Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 71
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    They'll know how many there can possibly be because the qual period will be over. They can safely start inviting some people at that time. Then, when countries file their entries (or they otherwise learn of the non-entry of certain qualifiers), they can make additional invites as needed.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    Quote Originally Posted by tandfman View Post
    They'll know how many there can possibly be because the qual period will be over. They can safely start inviting some people at that time. Then, when countries file their entries (or they otherwise learn of the non-entry of certain qualifiers), they can make additional invites as needed.
    The flaw in that is: The IAAF will know how many athletes qualified, but without the entries from federations they won't know many will be entered. If you don't know how many are entered, you won't know how many to invite.

    Examples: Pearson qualified but retired, Dutkiewicz qualified but injured/season over, Wlodarczyk qualified but injured/season over. It makes absolutely no sense to base invites on a theoretical number of athletes that could be selected, it would also ignore the fact that some federations have additional qualification criteria.
    This also never happened before so there is no reason to assume it will done this way for Doha.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    16,016
    Also, even if it still possible to enter athletes after 13 Sep, it won't possible to achieve qualification marks at the Kenyan Trials. I know in most events Kenya has either a lot of people with qualifiers or none at all with any chance of getting them, but there are still a few in between. Assuming the trials are held at altitude as usual, they could get some in the sprints at least.
    Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    Quote Originally Posted by norunner View Post
    Pearson qualified but retired, Dutkiewicz qualified but injured/season over, Wlodarczyk qualified but injured/season over. It makes absolutely no sense to base invites on a theoretical number of athletes that could be selected, it would also ignore the fact that some federations have additional qualification criteria.
    This also never happened before so there is no reason to assume it will done this way for Doha.
    Don't you think the IAAF is aware of all of these things? I suspect they are monitoring stuff like this as best they can, and are aware of countries that have published more stringent standards. (For example, USATF is not allowing anyone to use a qualifying mark after Des Moines. So the IAAF knows now how many qualifiers the USA can have.) It does take a little vigilance, and in some cases dialogues with particular federations, but it's not brain surgery.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #15
    Here is a problem that would affect the US team: US has 3 athletes with a qualifying mark in the decathlon. If the IAAF went by numbers without names, the assumption would be that the US would enter three decathletes, because all three have the standard and Williams could not possibly get an invite because the US already has 3 slots filled. This would be by far the most ridiculous way to do it.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    16,016
    But you're talking about 200+ federations and some 2000 athletes. The world isn't limited to the top 10 or so countries.
    Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #17
    Quote Originally Posted by tandfman View Post
    Don't you think the IAAF is aware of all of these things? I suspect they are monitoring stuff like this as best they can, and are aware of countries that have published more stringent standards. (For example, USATF is not allowing anyone to use a qualifying mark after Des Moines. So the IAAF knows now how many qualifiers the USA can have.) It does take a little vigilance, and in some cases dialogues with particular federations, but it's not brain surgery.
    "They have never done it this way before" is also not brain surgery, yet you seem to completely fail to understand the concept. You seriously think the IAAF is aware of EVERY injured athlete on the planet with a qualifying mark? For clarification: This is the organisation who for five years has failed to come up with a webpage for their qualification system and who until 2 years ago entered most results by hand.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #18
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    61,578
    Quote Originally Posted by tandfman View Post
    ....(For example, USATF is not allowing anyone to use a qualifying mark after Des Moines. So the IAAF knows now how many qualifiers the USA can have.) .....
    Isn't the situation a little more complex than that? While we know Indy said "no chasing Q's," at the same time I can't believe they won't follow the same protocol as in '17, when they did add people to the team when the IAAF came knocking with the fill-the-fields list after the Q period was over. And that would indicate that it makes all the sense in the world for U.S. athletes to keep going for a higher standing on the list.

    I can imagine the lawyering-up already should the IAAF tell USATF, "we've got a spot for x" and USATF says "thanks but no thanks"
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #19
    I agree that they'll accept all invitations. No reason they shouldn't. When I said that the IAAF knows how many qualifiers the USA can have, I just meant that they'll take that number into account when they determine how many invitations they need to issue in each event. I did not mean to say that the US team would be limited by the number of athletes who had met the qualifying standard by the end of the USATF Championships.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #20
    Still doesn't make sense, too many variables. France has higher qualification standards, Britain doesn't accept any results achieved at an altitude higher than 950m. Germany requires not only a qualification mark, but also a second lower mark as confirmation in most events. Just three examples the IAAF would have to keep track of. How does this affect the qualification? David Storl is not qualified for Doha because the German federation doesn't accept indoor marks. European champion Mateusz Przybylko ist not yet qualified for Doha because he is missing the confirmation mark. Is the IAAF supposed to keep track of all these special circumstances for 200 member nations & injured athletes? Instead of simply requiring the entries by Sept 6th, which would require zero keeping track of anything other than the results the IAAF already has for the rankings anyway.
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •