Must admit I didn't warm to Neita last night. She looked (before doing the BBC interview) like she was stropping off for only getting bronze at the end, and whilst I can believe that she felt some mild cramping before the start and had some mild cramping whilst running she just came across really badly. Whereas Dina had worse outcome but presented far better. I know we shouldn't just judge athletes on personality though, but I can't help myself.
Really disappointing conduct of the LJ though. They need to rethink the technical rules to some degree to avoid someone getting into the final round believing they have a secure jump as their "counting" jump for the competition to be fair. I know in the track events runners can be DQ'd a long time after the race has finished, and there've been laps of honour done before which have been premature, but revisiting a green light jump after the competition is like DQ'ing a sprinter for a false start that wasn't identified by the starter at the time (Q - has that ever happened?). There should be perhaps a 5 minute period after the jump for objections to be raised or something similar. The whole nature of the competition was screwed by the wrong call in the first round (assuming that the right call is that the 8:06 was a foul, which I'm presuming the judges have now got "right"), including them all jumping in the wrong order in the final. I don't think awarding him a sympathy medal is the right outcome either btw, that would be rewarding a foul jump with a medal and that's a dangerous precedent. But all athletes deserve to have the certainty of knowing that theirs and others cards are secure as they go through the competition.
Really disappointing conduct of the LJ though. They need to rethink the technical rules to some degree to avoid someone getting into the final round believing they have a secure jump as their "counting" jump for the competition to be fair. I know in the track events runners can be DQ'd a long time after the race has finished, and there've been laps of honour done before which have been premature, but revisiting a green light jump after the competition is like DQ'ing a sprinter for a false start that wasn't identified by the starter at the time (Q - has that ever happened?). There should be perhaps a 5 minute period after the jump for objections to be raised or something similar. The whole nature of the competition was screwed by the wrong call in the first round (assuming that the right call is that the 8:06 was a foul, which I'm presuming the judges have now got "right"), including them all jumping in the wrong order in the final. I don't think awarding him a sympathy medal is the right outcome either btw, that would be rewarding a foul jump with a medal and that's a dangerous precedent. But all athletes deserve to have the certainty of knowing that theirs and others cards are secure as they go through the competition.
Comment