Verdict in Charlotte DQ reversal: Let the result* stand
Five months after the fact, we now have a ruling on the reversal of a DQ in the M45 110 hurdles at the Charlotte masters nationals. The verdict? No verdict. At the moment, the official results still show Dexter McCloud of Georgia as second to Karl Smith’s M45 world record. But eventually, the results will carry an asterisk. The asterisk will stand for “in dispute.” As first American, originally-DQ’d Dexter can claim a gold medal. But Jeff Brower, the next American finisher, gets to keep the one he was awarded that day. In any case, I was sent this official ruling today.
Dated December 31, the nearly 2,000-word ruling wasn’t made public until today because of a computer crash. (Jim Flanik’s hard drive failed, and he was delayed in recovering this file.)
But here’s the key paragraph:
“For many reasons, I don’t believe that there is any official action that can be taken at this time other than indicating in the official results that the results are in dispute for this event.”
But near the end of his analysis, Jim Flanik — chairman of the USATF Masters T&F Games Committee — writes:
“Simply stated, the Running Referee (Murray Sanford of Georgia) has stated that the hurdle was knocked down deliberately, but made the decision that it was for good reason and therefore was justified.
“I don’t personally agree with that logic and that decision so I think that if there were a basis for an action by the Jury of Appeal, that the original DQ should stand for two primary reasons. First because it was proper and necessary DQ, and second, the Referee did not properly make his reversal decision known to the proper authorities and certainly not in a written report of any sort.
“However, there is enough question about the incident, that I think the results as posted with Dexter McCloud listed as winner should be designated as “in dispute ” with the results as listed the day of the meet remaining the same.
“To clarify this, the final results will show a Guest Competitor with the fastest time, Dexter McCloud will show up next and be asterisked as in dispute, Jeff Brower will be listed first US citizen with the rest of the results the same as what was posted at the meet. And there is enough question about what the final results should be, that I am recommending that, in addition to the awards handed out the day of the meet, that Dexter McCloud be also awarded a first place medal should he request one.”
Jim concludes:
“Hopefully we have all learned something from this process, that the proper rules and procedures are in place and, if they are adhered to, that complications like this will not arise.”
Me again:
The ruling seems forced — an attempt to avoid taking a stand. It splits the baby and lets everyone have a gold medal (I count three: Karl’s, Dexter’s and Jeff’s). Nobody is held accountable for a very questionable call. But if you read between the lines, you can imagine this represents a severe rebuke for Murray Sanford, the referee who apparently wanted to reverse the DQ the day of the event but failed to follow through until a week later, thus sparking Jeff Brower’s appeal.
Also disturbing: Carroll DeWeese’s decision to order Sandy Pashkin to update results to reflect Murray’s intentions. This happened several days after the meet ended. So what keeps ANY Games Committee member from altering meet results at nationals to reflect some “understanding”?
Murray’s name appears but once in the ruling. But he’s well known in USATF circles. In fact, Murray was honored by the USATF national officials organization in 2003 with the John R. Davis Memorial Humanitarian Award — given to an official who best espouses humanitarian efforts “by leadership, fellowship and developmental welfare.”
So Murray is a nice guy. A popular guy. But even good guys make mistakes. And mistakes should be corrected.
The real fallout won’t come until the next masters nationals in Boston or this summer’s nationals in Orono, Maine. Will Murray have the same role he did in Charlotte (and earlier in Hawaii)? If so, then perhaps there really is no consequence for a top official who ignores official rules. We’ll see.
3 Responses
Geez…I thought this episode was over but apparently someone is determined to keep pouring gasoline on this thing until it becomes a fire. so, in an effort to clear my name in all this nonsense, let me expound on a few points>
First, I find it odd that the USATF Jury of Appeals would send the results to Ken Stone, a reporter who has no involvment in this matter other than to generate a story. Yet, I have never been contacted in any official capacity whatsoever by them.
Second, in reading this decision, it states that I filed a protest the day of the race regarding my disqualification. This is unequivocally not the case. I didn’t even KNOW I was disqualified until I went to the award ceremony in order to pick up my medal.
Because I felt that I didn’t run a good race, by my standards, I wasn’t upset about the fact that I was disqualified. However, I did email Murray Sanford several days later after the resuts were posted simply to ask him if he knew why I was disqualified.
I received a return email from Murray saying that my email reminded him that he was supposed to have dealt with this matter at the meet and would get back to me.
Before I go further let me point out that I ALL of this information was given to ken Stone when he initially emailed me regarding this “investigation”. He in turn, accused me of being involved in a conspiracy to cover up this scandal and urged me to “confess”.
I wasn’t planning on going to the Outdoor nationals this year because, quite frankly, the World Championships is much more important. However, I’ve changed my mind. If ANYONE thinks I need favors…or a cover-up..or a conspiracy to win a National Title, I urge to you get in a lane beside me in Orono, Maine this summer.
I guarantee you that there will be no doubt then.
I have to say this whole episode has really pissed me off. You wonder why elite athletes don’t want to get involved in Masters Track. Why would they when they have to put up with nonsense like this?
In defense of Jim Flanik, he shipped me the ruling in a Word document only after my incessant requests. So don’t blame him.
I have no defense, of course. Guilty as charged. This matter is none of my business, personally. But it certainly is the business of the wider masters track community. So as the self-appointed masters nag, I chose to pursue the story.
It would have helped had Murray Sanford responded to my numerous email inquiries. Although he has a right to ignore me, he also has an obligation to explain his official actions to the masters community. He chose not to tell me his side of the story. His loss.
Sorry you’re pissed, Dexter. But at least you have incredible talent and world records to your name.
Think of all the schlubs like me who may never win an individual medal in the short hurdles. The system is cockeyed, but it’s supposed to treat athletes of all skill sets equally. Elites aren’t cut slack becuz they’re elites.
Best of luck in Orono.
As previously quoted, Jim Flanik wrote “Hopefully we have all learned something from this process, that the proper rules and procedures
are in place and, if they are adhered to, that complications like this will not arise.”
Well Jim, here’s a summary of what we’ve learned from your disorganized ruling:
I think that just about covers it. I agree with my World Champion buddy Dexter. This is nonsense. As an official, I am embarrassed at the way this was handled by the officials and the Games Committee. As an athlete, I am shocked. Fellow Master Athletes, while we have some good leaders in some positions, please step up to the plate, get involved, and replace some of the incompetent people in leadership positions, and perhaps we can make the sport better subsequently.
While we may put this individual issue “to bed”, the resulting distrust won’t fade for a long time.
P.S. Though I submitted the protest to the Games Committee, they haven’t responded to me. Thank you, Ken, for finally getting an answer out of them, albeit many months later and next to worthless in content.
Leave a Reply