guru wrote:nevertheless I'm really annoyed Trotter didnt go over and run.
Seriously? There is only one thing that matters to her this year, just like every other pro: make the Olympic team. Everything else takes a back seat. If she wasn't running the individual race and felt that her chances in June would be better served by cutting her indoor season two weeks ago, then that's what she should do.
I understand that "Ned", but Trotter could have just trained through and still been a notable upgrade, and picked up a $10,000 check for her trouble.
e-mail from Istanbul, titled "It's not enough to be disqualified...." and then follows
<<.... . . you must be publicly humiliated, too.
Jones-Ferrette rolled out of her blocks early in the semifinals, and she knew she had done something wrong. She walked over to the side to clear the way for the other seven to have a re-start, and one of the judges told her to go back to her blocks, which she did. (At this point, did she think she may have been given a reprieve?) Then, the judge walked to the sprint apron in front of Jones' blocks to hold up a red card. ONLY THEN was Jones-Ferrette allowed to leave the competition area!
The US athlete (second or third leg) lined up in the wrong position at the changeover. The Brits were leading at that points and should have been on the inside but the US athlete moved in front when he should have been in the second lane.
I have NEVER seen that kind of DQ in HS or college (and there's plenty of lane jumping as the runners approach - I've seen the inside runner give up his position when it's clear his man has been passed in the straightaway), so here's betting that was a surprise to the USA team. It's a rule that has never been enforced in my 45-year experience. That said, it's clearly a DQ if that's what happened (and obviously it did).
The US athlete (second or third leg) lined up in the wrong position at the changeover. The Brits were leading at that points and should have been on the inside but the US athlete moved in front when he should have been in the second lane.
I have NEVER seen that kind of DQ in HS or college (and there's plenty of lane jumping as the runners approach - I've seen the inside runner give up his position when it's clear his man has been passed in the straightaway), so here's betting that was a surprise to the USA team. It's a rule that has never been enforced in my 45-year experience. That said, it's clearly a DQ if that's what happened (and obviously it did).
If that's a basis for a DQ 95% of the 4 X 400 relays I've seen in my life should have had at least one team DQ'd.
The US athlete (second or third leg) lined up in the wrong position at the changeover. The Brits were leading at that points and should have been on the inside but the US athlete moved in front when he should have been in the second lane.
I have NEVER seen that kind of DQ in HS or college (and there's plenty of lane jumping as the runners approach - I've seen the inside runner give up his position when it's clear his man has been passed in the straightaway), so here's betting that was a surprise to the USA team. It's a rule that has never been enforced in my 45-year experience. That said, it's clearly a DQ if that's what happened (and obviously it did).
If that's a basis for a DQ 95% of the 4 X 400 relays I've seen in my life should have had at least one team DQ'd.
Kind of like getting a DQ for an EARLY 4x1 exchange...
Curious if the DQ was called at the zone, or the product of a protest
edit: Nevermind, I might have guessed - British protest
May be the single dumbest rule in track. I'm not sure about other countries but this rule only exist for US athletes at a major competition. We grow up running relays and are taught the exact opposite of this rule. As your man moves up, so should the next leg to prevent all the cross over at exchange. But not at this level! At a given line (200 outdoors) the places are set. Dumb! Moreover, in 2006 the British runner was told to move in, but let's not let the racing get in the way of the track meet.
By far the dumbest rule out there. And it seems as if the Brits are always trying to find a way to beat the US with out actually having to beat the US.
According to that rule almost every 4x4 run somebody should be disqualified.
Glad to hear it. It's a bad rule and the infringement had no impact on the race. It made us look like a bunch of whingeing Poms. Buck should have saved his complaint for whoever chose Bingham on the third leg.
I thought Mo had a better claim - he was cut up on the back stretch but that clash on the final bend was caused by him trying to go though a gap that wasn't really there.
Not sure I agree on the whinging Poms stuff. Melbourne 2006. Women's 4x400m. Tamsyn Lewis. Say no more. England won by a country mile but the exact same thing happened for the second changeover - the Aussies were declared winners in the end because the English team broke the rules - but it was an empty victory. I'm glad the US has been reinstated and I'm a Brit who loves his relays (anyway lets not get onto Melbourne again...)
I agree the rule is a little stupid and that the actions here didn't affect the race - but I understand it's there to stop the argy-bargy that happened in the 1980's and bum-bashing (for want of a better word) which saw the changeover zone become more like a war zone. The whole point is to decongest the area. The problem is though that teams who aren't in the lead can end up running much further to pass the baton if the race is close.
As for this ''Brits trying to win relays without actually beating the US' it is a bit lame...
Tokyo 1991 Men's 4x400m - fair and square awesome race London World Cup 1994 Men's 4x100m, Men's & Women's 4x400m - fair and square (thought I'd throw this one in!) Athens 2004 Men's 4x100m - fair and square awesome race Istanbul 2012 Women's 4x400m - fair and square awesome race
We know the 1997 men's 4x400m won because of Pettigrew's (RIP) doping - which is hardly just a technicality...
Which other relays were controversial involving the Brits trying to protest their way up the podium?
Finally - huge congrats to the GBR girls for a great display. If ONLY Nicola were back to her awesome 2007 50.02 form she would have chewed up that track like noone else. At her best she is unbeatable indoors and I'm not sure we'll ever see it from her again. PSD is going to be awesome this year and TBO looks like she could be in some great form (52.0 split is nothing amazing but its great off the back of no indoor running and a deserved bad rep for lack of relay fight).
guru wrote:nevertheless I'm really annoyed Trotter didnt go over and run.
Seriously? There is only one thing that matters to her this year, just like every other pro: make the Olympic team. Everything else takes a back seat. If she wasn't running the individual race and felt that her chances in June would be better served by cutting her indoor season two weeks ago, then that's what she should do.
I understand that "Ned", but Trotter could have just trained through and still been a notable upgrade, and picked up a $10,000 check for her trouble.
If it's guaranteed, that's one thing. But it's not -- neither of the US relay teams is coming home with first place money.
guru wrote:nevertheless I'm really annoyed Trotter didnt go over and run.
Seriously? There is only one thing that matters to her this year, just like every other pro: make the Olympic team. Everything else takes a back seat. If she wasn't running the individual race and felt that her chances in June would be better served by cutting her indoor season two weeks ago, then that's what she should do.
I understand that "Ned", but Trotter could have just trained through and still been a notable upgrade, and picked up a $10,000 check for her trouble.
If it's guaranteed, that's one thing. But it's not -- neither of the US relay teams is coming home with first place money.
Actually, one is, and the other would be - if Trotter ran...
GBR certainly didn't deserve to win today's m4x400m, but this rule has been used against England before (as mentioned above), so surely if the USA have never heard about it, they need to get checking to stop it happening again - the local organisation seemed to reinstate quite a few of those appealing in Istanbul, whereas I'm not sure that'll be the case elsewhere. To be fair, it's unusual to see the USA in second, but they might well be facing stiffer competition come London (Bahamas, GBR, Belgium, Grenada?)
Despite the ever-present threat of Carmelita Jeter, the World champion at 100 metres, and Allyson Felix, Campbell-Brown is surely the pre-eminent sprinter of this generation. She has now twice been World Indoor champion at 60 metres, twice Olympic champion and twice World champion at 200 metres and World champion at 100 in 2007.She has also won at every level of IAAF competition, World Youth, World Junior, World and World Indoor.
That is some record and Campbell-Brown is by no means done yet.
GBR certainly didn't deserve to win today's m4x400m, but this rule has been used against England before (as mentioned above), so surely if the USA have never heard about it, they need to get checking to stop it happening again - the local organisation seemed to reinstate quite a few of those appealing in Istanbul, whereas I'm not sure that'll be the case elsewhere. To be fair, it's unusual to see the USA in second, but they might well be facing stiffer competition come London (Bahamas, GBR, Belgium, Grenada?)
You've got to be kidding. The US was ahead from prior to the final bend of the 3rd leg.
^^^ not sure which bit you're referring to? Kidding about what? Knowing the rule exists, or that the m4x400m is looking a bit more competitive these days?
(I'm assuming you don't think i'm kidding about GBR not deserving to win )
jjimbojames wrote:^^^ not sure which bit you're referring to? Kidding about what? Knowing the rule exists, or that the m4x400m is looking a bit more competitive these days?
(I'm assuming you don't think i'm kidding about GBR not deserving to win )
The fact that the US was in "second". They were in first from just prior to the final bend. In addition to the rule in itself being pretty stupid, they were clear in front all the way down the stretch. I'd be embarrassed to protest that. That's like trying to get a kid kicked out because his or her T shirt isn't the same shade as the rest of the kids on a relay team as we see so often in HS here.
Also....wasn't the GBR team dq'd for violating 170.9 in 2006 which is the pushing/shoving rule while awaiting the baton. I can't find a video of the race so I have no idea what really occurred or if these situations are even remotely comparable.
jjimbojames wrote:^^^ not sure which bit you're referring to? Kidding about what? Knowing the rule exists, or that the m4x400m is looking a bit more competitive these days?
(I'm assuming you don't think i'm kidding about GBR not deserving to win )
The fact that the US was in "second". They were in first from just prior to the final bend. In addition to the rule in itself being pretty stupid, they were clear in front all the way down the stretch. I'd be embarrassed to protest that. That's like trying to get a kid kicked out because his or her T shirt isn't the same shade as the rest of the kids on a relay team as we see so often in HS here.
Also....wasn't the GBR team dq'd for violating 170.9 in 2006 which is the pushing/shoving rule while awaiting the baton. I can't find a video of the race so I have no idea what really occurred or if these situations are even remotely comparable.
Where did I say they were? I said they should know the rules, even though it's unusual to see them in second, but you never know, given the depth I expect come London. I've been pretty clear that GBR have correctly gained silver
Re 2006 - Tasha Danvers was in the wrong place (sorry to bring it up Smoke) because she was told to stand there, then Tamsyn Lewis piped up
So can we assume that the shrinking violets of the USA have never appealed in an individual case or relay to their own benefit and will not do so in the future.Thinks did they not do so in the Beijing 200m or is my memory at fault.?
Clearly the USA won the race today but the rules are and will continue to be used by all countries if they feel it advances their interests; make sure you have a bunch of lawyers at the Relay handovers ready to complain at any infraction of the rules if it suits
Veronica's post race interview after defending her 60m title at the World Indoor championship. What a great championship runner. She has lost count of how many championship medals she has had over the years
)
did they not do so in the Beijing 200m or is my memory at fault.?