WC sprint final
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
5 posts
• Page 1 of 1
WC sprint final
What's this I'm reading about the Swedes possibly being disqualified after the Danes and Swiss put in a protest? The Swedish federation site says that the runners were said to have been in the area before the race...
- Domhnull Mor
- light green
- Posts: 286
- Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 11:16 am
- Location: Way, Way Up North
Don't know which teams were involved, but the explanation given before the prize-giving was that last night at the team managers briefing, they were told where was OOB to the competitors. A protest was made that competitors had been seen in the OOB areas. The jury agreed that they had been in OOB areas, but that this would have had no impact on the result, which was allowed to stand.
I hope I got that right.
I hope I got that right.
Make the most of life - you're a long time dead.
-
Stodgetta - brown
- Posts: 569
- Joined: Fri May 07, 2004 2:55 pm
- Location: north of brum, south of manchester
Thats the second time a team has done somthing which before the race was made clear that it was strictly forbidden, and then both times the jury has decided that it didn't affect the results. So why were they forbidden if it doesn't matter?
-
mharky - team nopesport
- Posts: 4541
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:39 pm
Thats the second time a team has done somthing which before the race was made clear that it was strictly forbidden, and then both times the jury has decided that it didn't affect the results. So why were they forbidden if it doesn't matter?
In the interests of fairness don't forget that another rule infringement did lead to disqualification.
If one wishes the letter of the law, rather than the spirit of the law, to be upheld then most of the runners at Battersea should have been disqualified for warming up along the small path by the -8 line which was technically OOB.
Today's race saw a change in the usual policy in that finishing runners were allowed to communicate with those that had yet to run. In the future we may see an end to some of the traditional rules.
- Guest
mharky wrote:both times the jury has decided that it didn't affect the results.
The jury was never called at the World Cup Sprint Final, so it is no good blaming them for something they didn't do.
Before you go into the details of what actually happened you need to understand about complaints, protests, appeals and juries. IOF rules are similar to BOF rules;
1) The first stage is a complaint. This is made to the organiser, who must take an initial decision. The complaint and response must be in writing.
2) A protest can then be made about the organiser's decision. It is the protest that results in the jury having to meet.
3) The IOF rules include a limited right to appeal against a jury decision. BOF rules include a more complete appeal process.
At Battersea Park the organisers received two complaints. These were discussed amongst the organising team, and responses were made. No protests were received against these decisions, and therefore the jury was not involved.
For anyone who has ever been involved in this process you will be aware that complaints and protests are very seldom as clear-cut as you might think. The two complaints did relate to people being in the competition area, but neither case was as simple as that. Note that the people making the complaint were willing to accept the decision and did not enter a formal protest.
Simon Errington
World Cup Sprint Final Controller
-
Simon E - green
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:13 pm
- Location: St Albans
5 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 198 guests