No announcement yet.

2022 European Championships - Tue 16th Aug - DAY 2

  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 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.


    • I think limiting the time for an appeal as you suggest larkim - to 5 mins - is a good idea. At the moment it's 30 mins post competition. But either way, you can't have a situation where an obvious foul goes unaddressed. The unfairness of the situation for JFD is not as big as the injustice that would have resulted for the other two jumpers.

      As I understand it, it is not judged by a laser beam as some have suggested but by a judge looking at a camera image.

      Under the new rules, if a camera is not available a plasticine strip is still to be used. But whereas in the past it was set at an angle of 45 degrees to the take-off board, it is now 90 degrees. I think using that approach universally is much better and less likely to result in judging errors. I'd trust a judge looking at plasticine more than a judge looking at a camera angle.


      • Interesting to note that the technical rules (8.5 if you're interested) seem only really to deal with the situation where a foul jump is challenged by the competitor so that they get it measured anyway and compete under protest (subject to some conditions). No explicit consideration of a valid jump being later protested, that's just mopped up as you say by the existing 30 minute protest window.

        I might be wrong but wouldn't a vertical strip of plasticine need to extend up in front of the board to record a mark? And therefore potentially be marked by someone who had taken off but caught the soft stuff mid-flight (even if only by tiny margins).

        As usual, transparency is the issue here - if there was a "photo finish" style photo of the moments of take off then we could all be reassured that the judgement was definitely correct and that we understood the process by which evaluations happen. At the moment some of the fury and ire is that there's a presumption that the french coach's screenshot of the TV coverage (or something similar) is the basis for the foul judgement, which I'd be pretty confident isn't the case.


        • Originally posted by marilyn1
          and many athletes got Covid, it doesnt kill you.
          The families of the 6m+ worldwide who have died from Covid-19 may disagree with you.


          • MysteryBrick
            MysteryBrick commented
            Editing a comment
            I can recommend the Ignore function. It has thoroughly enhanced my life in the 12+ hours I have had it operational.

          • trickstat
            trickstat commented
            Editing a comment
            Of course it is highly extremely unlikely that a fit 20 something who doesn't have serious underlying health issues will die from Covid, but that's not the point. While some people experience no symptoms and other have nothing more than slight cold symptoms, even a young, fit person may feel too poorly to exercise for several days and still fell less than 100% for quite a lot longer than that. Even somebody with no symptoms will be unable to train with others for a few days.

        • Actually still in disbelief that JFD doesn’t have a medal to his name. He had the flag around him and a lot of honour! Thinking he had an 8.06m jump in the bag alters the whole competitor and can’t simply be retroactively deleted (or rather unfortunately it can be but it shouldn’t be).


          • Originally posted by larkim
            I might be wrong but wouldn't a vertical strip of plasticine need to extend up in front of the board to record a mark? And therefore potentially be marked by someone who had taken off but caught the soft stuff mid-flight (even if only by tiny margins).
            Yes the plasticine needs to be higher than the board - which was always the case. IIRC WA wanted to eliminate the cases in the past where a toe has clearly been beyond the board but left no mark because the height of the athlete's spikes raised their toe above the plasticine. I guess this became necessary when the stack height for LJ and TJ rose to 20mm and 25mm versus the previous 13mm


            • In many ways a great night of athletics : terrific Decathlon with the runaway leader hauled in over the last two events. Never mind Ehammer's poor javelin and 1500 - was a great performance by Kaul to maximise his superiority and make up that huge deficit. One of the best multi finishes of recent years, And Sandra Perkovic winning always gives me joy...

              Despite the problems for DAS and lack of Gold for GB , I was relatively satisfied with four medals from the day ; but that retrospective foul call on JFD soured it for me. Cannot believe with all the technology they can make a definitive call of "OK" at the time , only to reverse it ages later on protect. Totally not fair to any of the athletes as it must change not just the jumping order but even their tactical decision making . The analogy with a retrospective call of false start seems apt. Haven't seen the photo but I must accept the "right" decision was made - but it should have been made in the first place ! A very unsatisfactory result.
              Still a good effort from a long jumper who wouldn't have even been on the team if Marilyn had his way - though I see our resident curmudgeon is still putting the boot into him anyway

              GB highlight may be Azu getting the bronze ?


              • Yes. A night through the emotional wringer.
                Azu's joy was indeed a highlight.
                Perky's win was certainly a highlight (and a very happy reminder of super Saturday).
                And for me Neita's fury at her (from her perspective) failure was also a strange kind of highlight.


                • We now know that every serious contender in the w100 was at least somewhat crocked before the start (Luckenkemper had hamstring issues and was not going to run but, hey, it was the biggest race of her life, so what's a hamstring and a little skin and blood?! - on which basis I guess the joy was maximized overall by her win. sigh.).