Have you seen this? I almost fell out of my chair.
the IAAF wrote:
9 August 2017
JURY OF APPEAL DECISION
Event: 5000m Men Round 1 – Heat 1
A protests was presented by the US team after Heat 1 of the 5000m Round 1 Men, claiming that their athlete Erik JENKINS was obstructed by Azeri athlete Hayle IBRAHIMOV with 150m remaining in the race, impeding his progression.
The US team asked that their athlete Erik JENKINS be advanced to the Final under Rule 163.2 b)..
The Jury of Appeal examined the video of the incident, and in its opinion, the contact did not impede the progress of the US athlete..
The Jury rejected the appeal.
JURY OF APPEAL DECISION
Event: 5000m Men Round 1 – Heat 2
A protests was presented by the Kenyan team after Heat 2 of the 5000m Round 1 Men, asking that their athlete Josphat Kiprono MENJO, be advanced to the Final under Rule 163.2 b), claiming he had been obstructed by the fall of an athlete in front of him, which prevented him from qualifying.
The Jury of Appeal examined the video of the incident, and in its opinion, the fall was not the primary cause of the athlete’s non-qualifying performance.
The Jury rejected the appeal.
RULE 163 (The Race)
Obstruction
2. If an athlete is jostled or obstructed during an event so as to impede his progress, then:
(a) if the jostling or obstruction is considered unintentional or is caused otherwise than by an athlete, the Referee may, if he is of the opinion that an athlete (or his team) was seriously affected, order that the race be re-held or allow the affected athlete (or team) to compete in a subsequent round of the event;
(b) if another athlete is found by the Referee to be responsible for the jostling or obstruction, such athlete (or his team) shall be liable to disqualification from that event. The Referee may, if he is of the opinion that an athlete (or his team) was seriously affected, order that the race be re-held excluding any disqualified athlete (or team) or allow any affected athlete (or team) (other than any disqualified athlete or team) to compete in a subsequent round of the event.
In both cases Rule 163.2(a) and (b), such athlete (or team) should normally have completed the event with bona fide effort.
Do those people not get why so many people can't stand them despite their success? It's because they've forgot what sport is supposed to be about. They think the ends ALWAYS justify the means.