the pass out of the zone?

take from this what you will wrote:

Was the pass out of the zone?

was it?

if it was, you look silly arguing your case.

if it wasn't, then you probably won't win and if you do it will take 8 months (see: Bumby DQ) but its worth raising the point.

I'm assuming this is referencing the DMR at the JDL fast track where a team that qualified for NCAAs was DQd. The race replay clearly showed it to be out of the zone (before the zone i believe) and it's worthy of a DQ.

I think it's admirable that the official had the guts to make the DQ. It would be so easy to look the other way.

Should you try to get off on a technicality? No. You are an educator. Life is full of ups and downs. Do you want to teach people it's ok to cheat on your taxes if you can get away with it? No, you don't.

If the exchange really was out of the zone then I don't see how to fight the DQ.

For what it's worth, an exchange out of the zone for a DMR, or almost any really, never gives a team an advantage.

In fact it usually hurts them.

The judge is not required to cal the DQ and could let it go.

Some judges love ruining a good moment for the athletes.

How is cheating "a good moment for the athletes"?

Winning is a good moment.

Breaking the rules and cheating isn't the same thing.

If you wear different shorts than your teammate then you can be DQed.

Would you consider that cheating?

What about wearing a string bracelet and getting DQed.

Is that cheating?

Star wrote:

What about wearing a string bracelet and getting DQed.

Is that cheating?

Never an infraction in NCAA and now no longer an infraction in high school.

But the concept is that you can get DQed for something that does not give you a competitive advantage.

Do you call that cheating?

I am not saying they should not be DQed.

I just wouldn't refer to them as cheaters.

Another example.

Someone doesn't check in but they run the race and win but are subsequently DQed.

Cheater?

it might be too late

Assuming we are talking NCAA rules here? If so...

Correct order of events:

1. Umpire witnesses incident.

2. Umpire raises flag to indicate to Head Umpire he has something to report.

3. Umpire puts into writing what he/she saw and gives it to Head Umpire.

4. Head Umpire relays this information to Referee.

5. Referee decides whether or not a violation has taken place. In this case it sounds as though the referee ruled the DQ.

6. Results are posted/announced and DQ ruling is made public for the first time.

7. Coach of DQ'd team has 15 minutes to file a protest regarding the DQ. 8. Protest is filed with the referee through the process outlined by the conference manual (often it is required to be put into writing).

9. Referee rules on protest (in this case it sounds as though the ruling was upheld).

10. IF a jury of appeals has been established for the meet the coach may then appeal the ruling to them.

11. Jury of appeals then either upholds referee's ruling or overturns it.

It does sound like there potentially were administrative errors in the process as the OP describes it (no yellow flag raised & umpire report not provided in writing). However the DQ doesn't actually happen if/when a yellow flag is raised - it happens when the referee rules on the umpire's observation.

From there it sounds like some type of protest/appeal was allowed where you were give the opportunity to argue that the ruling was incorrect. Once the referee rules on a protest (assuming no jury of appeals) or the jury of appeals rules on an appeal there is no further opportunity to overturn the ruling.

Star wrote:

please cite the rule on this one

The judge is not required to cal the DQ and could let it go.

I've been knocking around this sport since the 1950s and officiated at all levels from JHS to holding a chief officials position at National Champs and at IAAF Invitationals. I never met an official whose mindset included the desire to ruin an athletes day.

Some judges love ruining a good moment for the athletes.

I don't have to cite any rules to say that a judge is making a judgement call.

But I will give an example of how an 800 runner can break before the break line and not be DQed if the athlete is judged to not gain an advantage.

My response was mainly at the accusation of cheating.

I don't think of an exchange error as cheating.

And my coach used to warn us about being careful at the Penn Relays.

Saying the judges sit there watching the lines and exchanges waiting all day for the excitement they get when they can raise the red flag.

Most don't want to mess things up but I truly believe that some get a kick out of the small power trip.

Star wrote:

But I will give an example of how an 800 runner can break before the break line and not be DQed if the athlete is judged to not gain an advantage.

Can you cite which NCAA or IAAF rule clarifies this?

Question is whether OP provided accurate and all information on this issue. Previously noted steps on disqualification is standard procedure. If official did not raise yellow flag, he or she can still submit disqualification (some do this verbally and then follow up with written report, depending on Referee). Appeal process provides opportunity for team to get "second opinion", but usually the appeal process will follow form, especially if more than one official sees violation. If the baton was taken before the zone, obviously that is a violation of the rules, otherwise why have exchange zones.

UMPIRING RELAY EXCHANGES

(USATF Rules 127, 163, 170; NCAA Rules 3-5, 5-5, 5-8; NFHS Rule 5-9 thru 5-13)

(Also see the Best Practices “Umpiring – General” paper)

General rules pertaining to running violations apply -- stepping on or over the lane line, interference, running

in lanes, etc. Reminding athletes of relay rules is preventative officiating and can help prevent infractions.

Each Official Should

• Review the Best Practices “Umpiring – General” paper, and have the specified equipment • Know their assigned area of responsibility in exchange zones and the zone markings • Inspect and remove all old tape marks in the run-up area following each race

Flags

• NCAA & NFHS: Raise and hold a white flag when all runners are ready • NCAA & NFHS: After runners pass, raise a white flag when no violation takes place • All: Raise a yellow flag if runners in your zone are not ready for the start. Raise a yellow flag to signal

potential violations. Report apparent violations to the Head Umpire in writing.

Marks

• USATF: One piece of tape, contrasting color, max 5 x 40cm; allowed only for races in lanes • NCAA: Max of two 2” pieces of tape/suitable material, no wider than width of the lane; allowed only

when using the International Zone • NFHS: As designated by the Games Committee

General The baton must be carried by hand throughout the race and passed, not thrown, to a teammate.

Gloves or substances on the hands are not permitted. A runner may not push or pull a teammate. Team

members may run only one leg of the relay.

Placement of Competitors

For all relays Remind runners of the exchange zone limits & markings, and that they may not step back out

of the zone toward the incoming runner

For exchanges made in lanes: • In the 4x100, 4x200 & other relays with an incoming leg of 200m or less, outgoing runners may start in

the International Zone, no more that 10m outside the exchange zone • In all other relays and legs, outgoing runners must be within the exchange zone

For exchanges not made in lanes, outgoing runners are positioned by officials: • USATF: According to the order of incoming runners 200-meters out (entering the curve) • NCAA & NFHS: According to the order of incoming runners as they exit the last curve • All: Once incoming runners pass these points outgoing runners are set in position and may not move,

regardless of shifts in the incoming runners’ positions. Once inner lanes are clear – when those runners

have departed - remaining outgoing runners may move to the inside.

Baton Exchange

• All: The position of the baton, not the athletes, governs the exchange. The baton must be in sole

possession of the outgoing runner within the 20-meter exchange zone • USATF & NCAA: The passing of the baton commences when the baton is first touched by the

outgoing runner and is completed when it is solely in the possession of the outgoing runner • NFHS: The outgoing runner shall not take sole possession of the baton while it is outside the exchange

zone

Dropped Baton

Umpiring Relays, USATF Best Practices Mar 12, (Credit: B. Boyd)

So no rule that says a judge or inspector can decide if a rule should be enforced because he does not feel an advantage was gained.

For exchanges not made in lanes, outgoing runners are positioned by officials: USATF: According to the order of incoming runners 200-meters out (entering the curve) NCAA & NFHS: According to the order of incoming runners as they exit the last curve All: Once incoming runners pass these points outgoing runners are set in position and may not move,

regardless of shifts in the incoming runners positions. Once inner lanes are clear when those runners have departed - remaining outgoing runners may move to the inside.[I/I]

I recently saw a six lane banked 4x800 relay where one HSer had The Bear jump on his back 60metres out. At 30 metres out someone handed him a piano to carry and then insult to injury he was forced to lug everything uphill to pass the stick to the next leg who for some reason thought he had to stay in lane six (where the official placed him) to get the pass. You could see his eyes begging the outgoing runner to come down to take the stick. Seriously I swear I could see the lactic acid dripping out of his thighs as he wobbled those last uphill steps.

Farmer Ted wrote:

Star wrote:

What about wearing a string bracelet and getting DQed.

Is that cheating?

Never an infraction in NCAA and now no longer an infraction in high school.

In Pennsylvania it still is, they refuse to catch up with NFHS guidelines. It's a slow moving organization.

what did the unc women run before the dq? 11:12? i thought i saw them in the results and then they were dqed and i can't remember their time.

Um, yeah wrote:

Star wrote:

But I will give an example of how an 800 runner can break before the break line and not be DQed if the athlete is judged to not gain an advantage.

Can you cite which NCAA or IAAF rule clarifies this?

There is wording where they may cross over the line and cross back before the break.

So maybe not break early.

"If steps on or over the inside lane line are allowed by rule, the athlete must make sure that they are in the proper lane before crossing the break line. For example a high school athlete may step inside the lane line for two steps, but must make the last step before the break line in the assigned lane"

More cases where the word "advantage" is used:

"The athlete may be disqualified if observed to have deliberately run outside the assigned lane and gained an advantage"

" For the IAAF a material advantage must be gained, or another runner must be obstructed for disqualification (Rule 141)."

"The pass must still be completed in the take-over zone and the team may not gain advantage or interfere with other runners while retrieving the baton."

The reason that any rule is written that leads to a DQ was made on the premise of someone gaining an unfair advantage over someone else.

Since limited words cannot describe every situation, it is up the officials to interpret the rules and decide when to apply them.

We hope that they are only applied when a true advantage is gained. And we see as many rules are written that is the idea. To make sure an advantage has not been gained.

But since the officials have the final say, they can perform strict enforcement of the rules as written.

And that's what we have here.

This is correctly called a DQ based on the wording of the rules.

The exchange was not completed in the take-over zone.

But ... no advantage was gained.

Does anyone think that there was an advantage gained here?

Based on the OP, I don't think this is in reference to the UNC situation. I was very close to the UNC situation on Saturday and know for a fact that a flag was thrown, it was reported in writing and , in fact, UNC did not appeal after looking at video. Was there another similar situation this past weekend?