Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

¶'22 wUSATF JT—Kara Winger 210-10

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by gm View Post

    Where did you see that?
    Do you have some info on this gm? GH says someone said Malone couldn't go and I keep insisting USATF always sends the maximum number.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by gm View Post
      Where did you see that?
      on the Road To Oregon page I see

      3 Malone
      7 Winger
      27 Ince

      all three 'competed' at USATF, ergo we 'get' to send them. Whether USATF nominates Malone or not is up to them.

      Comment


      • #18
        She 'competed' but with 'XXX' she did not 'place' (note, there is no place number next to her name), so this may be a very technical interpretation of the rules, which state:

        "If, after the close of the Selection Event, there is a place or are places in an event(s) on the World
        Championships Team that have not been filled, USATF will enter an athlete(s) or designate an athlete as
        an alternate, based upon their rank order of place finish at the Selection Event, and by virtue of their
        standing on the World Rankings list to be published by World Athletics on June 29, 2022."

        Last year in the wHJ, Jelana Rowe NH'ed (same 'XXX' as Malone) in the prelims, and even though she had the auto-Q (Oly Standard), when you looked at the Road to Tokyo list, she was at the bottom, listed as "Withdrawn'.

        The only difference is in last's year's wHJ, USATF was able to still send 3 athletes. In this scenario, if the rules are interpreted that strict as GH mentioned, that would only send 2 since we have no other USA women in the top-32 (other than Malone, Winger Ince).

        This is a real interesting situation.
        Last edited by trackstatfan; 06-29-2022, 09:35 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          IMO, USATF would be derelict in their responsibility, if they interpret it as you suggest they will. Or, just plain stupid - Malone could win the Gold!.
          Their job is to put the best team out there, not to hide behind bureaucracy. If they are worried about setting a precedent for other 'no mark / DNF' athletes, just make it clear this was strictly a 'send as many as you can' situation.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Atticus View Post
            IMO, USATF would be derelict in their responsibility, if they interpret it as you suggest they will. Or, just plain stupid - Malone could win the Gold!.
            There job is to put the best team out there, not to hide behind bureaucracy. If they are worried about setting a precedent for other 'no mark / DNF' athletes, just make it clear this was strictly a 'send as many as you can' situation.
            100% agree - my goodness, why would they not send her?... because of some ridiculous technicality? Seems illogical.
            Last edited by trackstatfan; 06-29-2022, 09:43 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              I would bet that the underlying good news here for Malone is that she was not listed as 'Withdrawn' (as Jelana Rowe was last year), and with this being the final June 29th WA listing, she can (and should) be selected for the WC team.

              Comment

              Working...
              X