False start: move blocks back some distance. 1 meter? 2 meters?
You make some good points. I never thought it like this before but it's basically - death penalty or no penalty. It's crazy those are the only two options.
I've long said they should move false starts back 3 meters in case a Bolt false starts in a semi.
This could make for awesome television in the hurdles - and 100m. Time for WA to expand their minds a bit…
The major difference in these two is the fact that Chelimo's was on an outdoor track. Therefore his move looked much more natural plus his move was a lot more long winded which made it not illegal or cutting off the competition egregiously enough. The Columbia runner did it on a 200 meter banked track and started doing it with nearly 40 meters left in the race, which is a hard cut to the 4th lane which was deserving of a DQ in my opinion.
In the Chelimo race he had a stride or so lead. In the Columbia race it appears to be a lot closer.
Watch the Chelimo video again and you'll notice Chelimo doesn't run the hypotenuse all the way down the straightaway. Comes off the turn and immediately moves into lane 2. In another quick motion, moves into lane 3 to create another block. I may be wrong in my calculations but you're also incorrect thinking Chelimo ran a perfectly even hypotenuse coming down the straightaway.
This post was edited 27 seconds after it was posted.
I would agree with you. I would think that "direct line," if this is the language in the rule, means that if you start in the middle of lane 1 and end in lane 4 but go in a straight line you are ok. If you mix going parallel to the lines with moving from lane to lane, that would not be "direct" and you should DQd. The rule does not say you need to stay in your lane or go parallel to the lines.
I've always thought it was crazy that track only has one penalty--DQ. There are lots of other ways to think about penalties for minor or inadvertent violations. If Lord Coe can consider foul-less long jumping, how about considering these?
Drift to Lane 4: officials switch the order of finish. In this case, Princeton wins, Columbia 2nd in NT. Could do the same for inadvertent contact where nobody goes down.
Lane violations: some kind of time penalty. 0.1 sec per step on the line? Result is not record eligible, like a wind-aided time.
False start: move blocks back some distance. 1 meter? 2 meters?
Can't do this in the hurdle races without completely screwing up the athletes.
Besides the whole hurdles issue, it's a freaking stooooopid idea. How long would it take for the block reset? Then some other fool tries to take a flyer and gets popped, another block reset. Plus in bigger events they'd have to move the lane number and gun speaker. God, they'd have to bring in some dude (or dudette, equal opportunity foolishness here) with a tape measure. Then if they ran under protest, and they moved the blocks back and the protest was upheld, then what? And how many false starts can one get? If some sprinter got pissed enough, they'd just keep on false starting until when?
It's just a non-player of an idea from our friendly neighborhood silver-spooned dolt.
USATF Rule 163.3: Each competitor shall run in a direct line after entering the final straightaway in all races of two of more turns unless there is another competitor in his/ her path
Poorly written rule. so if you come off the final turn in lane 2 just having taken the lead, you have to stay in lane 2? that puts you at a disadvantage allowing someone to pass on the inside.
another example: if you have a big lead in the 10k, you celebrate on the home stretch veering towards the crowd to wave, you could be DQd by this rule.
All rules have judgement calls.
Refs can review and make judgement. Its fairly obvious. They do it in cycling all the time and those guys are under far far more pressure at greater speeds and on a bike. Yet they cant cut people off.
Rojo, you need to let go of this compulsion that lead runners have to move out of the way of trailing runners. The lead runner can run in any lane of the track he/she wishes. The same for the trailing runner, but it's their responsibility to go around the leader if they wish to pass. The leader has no responsibility to get out of the way or provide a clear path.
Rojo, you need to let go of this compulsion that lead runners have to move out of the way of trailing runners. The lead runner can run in any lane of the track he/she wishes. The same for the trailing runner, but it's their responsibility to go around the leader if they wish to pass. The leader has no responsibility to get out of the way or provide a clear path.
Someone else who gets it! Seems like this is unpopular around here though.
By the letter of the law, both are DQs. I was thrilled Chelimo wasn't DQd, however as i 1) I don't think he'd have been passed (where I do think the Columbia runner would have been passed) and 2) It was a qualifying race for the Olympics and clearly he was worthy of a top 3 finish. He also went on to win a medal at the Olympics.
In general, I think the we need somewhat contradictory things to happen.
1) If I was the head of WA, I'd issue a proclamation. If you come off the turn in lane 1 in the lead and leave lane 1, you will be DQd. Period. Then we don't have to worry about this moving forward.
2) We need something other than a total DQ. I'd like to see the Columbia runner placed 2nd and maybe Chelimo placed third.
PS. Jonathan gault thinks the opposite. He thinks Chelimo would have been passed but not the Columbia guy. I don't get how anyone thinks that. What the Columbia guy did was WAY more blatant than what Chelimo did. Chelimo's move out to lane 4 took almost 10 seconds and he ended up pulling away at the end. Remember, the Columbia guy is doing it on an indoor track. It happens in the span of four seconds from lane 1 to lane 4 and contact is made at the finish.
To be honest Rojo, I said that having watched the Heps video a few times but not watching the Chelimo footage recently. Having watched both, I am reversing course: I think Bendtsen was more likely to pass Syed than Kincaid or Fisher was to pass Chelimo. I do think in both cases that the trailing runner(s) would not have passed the leader had the leader just run a straight line. But even if you don't step in and blatantly cut someone off (which didn't happen in either case), you are asking for trouble if you are drifting out to lane 4 in the home stretch with someone on your shoulder...
Neither you Gault or Rojo is addressing the impeding. Lane 1 is lane 1. Lane 4 is lane 4. Syed definitely impeded and definitely intended to impede. This isn't 1964 Olympic 10,000.
Are you and Rojo blind? Or both stoopid and blind? Graduating from St. Marks Private School for Privileged Boys is no excuse for going through life stoopid and blind, son.
Syed was clearly trying to block the other runner. A move more to either side by the other runner to clear and not interfere with Syed would have cost him the difference in distance. There was no excuse for Syed to change lanes. Same could be argued towards Chelimo.
Rojo, you need to let go of this compulsion that lead runners have to move out of the way of trailing runners. The lead runner can run in any lane of the track he/she wishes. The same for the trailing runner, but it's their responsibility to go around the leader if they wish to pass. The leader has no responsibility to get out of the way or provide a clear path.
Why does a sprinter have to stay in his lane? Particularly if he has a clear lead.
Rojo, you need to let go of this compulsion that lead runners have to move out of the way of trailing runners. The lead runner can run in any lane of the track he/she wishes. The same for the trailing runner, but it's their responsibility to go around the leader if they wish to pass. The leader has no responsibility to get out of the way or provide a clear path.
>>The lead runner can run in any lane of the track he/she wishes. <<
Yes, any one lane. But not in lane 1 AND lane 2 AND lane 3 AND lane 4. You can't claim all the lanes for yourself. >>The leader has no responsibility to get out of the way or provide a clear path.<<
They don't have get out of the way, but they can't deliberately change lanes to get in the way.
You need to let go of this compulsion that rules don't matter. The rule should be enforced as it written.
I would agree with you. I would think that "direct line," if this is the language in the rule, means that if you start in the middle of lane 1 and end in lane 4 but go in a straight line you are ok. If you mix going parallel to the lines with moving from lane to lane, that would not be "direct" and you should DQd. The rule does not say you need to stay in your lane or go parallel to the lines.
I don't agree. The language "direct line" is SPECIFIC, it does NOT say straight line. The fastest way to run 100 meters is a direct line, the most efficient path, in your lane. Running a straight line, but going from lane 1 to 8, is longer and not as efficient.
A direct line is not the same thing as simply as a straight line. That is why that specific language is used.
By the letter of the law, both are DQs. I was thrilled Chelimo wasn't DQd, however as i 1) I don't think he'd have been passed (where I do think the Columbia runner would have been passed) and 2) It was a qualifying race for the Olympics and clearly he was worthy of a top 3 finish. He also went on to win a medal at the Olympics.
In general, I think the we need somewhat contradictory things to happen.
1) If I was the head of WA, I'd issue a proclamation. If you come off the turn in lane 1 in the lead and leave lane 1, you will be DQd. Period. Then we don't have to worry about this moving forward.
2) We need something other than a total DQ. I'd like to see the Columbia runner placed 2nd and maybe Chelimo placed third.
PS. Jonathan gault thinks the opposite. He thinks Chelimo would have been passed but not the Columbia guy. I don't get how anyone thinks that. What the Columbia guy did was WAY more blatant than what Chelimo did. Chelimo's move out to lane 4 took almost 10 seconds and he ended up pulling away at the end. Remember, the Columbia guy is doing it on an indoor track. It happens in the span of four seconds from lane 1 to lane 4 and contact is made at the finish.
Based on videos, decisions are correct
Chelimo clearly in front and the guys behind him had other options (i.e. go inside) , but obviously to slow to take them
Colombian not clearly in front and impeding the only path that the other runner could take, whether he had the gas or not is moot.
You have to let all of them play. Grab an arm. A little tripping. A push from behind. Yelling right in the ear. Ganging up - hey it's the logic of numbers.