Ruling Needed

[tafnut]

I thought I knew this rule, but now I'm doubting myself. We just had our District Championships (to qualify the top 4 into Regionals) and this happened in the 100 Hurdles:

At the last hurdle the girl in second clobbered the hurdle, pushing it into the next lane. My girl was in third place in that lane, cleared her hurdle, only to find another one in her lane, which she fell over and crawled to the finish line in last. I realized immediately that my girl was out of luck, but that the girl in second should be DQ'ed for 'impeding the progress.' She was, but then the coach protested and won the appeal, because the 'hurdle impeded' my girl, not his girl. I tried to argue that the rule states the impeding is caused by 'any action' of an athlete that causes the impeding. They said no. I would think that the initial DQ was not even appealable, much less turnoverable! Can anyone clarify this for me? If I call the State Office Monday do I have a chance of getting this rereversed, or is the Jury of Appeals' decision (albeit wrong) have to stand?

[tafnut]

Re: Ruling Needed

Has no one ever come across this situation before??!!

[buckeye II]

Re: Ruling Needed

I have come across this, but thought someone else might be able to answer it a little better. I talked with two officials this morning about your case. The girl hitting the hurdles should have been disqualified and not returned. that seemed a definite. As for your girl, they have seen it handled several ways and agreed it is basically a judgement of how to proceed. They have seen an athlete in your girl's position (fairly certain of a qualifying position) moved on in addition to the others. Of course this scerws things up at the next level. They have seen the 'tough luck' approach for your girl. They have also seen your girl, and any others impeded, given a chance to rerun on time (with electronic timing). Luckily, in the eyes of the officials I talked with, the reruns have not run well displacing someone else. So, after all this, to answer your question: Appeal. It is very vague, so what do you have to lose. Good luck and let us know how it turns out.

[go pre]

Re: Ruling Needed

i'll quote the 2004 nfhs rule book for track and field and cross country.

rule 5
section 13 hurdling infractions
art. 2 ... it is an infraction if a competitor:
a. does not attempt to clear each hurdle.
b. deliberately knocks down any hurdle by hand or foot.
c. advances or trails a leg or foot along the side of and below the height of the gurdle gate.
d. runs over a hurdle not in the assigned lane.
e. runs around a hurdle.
f. impedes another hurdler.
PENALTY: disqualification from the event.

and now to quote the 2004 nfhs track and cross country case book:

5.13.2 situation e: in the 110-meter high hurdles, a1, running in lane 3, hits a hurdle, knocking it in to an adjacent lane, where it causes b1 to fall. RULING: a1 shall be disqualified for interference. COMMENT: even though the act was inadvertent, a1 must be responsible for the hurdles he knocks down; and when they fall into an aadjacent lane causing another runner to stumble or fall, he has caused interference.


you are correct. the person who knocked over the hurdle should have been disqualified.

[tafnut]

Re: Ruling Needed

Thanks, I'll let you know. Florida HS has a history of overlooking the obvious, so I'll be surprised if they do anything. I obviously need to get my hands on the Case Book.

[buckeye II]

Re: Ruling Needed

Case books are usually distributed with rule books and sometimes part of the rulebook.

[tafnut]

Re: Ruling Needed

go pre - I owe you one! The FHSAA overruled the Jury of Appeals and she was dq-ed. She did qualify in the 300H, so she is not left abandoned from Regionals. I was not thrilled being the whistleblower, but as Piggy said in 'Lord of the Flies', "without rules, we have nothing."

[go pre]

Re: Ruling Needed

congrats. it's odd that the officials missed that one in the first place.