I agree with the DQ.
Plus, if you are dehydrated, maybe it is medically best to be left prone on the ground?
Similarly, but not quite the same, you don't pick up people in a car accident. They could be paralyzed if they have some back injury. Tend to them, but you NEVER pick them up or move them. That's what the medical professionals are for.
In a race, plenty of other can help collapsed runners. Medical professionals are EVERYWHERE at a XC meet, so the DQ should stand, IMO. Sorry.
Great kid!
I'm glad his season will continue, but I do see the reason why they stuck with the DQ.
Hopefully the rule can at least be changed to give some discretion to the race committee rather than requiring an automatic DQ.
Wow. Your just as dense in the brain as the meet referee and the ihsaa. When does common sense take over. He already finished his race. The runner was not on his own team. How can you penalize someone for good sportsmanship. In any other sport this would be encouraged. I think this rule needs to be rewritten. Many times the meds refuse to get involved because they know that any assistance means a dq.
Thetigerrunner wrote:
Wow. Your just as dense in the brain as the meet referee and the ihsaa. When does common sense take over. He already finished his race. The runner was not on his own team. How can you penalize someone for good sportsmanship. In any other sport this would be encouraged. I think this rule needs to be rewritten. Many times the meds refuse to get involved because they know that any assistance means a dq.
Wow. You asked for thoughts, but didn't like my answer so chew me out?
Next time if you want a credible rebuttal, state your opinion, but skip the personal insult in your reply.
My bad. I'm sorry I got carried away. Please accept my apology. I was wrong
Serves him right for wearing knee-length spandex under split shorts.
While he did wrong, I think some penalty other than DQ would be appropriate.
contrary thoughts wrote:
Similarly, but not quite the same, you don't pick up people in a car accident. They could be paralyzed if they have some back injury. Tend to them, but you NEVER pick them up or move them. That's what the medical professionals are for.
Sorry, not in the case of a car fire. You pull people out not matter what. Think carefully before you post next time, okay.
Who gives a crap about Iowa. You don't care abour running,. Shut up will you. No body gives a shit about Iowa.
contrary thoughts wrote:
I agree with the DQ.
Plus, if you are dehydrated, maybe it is medically best to be left prone on the ground?
Similarly, but not quite the same, you don't pick up people in a car accident. They could be paralyzed if they have some back injury. Tend to them, but you NEVER pick them up or move them. That's what the medical professionals are for.
In a race, plenty of other can help collapsed runners. Medical professionals are EVERYWHERE at a XC meet, so the DQ should stand, IMO. Sorry.
Car on Fire!!! wrote:
contrary thoughts wrote:Similarly, but not quite the same, you don't pick up people in a car accident. They could be paralyzed if they have some back injury. Tend to them, but you NEVER pick them up or move them. That's what the medical professionals are for.
Sorry, not in the case of a car fire. You pull people out not matter what. Think carefully before you post next time, okay.
Also not in the case when you're the attending medical professional. The use of "NEVER" was obviously being used in its less literal sense...
This happens every season, every year. The general public, particularly reporters and non-runners, see what this kid did as an act of good sportsmanship and complain about the rule. They think the meet officials should make an exception for this one special case. They're wrong.
The sport's governing bodies enact the no-aid rule for a good reason: the results of a race should be based on fair competition. If one runner helps another runner to finish a race, both runners are disqualified because their act is unfair to the other runners; the aided runner has not completed the race on his own. Both runners have skewed the race's results. (Even if the aided runners comes in last, his "time" should not be in the results because it is not really his.)
The coaches know the rule. The coaches tell their runners about the rule. Repeatedly.
If a A comes upon B during a race, and B genuinely appears to need aid, and A decides he should stop and help, then A should stop and help; A should stop competing and help B. Focus on helping B until a medical person arrives or until B can move on his own. But neither A nor B should then head for the finish line. Their races are over. They don't belong in the results.
Great explanation.
Never say never...
Ok, I could have worded it differently, but clearly this was not a life and death situation like a fire. His life was not in danger. If it was, he shouldn't have been helped across the finish line as if that was the most important thing to do. Double DQs.
While I understand your explanation, I disagree with the disqualification of the kid who helped for this reason: he had already finished the race in "fair competition". At what point do finished runners become spectators? If a parent had helped the fallen runner, the parent would not be disqualified from a race in which he/she did not compete.
This may fall within the rule here, but if that's the case the rule should be amended. The runner receiving aid should be DQ'd, and if the aid comes from a runner while in the midst of the competition, he/she should be DQ'd too. But I'm saddened to think a finished runner or coach helping another teams runner would also be disqualified in the name of good sportsmanship. And I recognize the argument "what if its a finished teammate or coach helping his/her number 5 runner cross the finish line".... but if the aided runner is DQ'd, this is a moot point anyway.
Technically it is a DQable offence. But who actually does that? Honestly? This happened at the NAIA national championship last year. Did they DQ the two kids that helped the kid who went down finish? Absolutely not. They lauded the two kids for their sportsmanship.
Your headline is inaccurate, or at least misleading. It makes it seem like the runner that collapsed had already finished, which of course was not that the case. Big difference.
To me, this is where the rules of cross country are missing the point of the competition. The rules right now are focused on individual efforts. What follows is another way that Cross could be viewed. (Rule changes would be required.)
Cross country is a team sport. If someone on your team needs a hand to make it to the line then you should be able to help them. You are working as a team toward a team goal.
With that said, if someone from another team wants to assist a member of your team that should be allowed as well. As long as there is no physical interference of another team I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed.
"But, what if a runner from Team-A falls over and Team-B needs him to displace Team-C so they rush out to help him and their own team?"
Well, he - and all of Team-B - are already clearly ahead of the runner from Team-C who will be displaced.
I think it goes without saying, but adding another element of kindness and support among competitors would go a long way in today's world. Just my 2-cents.
This is what happens when you don't keep score in kid's soccer games and everyone gets a trophy.