PROTRACK

A forum devoted to track events from 60m to the 2 mile. Mainly pro but also news from local, national and international sprint & middle distance competitions.

Log in

I forgot my password



Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Multiple NAPS lead to anything?
Today at 10:01 am by DDog

» Pro running right on track
Today at 9:26 am by youngy

» Brighton Open Gift
Yesterday at 9:00 am by safrican

» Queanbeyan Gift overcomes small field and lower prizes, produces exciting final
Yesterday at 7:32 am by Admin

» Ararat Gift
Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:03 pm by GLPR

» Brighton (SAAL) HANDICAPS - 17th Dec 2017
Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:28 pm by Admin

» Brian Wilson rewarded for going the extra distance (PreBay Gift review)
Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:35 am by Admin

» Northcote Women’s winners handicap
Mon Dec 11, 2017 3:34 pm by FortySevenThirty

» Northcote results
Mon Dec 11, 2017 11:18 am by Todd Ireland

December 2017
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Calendar Calendar


You are not connected. Please login or register

PROTRACK » GENERAL » UK Athletics - Eleven appeals but only one successful - Gareth Warbuton (800m)

UK Athletics - Eleven appeals but only one successful - Gareth Warbuton (800m)

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Admin

avatar
Admin
Admin
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/athletics/athletics-gareth-warburton-wins-olympic-appeal-1-2398545

Athletics: Gareth Warburton wins Olympic appeal


Gareth Warburtons appeal was the only one of 11 to succeed. Picture: Getty

The Scotsman
Saturday 7 July 2012


Gareth Warburton last night admitted he was “over the moon” after his appeal over non-selection for the Olympic Games was the only one of 11 to succeed.

Warburton was left out of the 77-strong team which was announced on Tuesday, having failed to achieve the second ‘A’ qualifying time he needed during last week’s European Championships.

However, the 29-year-old Welshman’s appeal was successful yesterday, meaning he joins Andrew Osagie and Michael Rimmer in the 800 metres in London.

There was no such good news for the likes of Emma Jackson, Jemma Simpson and Marilyn Okoro, though, all three of whom appealed after being overlooked in the women’s 800m in favour of Lynsey Sharp.

“I’m over the moon,” Warburton said. “I had a missed call on my phone and had to call Ed Warner (chairman of UK Athletics and the chairman of the appeals panel) back and he told me I was on the team. I felt I had a good case, but I was not 100 per cent sure. I thought it was 50/50. My girlfriend and I went through the selection policy on the UKA website a million times and wrote the letter a thousand times. It was basically a one-page letter outlining my case. I had run an ‘A’ and ‘B’ time and others had been selected with one ‘A’ standard.”

Warburton, who was just 0.2 seconds away from achieving the qualifying time in Helsinki, said: “This is an incredible opportunity for me and I intend to make the most of it. I am joining a fantastic team of athletes and we’re all focused on doing Britain proud this summer.

“I was disappointed not to run the time in Helsinki. Hopefully they took into account it was a cold day and tough track and I had just run in the trials.”

Asked if he felt any extra pressure to perform in London now, Warburton added: “No, I don’t think so.

“It’s not as if I am keeping anyone out of the team and I felt I should have been there in the first place.”

Warner said: “We appreciate that this is a difficult time for athletes who were not selected to Team GB.

“Appeals are heard on a matter of process and facts and not opinion, and the panel considered 11 appeals today, of which only Gareth’s was successful. We ensure that the original selection committee has followed the selection criteria appropriately and have made their decisions based on full and correct facts.

“In the case of Gareth Warburton and in light of independent legal advice, the appeals panel decided that the combination of Warburton’s current ‘A’ and current ‘B’ standards made him selectable under the UKA selection policy and he has been added to the team.”

In the women’s 800m, Sharp was selected despite only having the ‘B’ standard, while Jackson, Simpson, Okoro and Jenny Meadows all had the ‘A’ standard. Meadows was the only one not to appeal after initially saying she definitely would.

Jackson, who was hampered by a rib injury when finishing seventh at the trials, wrote on Twitter: “Not too surprised that the appeal was rejected but I had to try. All I can do now is prove to everybody that I should have been in the team.”

Simpson also posted on similar lines, but added: “Good luck to @garethwarburton who fully deserves his place on the team after his appeal.”

UK Athletics would not release the names of the 11 athletes who appealed, although many had revealed via social networking sites that they had done so.

Sprinter Laura Turner wrote on Twitter: “It breaks my heart to announce that I will not be competing in London 2012. There are no words right now.”

And 200m runner Richard Kilty confirmed his appeal had also been turned down.

It is understood Jade Nicholls (discus), Eden Francis (shot), Hattie Archer (3,000m steeplechase) and Marlon Devonish (4x100m) also appealed.

http://protrack.easyforumlive.com

ToM

avatar
ProTrack Star
ProTrack Star
Once they decided to take a B-qual trial winner in the women's 800m over 4 A-qual runners, there was no way that any of the appeals could be upheld without completely overturning their entire selection policy.

Frankly, it's a stupid policy. I understand the value of trials, and I don't object to taking B-qualifiers, but this has become farcical.

In the case of Tamsyn Manou, she also only had a B-qualifier and won our trials, but was also the only person with a B-qualifier performance or better. No problem there. Should've been selected for a number of reasons.

However, as stated in a recent article posted here about Jenny Meadows:

But if the UK Athletics selection panel decide past form is outweighed by their commitment not to select any athlete “who it has good reason to think will be uncompetitive at the Games due to...injury, illness or lack of recent form,” then Meadows would appeal.


Even if Meadows is removed from the equation, it's hard to understand how a B-qualifier like Sharp is less likely to be "uncompetitive due to lack of recent form" than three women with A-qualifiers.

Surely the mistake here was in the UK Athletics selection criteria not requiring a trials victory in conjunction with an A-qualifier as a guarantee of selection? They've locked themselves in to a bad situation, one entirely of their own making.



Last edited by Admin on Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:32 pm; edited 3 times in total (Reason for editing : Spelling & punctuation)

View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum