Indy jury to render verdict on Charlotte M45 hurdles race
Carroll DeWeese of the Games Committee that oversaw the Charlotte nationals informs me that Jeff Brower has made a formal protest of the controversial DQ reversal in the M45 short hurdles. In an email note today, Carroll writes that the USATF Jury of Appeals received the protest this past Monday, and “since this protest involves a situation not directly addressed by current rules, the Jury of Appeals and the Games Committee will consider it. We will formally meet as a Jury of Appeals on this matter at the Convention. In order to give this protest the proper consideration, we want to meet face-to-face and not deal with this matter through email. Any decision that we make will be regarded as final.”
Carroll’s note — which also was sent to 11 other USATF honchos including CEO Craig Masback and President Bill Roe — went on to say:
“The intent of USATF Rules is that decisions be made during the meet and with no more than 30 minutes delay at each step of the process (appeal to referee and appeal to jury of appeals). The protest procedure is given in USATF Rule 146. A careful reading of the powers of the referee in USATF Rule 125 grants very broad powers to the referee during the course of the meet. He can even cancel or postpone an event to a future time. He can consider any evidence that he considers necessary to arrive at a fair decision. The rules, however, do not address a referee or anyone else reversing a decision several days after a meet is over.
“Even the Jury of Appeals is time constrained by rules, so that their decision should be made during the course of the competition. Per USATF Rule 146.8, ‘Where a Jury of Appeal has been established to consider appeals of decisions of the Referee as to matters which develop during the conduct of the event, appeals must be made in writing immediately and within 30 minutes after the action of the Referee has been officially announced. In the case of long distance and cross country races, the time period shall be 24 hours.’ ”
Me again:
Nice to see serious attention given this matter. Not only is the reversal at issue, but the timing of the reversal also is under scrutiny. As it should be.
If Murray Sanford’s decision to undo a DQ were to become precedent, what would stop any referee at any other USATF track meet from “fixing” a result? This kind of hacking raises a slew of other questions.
My main question:
If the Jury of Appeals at Indy decides that Murray was wrong in changing the results a week after the meet, how should he be held accountable? What will his punishment be?
My suggestion: Make him run the 110 hurdles.
2 Responses
Did Dexter ever file an appeal of the DQ at the meet?
If not, then the reversal should have never happened.
If so, then they are way out of line according to the rules above and should disallow the reversal. Either way, I think the DQ needs to be reinstated and close scrutiny of this matter should lead to something…..I like your punishment Ken, but lets have him do it while balancing the rule book on his head!
I’m posting this on behalf of someone who wants to remain anonymous (except to me):
Ken, thanks for shining the spotlight on this. I’m not focused on the ultimate decision as much as the appalling officiating. The real question for jury to consider is why three officials who made a reasonable call on the field were quietly overruled much later (without promptly notifying the affected athletes to allow for an appeal) by a sole official who refuses to provide information justifying his mysterious decision.
By stifling transparency, officials may spark conspiracy theories among athletes, such as possible local favoritism (Sanford & McCloud are apparently acquaintances who’ve served together on the USATF-GA Board of Directors/Exec Committee).
If we can’t handle officiating of our national meet, our sport is in real trouble.
The rulebook is unclear, but I thought the DQ was a reasonable call, because even though he didn’t appear to deliberately cheat, he instinctively chose (after being thrown off-balance by crashing the prior hurdle) to push the crossbar with his hands before he chose to begin his semi-jump. That differs from making incidental hand contact during a clean jump. I respectively disagree with McCloud’s reasoning for the reversal, and I disagree with his criticism of those who’re calling for further scrutiny of this matter.
Leave a Reply