CT HS Sophomore ineligible for XC for running charity 5k

Some douche must've turned him in. I coached for 20 years, saw kids doing it a lot. Never said a word

65 wrote:

Some douche must've turned him in. I coached for 20 years, saw kids doing it a lot. Never said a word

Really? Watching a rule be continuously broken by people and never say anything? That can't be the solution.

The point is that all athletes have to abide by the rules of their respective governing bodies. If a rule states that you cannot run in races outside of competitions, then expect that if you decide to break it, there will be consequences.

The suspension is appropriate given the rule. The only thing that should be being discussed is the rule's need to be in place; Although I see both sides and agree with some parts on each, I do think preventing athletes from competing in other events in season is overall beneficial to maintaining control.

not the same wrote:

random3 wrote:

Most rules like this have their roots in Football or Basketball. This is to reduce the conflicts that athletes often face between their "select" teams like AAU etc. and their public school teams.

The problem is that the rules don't take into account that even though a road race is organized, it's really more analogous to a pickup basketball game in the park than any kind of serious competition. Of course the rules wouldn't preclude a basketball player from playing with a few friends on an off weekend. Nor should they preclude a runner from jogging a charity event.

I respectfully disagree. I have coached a few high school athletes who had to decide, well before Mary Cain, whether to go with the high school team or club/open possibilities. In many states, including CT, there is a Grand Prix road competition. There are also numerous National Championship road races that all have team competitions. If I were a high school coach, I wouldn't want one of my athletes running a 10k on Sunday, a cross country race on Tuesday and an invitational on Saturday.

And to the CT coach that claims you can't do it during indoor and outdoor season.......I checked the rule book and can't find that anywhere. If you knew your sport history, you'd know that the state was forced to decide which sport road running was. They decided on xc. That is why track athletes can not enter a road race featuring distances of 1 or 2 miles.

You would be free to make that rule for your team. Why do you need the state federation to make a rule based on what you would want your athletes to do? Team rules are for enforcing what the coach wants their athletes to do. Federation rules are for creating fair competition between schools.

"If I were a coach..." Yeah, what about the coach who doesn't want his kids dating... better have CIAC outlaw that. Oh yeah, and what about those girls gaining a couple pounds coach, better have a weight limit since that is what you want as a coach. It frightens and sickens me how brazen you can be about deciding what kids do on their own free time. You are a control freak. And you think you can justify it. Kids go to practice and have to do what their coach says until they go home. The second they are home they are not beholden to your insecurities. Find yourself a woman, get a pet, read a book, play a video game, but stop concerning yourself with what kids do on there own time. You are discouraging participation in this sport. It's downright disgusting.

Nice job, Captain Logical Fallacy.

its a dumb rule in my opinion. the only rules in cross country is to get from start to finish following the course and don't attack another runner excessively (i.e you can use elbows to defend your space but not to whack the guy in the face) First to the finish wins. No other rules are needed for this sport which is what makes it so appealing and simple. [quote]yurginjurgin wrote:

Bad rule in CT. Let the coaches inform kids it isn't in their best interest, CIAC doesn't need to police it. I ran road races frequently during track season and handled it fine. CIAC has a bunch of dumb rules in track too.

Not sure how you draw the conclusion that this guys a control freak because he wouldn't want his athletes running 2 cross country races and a 10k road race in the same week.

By the way, he has been considered by myself and others as one of the top coaches in the state, if not the country. I've seen his success and heard him at clinics and camps. A little respect is due. He said back at the start of the thread that he wasn't crazy about the rule.

oldcrowbar wrote:

Most high school coaches like the rule. Athletes should be focusing on their xc season not running around doing additional road races etc. Just had our team volunteer to help with aid stations etc at a local charity race.

Then most high school coaches are control freaks who shouldn't be coaching.

Let the kids be kids. If they have fun at a charity 5k let them for chris-sake.

This story is what is wrong with the internet. Some random person posts a petition on line that is completely false the way it is written and a bunch of people take two seconds to sign a petition without knowing the issues and then the media picks it up.

Calling it a "charity 5k" to make it sound like he is just trying to support the cause makes him seem like a martyr and he was just out there for a jog to raise money. He could have just donated his time like he was going to and paid his $30 to support the cause. This WAS a timed race with awards just like any other competitive race. And he raced close to his PR, so you know he was competing.

State associations are not draconian as Scott Peterson said. You are not required to participate in a school sponsored sport. It is a choice. But there are rules in place and you must follow them. Students must earn a certain GPA, take a certain amount of classes and the state association can limit how much you compete in your sport. It is for the protection of the athletes so they don't get pulled into extra racing by over zealous parents or outside coaches. If you don't like the rules, you can choose to run on your own in open races. That is the freedom we all have.

But the thing that gets my goat, is a kid broke a rule that is well know and now people are whining and saying how unfair it is. How about just admitting your mistake and taking the consequence and learn from it.

His father got it right when he was quoted “When he got to school on Monday and he found out he was disqualified, he accepted it,” Dave Raymond said. “And he said, ‘I screwed up and I’ll learn from this.’ That should be the end of this.

CTCoach wrote:

Not sure how you draw the conclusion that this guys a control freak because he wouldn't want his athletes running 2 cross country races and a 10k road race in the same week.

By the way, he has been considered by myself and others as one of the top coaches in the state, if not the country. I've seen his success and heard him at clinics and camps. A little respect is due. He said back at the start of the thread that he wasn't crazy about the rule.

I wouldn't want my athletes running 2 xc races and and a 10k in one week either. Nor would I want them eating twinkies for breakfast. Nor would I want them staying up past 2 AM playing xbox or wii. But I am absolutely, positively, against a federation rule making them ineligible if they do. Everyone should be. The point is simple - and not a logical fallacy for anyone who has actually passed logic - what kids do on their own time is not fair game for a coach or federation to boot a kid off a team for it. A coach "not wanting" a kid to do something is something they can convey to their team. The success rates of kids listening will vary. They're kids.

Now speaking of logical fallacies: You can't have someone say something cruel and defend them because you heard them at a clinic and you think their record is impressive. That's called appeal to authority and it doesn't wash when that person is saying something indefensible. I by the way, am not impressed with his record. But that too is irrelevant to the point he is making...which is kids should be slaves during the season.

I always ran under an alias when I did this.

Kid deserves to be banned for being dumb enough to run under his real name. Consider it Darwinian justice.

OK Mr. Logic. Do you believe rules are necessary for the good of society? Schools are supposed to teach people how to think independently, but also follow arbitrary rules. There are consequences for not following rules and this athlete just learned that lesson. Consider this an effective life lesson.

As for appeal to authority, authority has many different meanings. In this time, it means he is an accepted source of information or advice. Being around the CT running scene for many decades and having background information makes him an authority and a person we should respected. His opinion is very defensible according to everyone who has any knowledge of the situation. How is his opinion "cruel"? If you think sitting out two meets is cruel, you live a very sheltered live. Saying athletes who have to follow rules turns them into slaves is a bit dramatic, don't you think?

Do us all a favor. Stop using big words you don't understand and stop trying to stir up controversies where there isn't one.

How fast did this hobby jogger kid run?

What was his time? wrote:

How fast did this hobby jogger kid run?

20:04, so unlikely he really raced it - which makes you wonder what was the point?

Maybe he did race it? I don't see any results that have the kid much faster than that. He wasn't in their top 7 last year and the 7th kid was around 21:15.

OK Mr. Logic. Do you believe that all rules are good rules?

The rule is idiotic. Simple as that.

CDA wrote:

65 wrote:

Some douche must've turned him in. I coached for 20 years, saw kids doing it a lot. Never said a word

Really? Watching a rule be continuously broken by people and never say anything? That can't be the solution.

The point is that all athletes have to abide by the rules of their respective governing bodies. If a rule states that you cannot run in races outside of competitions, then expect that if you decide to break it, there will be consequences.

The suspension is appropriate given the rule. The only thing that should be being discussed is the rule's need to be in place; Although I see both sides and agree with some parts on each, I do think preventing athletes from competing in other events in season is overall beneficial to maintaining control.

I said I talked to the kid's coach.