Nick Willis isn't only one being screwed over by the IAAF and slow runners - Mark English also won't be going to Worlds

Nick Willis didn't get screwed. The IAAF followed the entry guidelines that they posted for everyone. How can you complain about USATF not following their guidelines in the Pan Am team selection debacle and then blast the IAAF by actually following theirs?

Rojo - I rarely agree with you but I think you are 100% correct with this one.

kettlepot wrote:

How can you complain about USATF not following their guidelines in the Pan Am team selection debacle and then blast the IAAF by actually following theirs?

It's really no mystery. RJ went to an Ivy. You know what Ivy League professors say consistency: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do."

Who are we to judge big minds or great souls???

I am also crying a river for a 1:45 dude.

kettlepot wrote:

Nick Willis didn't get screwed. The IAAF followed the entry guidelines that they posted for everyone. How can you complain about USATF not following their guidelines in the Pan Am team selection debacle and then blast the IAAF by actually following theirs?

Under what guideline does it say that these random other athletes will be chosen to fill up the spots in the event instead of the top-ranked athletes?

The whole thing seems pretty arbitrary, especially the decision to not fill a field? What's the point of having rankings if they're just going to make arbitrary decisions in the end? Why did they decide to fill the field to 45 participants instead of 44 or 46 when their target was 48??

rojo wrote:

so he was still down at #45 but they decided to just keep it at 45 instead of filling the field to 48.

I don’t know the IAAF rules but I’m still confused by how this keeps him out.

Rojo, you are complaining that the IAAF should break their own rules and include Willis? Be consistent. Willis wasn't going to contend for a medal and probably wouldn't even make the final. If it's an athlete that just participates in a heat and then is out, I would prefer seeing more representation to build the sport rather than a guy pushing 40 who's been around the block more times than anybody in the entire field. Are you going to complain next year when New Zealand doesn't include him on their Olympic team?

David S wrote:

kettlepot wrote:

Nick Willis didn't get screwed. The IAAF followed the entry guidelines that they posted for everyone. How can you complain about USATF not following their guidelines in the Pan Am team selection debacle and then blast the IAAF by actually following theirs?

Under what guideline does it say that these random other athletes will be chosen to fill up the spots in the event instead of the top-ranked athletes?

The whole thing seems pretty arbitrary, especially the decision to not fill a field? What's the point of having rankings if they're just going to make arbitrary decisions in the end? Why did they decide to fill the field to 45 participants instead of 44 or 46 when their target was 48??

Read the document in the original post. If 5 pages is too much for you, specifically the Individual Athletes Ranking Process and the then referenced section on Unqualified Athletes.

Both Willis and English opened themselves up to this. All they had to do to automatically qualify was make the standard. Both failed to do so.

Les wrote:

Rojo, you are complaining that the IAAF should break their own rules and include Willis? Be consistent. Willis wasn't going to contend for a medal and probably wouldn't even make the final. If it's an athlete that just participates in a heat and then is out, I would prefer seeing more representation to build the sport rather than a guy pushing 40 who's been around the block more times than anybody in the entire field. Are you going to complain next year when New Zealand doesn't include him on their Olympic team?

How will it build the sport to have a guy from a country that doesn't care about the sport running 10 seconds off the pace in a 2 lap race? Watching their guy get crushed in a sport they don't care about is suddenly going to grow the sport in that country? Or more likely no one will tune in and it will have a net-zero effect and a 1:45 guy will be kept out for the reason of inserting a 1:55 guy.

Stupid thread by someone who should know better....sorry to not see Willis there, as I love his racing nous, but without an automatic qualifier, they don't just randomly fill the rest of spots.

And the 100m is different, easy to add another elimination round, for the slowest ones.

It is great that one can see athletes from lesser known countries.

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

How will it build the sport to have a guy from a country that doesn't care about the sport running 10 seconds off the pace in a 2 lap race? Watching their guy get crushed in a sport they don't care about is suddenly going to grow the sport in that country? Or more likely no one will tune in and it will have a net-zero effect and a 1:45 guy will be kept out for the reason of inserting a 1:55 guy.

I’m from a country that still celebrates the fact that one of its mid d runners made the semi-finals in the Olympics 30 years age. Absolutely, the ability to participate is a point of pride for countries, and helps to build the fan base.

kettlepot wrote:

David S wrote:

Under what guideline does it say that these random other athletes will be chosen to fill up the spots in the event instead of the top-ranked athletes?

The whole thing seems pretty arbitrary, especially the decision to not fill a field? What's the point of having rankings if they're just going to make arbitrary decisions in the end? Why did they decide to fill the field to 45 participants instead of 44 or 46 when their target was 48??

Read the document in the original post. If 5 pages is too much for you, specifically the Individual Athletes Ranking Process and the then referenced section on Unqualified Athletes.

It doesn't explain what the "target" number of athletes really is and it doesn't say unqualified athletes will count towards the target number.

I see a bunch of hypercritical posts on this thread but none of them discuss stopping at 45 participants.

How are you going to grow the sport in a country if you never see any of your athletes compete on the world stage? For some countries it's a point of pride just to be there. You are expressing the point of view of countries where it's routine to be at the World Championships. Not all countries are so fortunate.

And he's not happy about the lack of info from IAAF over recent weeks. If they knew the universality athletes entered since August why not TELL athletes?

https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/athletics/mark-english-calls-for-transparency-after-omission-from-worlds-38516159.html

Fretrr wrote:

And he's not happy about the lack of info from IAAF over recent weeks. If they knew the universality athletes entered since August why not TELL athletes?

https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/athletics/mark-english-calls-for-transparency-after-omission-from-worlds-38516159.html

Rojo wrote he was 42nd of 48. Then three exotic athletes were entered and they cut the field to 45. That doesn't make sense as he still would be qualified as #45 of 45.

The article linked in the previous post says he was #41 of 48 and eight such extra athletes were added. That would explain why he is out.

Can someone clarify these contradicting informations?

David S wrote:

kettlepot wrote:

Read the document in the original post. If 5 pages is too much for you, specifically the Individual Athletes Ranking Process and the then referenced section on Unqualified Athletes.

It doesn't explain what the "target" number of athletes really is and it doesn't say unqualified athletes will count towards the target number.

I see a bunch of hypercritical posts on this thread but none of them discuss stopping at 45 participants.

My post specifically talks about Willis, in an event where the target entrants is 45 and they took 45 runners. Where does it say that unqualified athletes wouldn’t count towards the field size? It doesn’t. The IAAF followed their rules in the 1500m and it’s hypocritical to slam them for that while also slamming the US for not following their rules for Pan Am selection.

That was my immediate reaction. Plus how does PNU know that the country doesn't care about T&F? I was born and grew up in another country that was obsessed with basketball - we'd be lucky to make the "Area" playoffs let alone just into the Olympics. I haven't lived in that country in over 30 years, and I still feel pretty psyched for the "designated" male and female representatives for Worlds/Olympics (c'mon - let's get out of heat 1! Woo!). Recently, we've actually had people meet (pre 2019) standards, and I went nuts.

Les wrote:

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

How will it build the sport to have a guy from a country that doesn't care about the sport running 10 seconds off the pace in a 2 lap race? Watching their guy get crushed in a sport they don't care about is suddenly going to grow the sport in that country? Or more likely no one will tune in and it will have a net-zero effect and a 1:45 guy will be kept out for the reason of inserting a 1:55 guy.

How are you going to grow the sport in a country if you never see any of your athletes compete on the world stage? For some countries it's a point of pride just to be there. You are expressing the point of view of countries where it's routine to be at the World Championships. Not all countries are so fortunate.

Les wrote:

Rojo, you are complaining that the IAAF should break their own rules and include Willis? Be consistent. Willis wasn't going to contend for a medal and probably wouldn't even make the final. If it's an athlete that just participates in a heat and then is out, I would prefer seeing more representation to build the sport rather than a guy pushing 40 who's been around the block more times than anybody in the entire field. Are you going to complain next year when New Zealand doesn't include him on their Olympic team?

And Willis is good with it because he knew what the rules were. He might get in, but no promises.