Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Running 'under protest'

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Running 'under protest'

    I've never understood this. At the Zagreb meet, the Irish 100Her was DQed for a FS and then ran anyway.
    If you get DQed, can you just stay in your lane and run the race, accepting that you'll be DQed afterwards?
    Seems like the thing to do. You're there anyway. Why not?
    We've seen this happen occasionally when a runner decides to run 'under protest'.
    Is there a rule about this?

  • #2
    World Athletics Book of Rules
    C2.1 Technical Rules
    In force from 1 November 2019 and amended on 31 January 2020

    8.4.1
    if an athlete makes an immediate oral protest against having been charged with a false start, a Track Referee may, if they are in any doubt, allow the athlete to compete “under protest” in order to preserve the rights of all concerned. Competing “under protest” shall not be allowed if the false start was indicated by a World Athletics certified Start Information System, unless for any reason the Referee determines that the information provided by the System is obviously inaccurate.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks, David. This may be the rule officials have kept in mind when calling back so many athletes recently without disqualifying anyone. Particularly in the event that the runner may have responded to an external sound (such as clapping).

      Comment


      • #4
        Im not sure if anyone collects data on these things, but this year there seems to have been a lot of leniency globally with letting athletes run either under protest, or just not calling it a false start at all. Even in Tokyo

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Davidokun View Post
          World Athletics Book of Rules
          C2.1 Technical Rules
          In force from 1 November 2019 and amended on 31 January 2020
          8.4.1
          if an athlete makes an immediate oral protest against having been charged with a false start, a Track Referee may, if they are in any doubt, allow the athlete to compete “under protest” in order to preserve the rights of all concerned. Competing “under protest” shall not be allowed if the false start was indicated by a World Athletics certified Start Information System, unless for any reason the Referee determines that the information provided by the System is obviously inaccurate.
          Interesting.
          So it's essentially 'Referee's Discretion'.
          I get the impression that some athletes just give up when they could indeed run the race under protest. I'd prefer that, even though it gums up the works with someone winning who "didn't".
          There is always a slim chance that the DQ could be determined to be a mechanical/electrical problem.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ATK View Post
            Im not sure if anyone collects data on these things, but this year there seems to have been a lot of leniency globally with letting athletes run either under protest, or just not calling it a false start at all. Even in Tokyo
            Too much leniency, IMO. Amalie Iuel in the 400 hurdles semifinals clearly false started in Tokyo but after several minutes of discussion they allowed her to race anyway. She made it easy on the officials by finishing last. I wasn't sure how they were going to handle that if she had been fast enough to advance.

            It's going to become strategic, just like NFL teams that race to the line of scrimmage to run the next play before replay can take a look. Anyone who false starts can instantly point to a specific area and claim they heard noise or some distraction.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Awsi Dooger View Post
              Amalie Iuel in the 400 hurdles semifinals clearly false started in Tokyo but after several minutes of discussion they allowed her to race anyway. She made it easy on the officials by finishing last. I wasn't sure how they were going to handle that if she had been fast enough to advance.
              That was exactly the situation I was thinking of in Tokyo.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Awsi Dooger View Post

                Too much leniency, IMO. Amalie Iuel in the 400 hurdles semifinals clearly false started in Tokyo but after several minutes of discussion they allowed her to race anyway. She made it easy on the officials by finishing last. I wasn't sure how they were going to handle that if she had been fast enough to advance.

                It's going to become strategic, just like NFL teams that race to the line of scrimmage to run the next play before replay can take a look. Anyone who false starts can instantly point to a specific area and claim they heard noise or some distraction.
                Was she actually charged with a false start and ran under protest or was their no false start charged before the restart? Two different things.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by NotDutra5 View Post

                  Was she actually charged with a false start and ran under protest or was their no false start charged before the restart? Two different things.
                  No false start charged. She was just given a yellow card.

                  https://olympics.com/tokyo-2020/olym...nl-000100-.htm
                  Last edited by ATK; 09-14-2021, 11:19 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by NotDutra5 View Post

                    Was she actually charged with a false start and ran under protest or was their no false start charged before the restart? Two different things.
                    They delayed a long time and then gave her a yellow. I thought it was bogus. That was a rainy night and she had lane one. I guess she claimed she heard something from the infield. Nothing was evident on replay. I watched several times.

                    BTW, I'm a USC alum and really appreciate Amalie Iuel. She was an iron lady racking up points in one event after another in college. That's one of the reasons I was keeping an eye on her in that heat, hoping she would make the final.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Awsi Dooger View Post

                      They delayed a long time and then gave her a yellow. I thought it was bogus. That was a rainy night and she had lane one. I guess she claimed she heard something from the infield. Nothing was evident on replay. I watched several times.
                      Your previous post makes it appear that the officials could have decided to dq her after the fact. Since she was not charged with a false start, there would be no reconsideration of that decision after the race and she would have advance had she qualified.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X