Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Angela Naeth added to Kona Start list [domingjm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
domingjm wrote:
sfjab wrote:
Just saw Angela Naeth’s FB post about corrected IM Maastricht results and that she’s now going to be racing in Kona.

After all she’s gone through the last several years, stoked to see her race in Hawaii... but was curious what the issue was with the IM Maastricht results?


Wanted to bump this, as Ironman's DQ of Visser and Bricegirdle was overturned. Visser said they were directed off course by an official, but I couldn't clearly see anyone directing them in the replay. Just curious if anyone knows what data was used as a means to justify the reversal.

I haven't seen all of the details, but apparently one of the key pieces of the court's decision (I'm surprised this went to a Dutch court instead of the CAS, because the precedent this sets is a bit scary...) was breach of protocol... The argument was that the officials were aware of the course cutting during the race, and didn't issue the DQ in accordance with the timelines in Ironman's rules... The rules revision process, which is what was invoked in this case to issue the DQ weeks later is reserved for new evidence (i.e. some of the videos that surface from spectators and stuff later that provide evidence of the offense), but the argument was made that Ironman was aware of this during the race and did not issue the DQ at that point, which constitutes a breach of their protocols and procedures... I don't know much else about what went down (on site or in court), but this is what I've been able to piece together from the rules and Visser's social media...

Typically when athletes can't provide evidence that a violation wasn't committed (i.e. in this case, there was video of them cutting the course), the first thing they go after is to challenge whether proper protocols were followed, because that's their next best weapon in a competition jury (most officials training courses stress the importance of following protocols when it comes to these types of violations or DQs, and even for posting appeals in process notices, to make sure that procedure door remains closed) to potentially get a decision reversed.
Quote Reply
Re: Angela Naeth added to Kona Start list [Trauma] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So this is a procedural ruling. Well, Ironman will be updating their rules IOT avoid procedural rulings. However, the reinstatement goes a bit far, since she cut the course.

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
Quote Reply
Re: Angela Naeth added to Kona Start list [Trauma] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Trauma wrote:
domingjm wrote:
sfjab wrote:
Just saw Angela Naeth’s FB post about corrected IM Maastricht results and that she’s now going to be racing in Kona.

After all she’s gone through the last several years, stoked to see her race in Hawaii... but was curious what the issue was with the IM Maastricht results?


Wanted to bump this, as Ironman's DQ of Visser and Bricegirdle was overturned. Visser said they were directed off course by an official, but I couldn't clearly see anyone directing them in the replay. Just curious if anyone knows what data was used as a means to justify the reversal.


I haven't seen all of the details, but apparently one of the key pieces of the court's decision (I'm surprised this went to a Dutch court instead of the CAS, because the precedent this sets is a bit scary...) was breach of protocol... The argument was that the officials were aware of the course cutting during the race, and didn't issue the DQ in accordance with the timelines in Ironman's rules... The rules revision process, which is what was invoked in this case to issue the DQ weeks later is reserved for new evidence (i.e. some of the videos that surface from spectators and stuff later that provide evidence of the offense), but the argument was made that Ironman was aware of this during the race and did not issue the DQ at that point, which constitutes a breach of their protocols and procedures... I don't know much else about what went down (on site or in court), but this is what I've been able to piece together from the rules and Visser's social media...

Typically when athletes can't provide evidence that a violation wasn't committed (i.e. in this case, there was video of them cutting the course), the first thing they go after is to challenge whether proper protocols were followed, because that's their next best weapon in a competition jury (most officials training courses stress the importance of following protocols when it comes to these types of violations or DQs, and even for posting appeals in process notices, to make sure that procedure door remains closed) to potentially get a decision reversed.

That's what I was coming up with also. I'd be a little more comfortable with the ruling (if I was directly affected) if the reversal was predicated upon a condition out of the athletes' hands (i.e., an official directing them off course or poor course marking).

---------------------------------------------------------------

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/profile/domingjm
Quote Reply
Re: Angela Naeth added to Kona Start list [domingjm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What I read somewhere is that they where apparently misled by an official. And you are supposed to follow their indications even if they are wrong. That source might be wrong. I have no criteria.
Quote Reply

Prev Next