There is nothing more challenging for an official than having to DQ a swimmer for a false start: either a dual confirmation done after the heat has been started or for the lone swimmer who goes in all by themselves.
It is a shame that starting early and only gaining, at most, .5 seconds results in the entire race being nullified. I would hate to be the 400 IMer or the 1650 swimmer if that were to happen.
So, instead of nullifying the entire swim, consider a time penalty assessed for a False Start. In either situation that I mentioned in the first paragraph, the swimmer incurs a 5 seconds penalty when the False Start is dual confirmed. The swimmer gets the benefit of the race, albeit with a time penalty.
This could be managed quite easier with a software change in Meet Manager or whatever meet software is being used.
Paul
Hi Allen,
Not so fast, buckaroo. :) I think you are mixing relays and individual swims. First - 5 seconds is alot of time. Most false starts that require dual confirmation are less than .2 sec too fast. Should a swimmer try to start 5 sec before the starter starts the heat, they would have to take off before the Starter evens says "Take you Mark." Obviously, the Starter would stand the heat up, the offending swimmer would be advised that they could swim it again with a 5 sec penalty added to their final time. If they tried it again, the Meet Referee should DQ them for unsportsmanlike conduct.
As this relates to your specific case, the 5 sec penalty applies to the first leg. After that, the combined exchange time of all three exchanges must be positive. I continue to believe there is no way a lead off swimmer (or individual swimmer) could leave the blocks 5 seconds before the rest of the heat and get away with it. The Starter and Meet Referee would have to be blind or bribed.
Perhaps I am missing something, so please clarify what I missed.
Paul
I assume Allen means the relay would have a clean start and then the other three could push their starts (exchanges) as much as they can without false starting; but if one pushes it too far and they get called for it, they would lose the WR after getting the 5 second penalty but at least still potentially win the race. If all of the starts are right on the money then perhaps they get the WR by .01. I think that is what he is trying to say.
This is all lively discussion, but assessing various penalties for all of the different infractions (and event distances) would be WAY too subjective and impossible to get everybody to agree to those numbers to pass rules (in my opinion).
Jeff
Hi Allen,
Not so fast, buckaroo. :) I think you are mixing relays and individual swims. First - 5 seconds is alot of time. Most false starts that require dual confirmation are less than .2 sec too fast. Should a swimmer try to start 5 sec before the starter starts the heat, they would have to take off before the Starter evens says "Take you Mark." Obviously, the Starter would stand the heat up, the offending swimmer would be advised that they could swim it again with a 5 sec penalty added to their final time. If they tried it again, the Meet Referee should DQ them for unsportsmanlike conduct.
As this relates to your specific case, the 5 sec penalty applies to the first leg. After that, the combined exchange time of all three exchanges must be positive. I continue to believe there is no way a lead off swimmer (or individual swimmer) could leave the blocks 5 seconds before the rest of the heat and get away with it. The Starter and Meet Referee would have to be blind or bribed.
Perhaps I am missing something, so please clarify what I missed.
Paul
I assume Allen means the relay would have a clean start and then the other three could push their starts (exchanges) as much as they can without false starting; but if one pushes it too far and they get called for it, they would lose the WR after getting the 5 second penalty but at least still potentially win the race. If all of the starts are right on the money then perhaps they get the WR by .01. I think that is what he is trying to say.
This is all lively discussion, but assessing various penalties for all of the different infractions (and event distances) would be WAY too subjective and impossible to get everybody to agree to those numbers to pass rules (in my opinion).
Jeff
