I'm fairly sure Laura won't have to worry about Caster beating her in Berlin.
I'm fairly sure Laura won't have to worry about Caster beating her in Berlin.
nodoublenodboule wrote:
Have you never heard of Semenya? Muir is good, but not 1:54 good imho.
ex-runner wrote:
As a British fan I'm very pleased Muir was entered in the 800 because the 15/5k double isn't possible in Berlin but the 800/1500 is.
And you think Semenya is running in the European Championships in Berlin? Seriously, the Semenya-phobia on this board is unreal.
Clearly, Sharp is frustrated - this result likely means that she missed out on selection, which could make a big difference to her career. Even though she ended up fifth, objectively, Muir being the race severely harmed her chances, not just for the win (that was always unlikely), but certainly of being selected (that was unlikely, but not as unlikely). I can understand why she complains, but her point about it affecting "preparation" is moot. Muir did not front-run, she did not make this a completely different race.
It sounds to me like Muir accepted her invitation on time, but perhaps not via the standard procedure, hence her name got lost when the start list was put together. I am sure nobody at UK athletics, or Muir, intended to "surprise" the competition by keeping Muir's entry secret; evidently, Muir does not need to play games against this field.
nodoublenodboule wrote:
Have you never heard of Semenya? Muir is good, but not 1:54 good imho.
ex-runner wrote:
As a British fan I'm very pleased Muir was entered in the 800 because the 15/5k double isn't possible in Berlin but the 800/1500 is. Muir has a very good chance of winning both.
I forgot that South Africa is in Europe. Thanks for reminding me.
The most ridiculous bit about Sharp's whingeing is the idea that somehow it affected her preparation, that's to say that had she known Muir was running, she'd have prepared differently?
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but anyone's preparation for their National Championships involves turning up on the day in the best shape possible, as simple as that. That would include the ability to adapt to any different tactical scenarios. What a load of whiney tosh
rojo wrote:
Can someone explain to me how often the online entries are updated? If she was entered on time, why didn't it show up online?
Even if she did enter on time, it sounds like a screwup by UK Athletics. It drives me nuts that fans of the sport have no idea who is running a race often until right when it takes place. Normally at least at championships, you know ahead of time. I can see why others would be supicious.
Imagine if this was the US and a big, big name like Rupp. The conspiracy theorists would be going crazy.
We’ve had similar issues at our championships. Dig up the John Chaplin posts. Tons of favoritism through the years
Is there anything Lynsey Sharp doesn't complain about?
shpeshal wrote:
The most ridiculous bit about Sharp's whingeing is the idea that somehow it affected her preparation, that's to say that had she known Muir was running, she'd have prepared differently?
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but anyone's preparation for their National Championships involves turning up on the day in the best shape possible, as simple as that. That would include the ability to adapt to any different tactical scenarios. What a load of whiney tosh
I was there and Muir sat at the back whilst the others went through in a cagey 62.2. Sharp did nothing of note but sit in the pack.
At 500m Muir got bored of them jogging and tore the life out of the others by scorching a 42/43. Sharp finished 5th.
If Sharp was 2nd or 3rd I'd understand her complaining. But 5th is poor. The competition isn't even that good in the UK. I really want to know what her tactics were going to be before Muir entered and what they were supposed to be in that final.
Sharp would struggle to make the final in Berlin with that performance.
A much more interesting discussion is what the UK selectors will do regarding Langford who decided not to run. Top three guys in the men's final all have the qualifying standard but Langford is arguably better than all of them, certainly better than 2 of them.
Sharp finished fifth. In a time that would have gotten third place at USATF Juniors behind a college frosh and a high school senior.
nodoublenodboule wrote:
Have you never heard of Semenya? Muir is good, but not 1:54 good imho.
ex-runner wrote:
As a British fan I'm very pleased Muir was entered in the 800 because the 15/5k double isn't possible in Berlin but the 800/1500 is. Muir has a very good chance of winning both.
As a Vet, Muir has unlimited access to testicles.
Also, Muir ran in the heats on Saturday. Sharp had plenty of time to overcome the mental shock of Muir's unexpected (to Sharp) entry when the finals ran on Sunday.
Exactly!!!
Poor sport wrote:
adding she had found out that Muir was in the 800m only when the start list was updated on Friday night.
Quit whining. You are lucky you got any "heads-up" at all. British/UK Athletics has no responsibility to tells you who the competitors are.
Pretty sure they do!
Idiot.
Rules include rules for the meet wrote:
Poor sport wrote:
Quit whining. You are lucky you got any "heads-up" at all. British/UK Athletics has no responsibility to tells you who the competitors are.
Pretty sure they do!
Idiot.
I think you'll find that many top competitors don't care who is in their race.
Neuter Fingerich wrote:
nodoublenodboule wrote:
Have you never heard of Semenya? Muir is good, but not 1:54 good imho.
As a Vet, Muir has unlimited access to testicles.
As a chick, Sharp has the same unlimited access to testicles if that is supposed to be the strategy in preparing for the 800.
alanson wrote:
Sharp finished fifth. In a time that would have gotten third place at USATF Juniors behind a college frosh and a high school senior.
So Sharp's strategy was:
1. Come in 4th, instead of 5th.
2. Whine
3. Not get, or have a qualifying time for European champs.
4. Whine more
Why does UK Athletics not just blacklist Sharp and let some juniors or other faster athletes get a chance?
Strange things were happening all weekend. In the mens 200 heats Adam Gemmili clearly false started. Disqualification was announced only for this to be overturned and the red card replaced by a yellow. Clear favouritism to a "big name".
I feel sorry for the meet officials who made the correct decision only to have this overturned by, pretty obviously, someone high up in UK Athletics.
the officials need to go through the applications to compete, all of them, and if there are any spelling errors, omissions, then DQ that athlete, and ban them for next year.
alanson wrote:
Also, Muir ran in the heats on Saturday. Sharp had plenty of time to overcome the mental shock of Muir's unexpected (to Sharp) entry when the finals ran on Sunday.
sharp had time to recover from shock! what a competitor, what calm in battle, what a spartan.
a model for all who seek calm in the face of death.
Sharp had some justification in complaints about losing to Caster.
However, for a 2:57 runner to moan about this when beaten well outside 2 mins us poor sportsmanship. She's a Prima Donna.
Muir could have entered last year she'd still have beaten Sharp. She think she's a 400//800 runner bit unfortunately did not inherent her dad's speed. She should do more endurance work race more 1500m and stop moaning and making excuses for being unfit.
The good looking ones are always the worst.
ex-runner wrote:
if Muir wasn't there then Sharp still won't have gone. Muir's in fine form and will probably win.
the rules are far more flexible in the UK, it's not like the US trials at all.
As usual you're making spurious arguments, that have nothing to do with the issue.
Whether Sharp even ran had nothing to do with whether Muir broke the rules.
Which she obviously did, and you apparently admit - while saying the rules don't matter.
For Muir anyway.
But then you're the first one to say that they matter for Sharp.
Not biased much at all, are you, huh.