The author completely glosses over the fact that there was contact, that Grunewald admitted to. She just says Grunewald goes for the pass and then gets it, which is a KEY admission. Recalling events is okay, but only if you put forth all the facts and not color them for your readers. I would say excluding facts…
rhodesianman
rhodes1anman
Flop? You don't pass someone on the inside especially indoors, the turns are too tight and people wander all over lane one. There is no way Hasay could have known Grunewald was that close, Grunewald needed to move to the outside (which indoors is easier to pass). USATF never said there wasn't contact, their decision…
Do you know Salazar? I don't so I can't say if he's sleazy or a narcissist, I personally like a coach doing everything he can to fight for his runner. I don't think Salazar wanted Grunewald DQ'd he just wanted Hasay in third place which is what the contact cost her.
No contact? Do you have proof because I see her touch her twice. Its not like Hasay tripped on her own.
It's difficult to say if a DQ would be best. She won the race and it wasn't because of the foul, but she cost someone else a spot in an important race.
I respectfully disagree. I see Hasay's left foot hit Grunewalds knee here (because Grunewald is too close and inside a lead runner:
That's your opinion, I don't think Hasay could have backhanded her given their position on the track and the length of her arms. Hasay drifts to the outside of lane 1 then takes one step inside while Grunewald moves up. It was sloppy by Grunewald because you never attack a slower runner on the inside especially…
I agree, it was borderline, but she screwed over Hasay because it cost her momentum and third place (in my opinion). My issue with the article was accusing Salazar and his Nike goons of forcing a decisions out of nothing. Grunewald CLEARLY makes contact and the Author completely glosses over that. She merely says…
Really? Because I clearly see Grunewald try to pass on the inside and cause Hasay to misstep and slow down significantly. I'm not saying that Hasay would have won, but she would have finished third which is a huge change in terms of what this race meant for the future. Try this video, it was clearer at the 10:10…
I respond to your rhetorical question with this question: Do you think the Authors direct ties to the situation (opposite Nike and Salazar) cloud her opinion of it? This is not a trick question, nor is it a difficult one. I eagerly await your anger over what seems to be my personal attack on you.
I thought the protest was justified, the girl obviously won the race going away and replacing her with a girl she beat handily would be a bad mistake. HOWEVER, she cost the fourth place girl third place. She had a big lead on fourth and she lost all momentum with that trip. She ran up on her on the inside which is…
She actually had everything to do with that girl getting 4th place. She tripped her up just as she was tightening up and cost her all her momentum which she couldn't recover. It 100% cost her 3rd place which a spot in a very important future race and maybe her career. And running up the inside on somebody is a…
I could go either way on the protest. It's not as if the runners are in the back where all this is going on. They just know who won the race and felt she was robbed. I personally don't think she should have been DQ'd but what happened definitely cost that girl 3rd place and Salazar was her coach.
The woman ended up getting fourth because she got bumped while she was tightening up and slowed her down significantly, if you've ever been in a race where your legs are tightening up it is impossible to recover momentum. The bump directly correlated to place she finished in which was one place out of trip to the…
As someone that has competed in both indoor/outdoor and cross country I think the DQ could have gone either way. I've seen people DQ'd for less, I've also seen people get away with a lot more (Shadrack Kiptoo Biwott comes to mind). Salazar has Nike at his back but any good coach will go to bat for you if they feel…
There were only 3 big names in Barnett, Brock, and Shamrock. Only Brock was an Elite wrestler before the WWE, Shamrock got his ass kicked in the UFC and was on roids, and Barnett is one of the most intelligent fighters in the world and did it to make extra money in Asia.
This article was painful to read. I understand you may be upset with the card, but almost every point you made was iffy at best.
But California fish taco's have guacamole in them. That's original right?