Molly Huddle Interference? Should Huddle have been DQd for flailing her arms out at United Airlines NYC Half?

elmore345 wrote:

If the Kenyan 'should have won' then she should have overtaken Huddle before the final 2 metres.

thank you!!!!

A DL steeple was run on the roads? Seems like that wuld have gotten more ink.

grow some wrote:

Operator, could you help me wrote:

Well? The poster asked for an example, got one? If not, thanks for playing.

DL steeple.

I don't see anything wrong with it. Yes she blocked the other runner with her arm...it's done in soccer all the time and perfectly legally in the other "gentlemans sport". Plenty of other more physical runners throw elbows etc. sorry but running can't be that wimpy all the time. Huddle wanted the win she was strong enough to assert that she wanted it so that's that...if she was behind her yanking her singlet that'd be different....get over it...the U.S. women's soccer team is way more physical and no one can touch them but they do it by asserting their physical presence.

Poor analogy. Different sport, different circumstances. Road running is a point to point individual competitor race, not a random running patterns, team, get a ball in a goal event. Auto racing would be a more appropriate analogy, where cars blocking lanes is not only legal, but part of the strategy for success, just as drafting. Both are ways to interfere with your competitors outcome even though it is an individual sport that the "fastest" one wins.

Regarding this event, unless there are particular rules prohibiting what either competitor did (cutting off at turns, sticking arm out) all was fair, end of thread.

Saw it live. Saw it on film. Heard Molly's interview. No controversy. Clean, hard fought. If we are going to do something, we should should do it the right way, by time. Therefore, the Kenyan runner cut of Huddle on several occasions on right and left hand turns. The DQ could come then and this would make any thought of a finish line controversy null and void.

Overall, I thought that and still do, that there is nothing here. Nothing. The winner was declared and the officials that viewed the tape had no issue and made no announcement.

It was dirty. Unnecessary sportsmanlike and dirty. Plain and simple.

Ummm they're all similar strategies...in soccer you use your body/arms to protect the ball against your opponent...car racing as you well explained they do the same thing but to hold a lane. Huddle used her body to assert her space...what's the issue?

To me this looks like two runners fighting to finish at the same spot, kind of like old cc or road races that finished in a chute. The second place runner didn't file a protest so I don't see why so many people are so worked up about this.

Did you run Cross Country? There was tons of jostling/bumping. It's not dirty; it's strategy. And part of the strategy is not to put yourself in a position to be blocked/jostled. In Cross Country if you weren't careful you'd get boxed out down the side of a hill. No one protested or claimed it was dirty. They used the experience and learned to run smarter and not put themselves in that position.

Tantor wrote:

It was dirty. Unnecessary sportsmanlike and dirty. Plain and simple.

Huddle cheated and she knows it no excuses !

Clean finish. No DQ called because there was no reason for a DQ.

suck it losers wrote:

Clean finish. No DQ called because NYRR wants and needs Americans to "win" once in a while.

Fixed that for you^

Zee wrote:

I don't see anything wrong with it. Yes she blocked the other runner with her arm...it's done in soccer all the time and perfectly legally in the other "gentlemans sport". Plenty of other more physical runners throw elbows etc. sorry but running can't be that wimpy all the time. Huddle wanted the win she was strong enough to assert that she wanted it so that's that...if she was behind her yanking her singlet that'd be different....get over it...the U.S. women's soccer team is way more physical and no one can touch them but they do it by asserting their physical presence.

So funny.

Your argument against a DQ, in asserting that her behavior should be allowed, is actually contradicting all of the posters who are covering their eyes and pretending it was "incidental."

Saw it wrote:

Saw it live. Saw it on film. Heard Molly's interview. No controversy. Clean, hard fought. If we are going to do something, we should should do it the right way, by time. Therefore, the Kenyan runner cut of Huddle on several occasions on right and left hand turns. The DQ could come then and this would make any thought of a finish line controversy null and void.

Overall, I thought that and still do, that there is nothing here. Nothing. The winner was declared and the officials that viewed the tape had no issue and made no announcement.

Back to the argument that if someone cuts a corner early on you can cut the course to make it up?

Nice try.

Well, the sport has no rule to push someone back a placing.

You either stick with the result or DQ the person.

(Would you assign second place but with the faster time?)

I don't dislike the idea but it's just not happening.

I do think it was a foul.

If you could adjust placing then Rowbury wouldn't have received a bronze in 2009.

Rowbury finished 4th but the winner was DQed for impeding the second place finisher.

The DQed chick clearly beat Rowbury without any foul.

Fhsjsic wrote:

A DL steeple was run on the roads? Seems like that wuld have gotten more ink.

grow some wrote:

DL steeple.

Why would obstructing your opponent be allowed in a road finish if it isn't on the track?

Those arguing for no DQ seems to be confused, alternately saying there was no impediment or saying there was an impediment but that's OK. Make up your mind.

grow some wrote:

Fhsjsic wrote:

A DL steeple was run on the roads? Seems like that wuld have gotten more ink.

Why would obstructing your opponent be allowed in a road finish if it isn't on the track?

Those arguing for no DQ seems to be confused, alternately saying there was no impediment or saying there was an impediment but that's OK. Make up your mind.

There is no confusion. There was no impediment so no DQ. Go find something else to do.

Star wrote:

rojo wrote:

I think the idea of a DQ is the wrong one. Would I take her out of the results entirely? Definitely not. The sport needs to have a way to put her 2nd.

The side angle replay is the worse one for Huddle:

https://youtu.be/x0WiUP-l2Q4?t=54s

[/link

Well, the sport has no rule to push someone back a placing.

You either stick with the result or DQ the person.

(Would you assign second place but with the faster time?)

A thought on the personal foul type of foul that impacts just one other runner and not the complete field.

An interesting thought by Robert that needs addressing on the front page and here on the message board. Instead of a bunch of rules about uniform congruently we need meaningful rules about the actual conduct of the event.

Did she run in the BAA 5k this morning?