The heat is still going on. I completely agree he didn't interfere with the other lane Archived Message
Posted by MojoJojo on March 1, 2024, 8:32:53, in reply to "It wasn’t “during” for him or the lane he crossed into. Again, it’s an interference rule."
But the rule, as least, as I looked up and read, doesn't state if the other swimmer is still swimming. It states while the heat is going on, which it was. Previous Message Who did he interfere with? Previous Message The heat was going on. He was clearly in the other lane while other swimmers were still swimming. It says nothing about "if the guy next to you is done, it's ok." The referees have rules meetings, case books, etc, that cover scenarios like this. Previous Message He didn’t interfere with anyone. The person whose lane he entered was already finished, and his teammate The officials overstepped
|
Message Thread: | This response ↓
- This is utter BS - TarheelIllini March 1, 2024, 5:55:00
- Likely another boomer keeping down the Gen Z - timmer March 1, 2024, 8:39:16
- This is Uttar Pradesh - Sammich March 1, 2024, 8:32:11
- That’s a really stupid application of the rule * - VIV March 1, 2024, 8:23:22
- ooo - Sammich March 1, 2024, 8:22:22
- I wouldn't call it BS. I'd call it a shame, but the rule seems pretty clear. - MojoJojo March 1, 2024, 8:03:50
- I would interpret the rule as entering an active lane or crossing an active lane - TarheelIllini March 1, 2024, 8:32:38
- *eyeroll* * - illini21 March 1, 2024, 8:25:37
- It’s a rule in the “interference” section. Who did he interfere with?* - VIV March 1, 2024, 8:25:31
- I used to be a fairly high level soccer official - Sounder March 1, 2024, 8:22:49
- The rule says “any competitor who interferes with another swimmer shall be disqualified…” - IlliniSax05 March 1, 2024, 8:20:46
- Holy shit that’s bad. If the other swinmers hadnt been so slow, it would have been legal - Cunativeson March 1, 2024, 6:58:40
|
|