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
You know,
If the relay lead off does incur a 5 sec penalty, the subsequent exchanges cumulatively positive, and they still break the world record, more power to them.
The "subjective" argument is always brought up as a reason this cannot be done, but I don't see it that way. Hockey has the penalty box, football has penalties, basketball has penalties, the Biathlon has the penalty box and triathlons have time penalties for drafting. The penalty amount is subjective and agreed to. There is no specific rationale for why the penalties are what they are. If you can't afford the penalty, don't do the crime.
Now, imagine in academics if one wrong answer resulted in a ZERO on the test. Imagine a foul in basketball resulting in the player being ejected, or worse, the team automatically losses the game. This is what swimming is right now. Some cultures cut off the hand of a thief. This is what swimming is doing with our current system.
I am simply proposing a better way to handle technical violations that are a better way to motivate athletes to abide by the rules.
Paul
You know,
If the relay lead off does incur a 5 sec penalty, the subsequent exchanges cumulatively positive, and they still break the world record, more power to them.
The "subjective" argument is always brought up as a reason this cannot be done, but I don't see it that way. Hockey has the penalty box, football has penalties, basketball has penalties, the Biathlon has the penalty box and triathlons have time penalties for drafting. The penalty amount is subjective and agreed to. There is no specific rationale for why the penalties are what they are. If you can't afford the penalty, don't do the crime.
Now, imagine in academics if one wrong answer resulted in a ZERO on the test. Imagine a foul in basketball resulting in the player being ejected, or worse, the team automatically losses the game. This is what swimming is right now. Some cultures cut off the hand of a thief. This is what swimming is doing with our current system.
I am simply proposing a better way to handle technical violations that are a better way to motivate athletes to abide by the rules.
Paul
