Disqualified over a Friendship Bracelet

[FlyingTrue]

Now this is pretty sad:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...rsy/index.html

[Jocelyn.]

Definitely a low blow from the other coach... I'm sure nothing would have been said if them winning hadn't depended on her being disqualified because of the bracelet. Like said in the article though, its the rule... and I feel like that's a rule she should have been aware of.

I love how they make a big deal out of it being a friendship bracelet.... trying to make it all sentimental and heart wrenching. But it wasn't an ordinary bracelet, she got disqualified over a friendship bracelet! lol.

[TakeTheLeap]

While it is a low blow by the opposing coach, the pole vaulter should have been disqualified in the first place because she broke the rules.
My brother was disqualified in the all state swim meet because he wore a swim cap that was representative of an organization that was not his high school team. Had he turned his cap inside out, he would have placed incredibly highly in his event.
I don't feel sorry for her. She broke the rules, plain and simple.

[MadPoet]

A friendship bracelet isn't even jewelry! I mean, yeah, if she was wearing an actual bracelet that wasn't made out of STRING, then she should be disqualified. But it's a piece of string? How does that even qualify as jewelry?

[DoesThisLookInfected?]

Originally Posted by NightOfNyx

A friendship bracelet isn't even jewelry! I mean, yeah, if she was wearing an actual bracelet that wasn't made out of STRING, then she should be disqualified. But it's a piece of string? How does that even qualify as jewelry?

It's not part of her uniform... That's the main deal here. You aren't allowed to wear things that aren't part of the uniform.

I don't feel sorry for her. She broke the rules. Plain and simple.

[Boobies]

Do the crime pay the time

Or whatever the saying is =p

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

I have no sympathy for the girl because she was able to compete despite breaking the rules and could have won despite breaking the rules. She should have been DQed earlier but she wasn't. The opposing coach brought out this rule at a somewhat sneaky time but it's good he did because the competition was unfair given this girl's clear violation of the rules not being caught earlier.

The only thing I see sad or disheartening about this is how some people are reacting to it. Rules are rules, follow them or you pay the consequences. The rules do not say something along the lines of "materials consisting of string and friendship bracelets are not considered jewlerry", if it did but the girl still got DQ'ed then that's another story.

Originally Posted by NightOfNyx

A friendship bracelet isn't even jewelry! I mean, yeah, if she was wearing an actual bracelet that wasn't made out of STRING, then she should be disqualified. But it's a piece of string? How does that even qualify as jewelry?

The bracelet was an accessory not part of the uniform regardless of the material it was made out of. String or gold, doesn't matter, it was not a part of the uniform and was not an injury-related accessory. You can debate over what materials count as jewlery but since the rules did not state what materials are, then it implies all materials are considered jewlery. The meaning the bracelet carries with it does not matter either in this case.

[dr2005]

Leaving aside the actual letter of the regulations for a moment, I have to say that is incredibly unsportsmanlike behaviour by the opposing coach, and his college should probably have a word with him about the effect such actions will have on both his reputation and the reputation of the faculty. It's certainly not encouraging students from either side to act in a particularly sportsmanlike manner, and that to my mind is far more important than the technicalities of rather minor regulations. If it was performance enhancing then that would be another matter, but this is petty, frankly.

Taking on the actual letter of the regulations for the moment, I think this is one of the daftest applications I think I've seen - professional athletes wear all sorts of good luck charms, bracelets, crucifixes etc. during events and no one bats an eyelid, and they exclude a girl for a friendship bracelet? Come on. It's not even a safety issue - it's on her wrist, not around her neck, so she isn't going to suffocate. Even if the unlikely happened and she cut her wrist open, paramedics carry scissors. Scissors cut fabric. As a matter of fact, I'm not even sure if fabric bracelets fall within the definition of jewellery anyway - it's certainly not comparable to the earring the opposing coach mentioned which led to their disqualification in the 4x100m a few years back. For one thing, earrings have points.

For the record, the rule in question (Section 3, Article 3) specifically mentions jewellery, so the not-uniform bit isn't relevant in this case. Also, if a provision does not specifically define what it considers a certain term to mean, that term takes its plain English meaning under the practices of contract law (which all regulations eventually boil down to). To my mind, a fabric bracelet does not fall within the general accepted definition of jewellery, and if it was meant to the regulations should have made this clear. Anything else is just sloppy drafting.

[DivingCheska]

She should have known the rules...Even I'm aware that if I was on a HS dive team I would of had to cut my friendship bracletes off my wrist but im not so i don't have to. But most sports don't let you wear any jewelery stuff and it includes friendship bracletes. So although it's sad its fair

[her_beautiful_mistake]

Meh. She broke the rules. Harsh but... just.

[ThrashAttack]

I am with her on this. So what if she wore a bracelet?

Fuck the rules,

[Cosmo]

I presume you all agree that all rules are just no matter what they are then?

[DoesThisLookInfected?]

Originally Posted by RainOnMe

I presume you all agree that all rules are just no matter what they are then?

It doesn't matter if it's an unjust rule. At the moment, you still have to follow it...

It makes sense though. It's not part of the uniform. She broke the rules.

[Bean]

I think it's a silly rule, but it should have been followed.

[Casey.]

I think it's just stupid. If it hadn't effected them winning, then fine. But it did, it'd let the other team win. Yes it's a rule, but the coaches should also make sure it's enforced before the meet, not at the end of it. Her coach should have made her take it off before the meet, and chances are she might not have been aware of it. We are not suppose to wear jewelry at work, but everyone does, and most people don't even know it is a rule. Besides that, a bracelet did not help her win, so why should she be disqualified?

[TakeTheLeap]

It does not matter if a rule is just or not. If you agree to participate in the sport, you agree to follow any and all rules and if you don't, correct action will be taken against you or your team.

Now, that being said... Do I think the rule is dumb? Sure I do. But it's there for a reason. It's the same reason I can't wear any jewelry in the pool during a swim meet. It's the same reason I can't use a swim cap that advertises a different organization such as a year-round team and the same reason giant logos aren't allowed on the towels they place on the diving blocks. It might seem stupid and insignificant, but the point is that you still have to follow the rules. You signed the forms saying you would, and if you don't, it's on you.

[Pelios]

Wow you train all year for this one moment of glory and what happens?? A couch of the opposite team tries to be a big baby and ruin it by bringing up a stupid rule that didn’t harm anyone. What a sore loser…

[TakeTheLeap]

Originally Posted by mexico

Wow you train all year for this one moment of glory and what happens?? A couch of the opposite team tries to be a big baby and ruin it by bringing up a stupid rule that didn’t harm anyone. What a sore loser…

But the point is... A rule was broken, plain and simple. It may not have been sportsmanlike, but it was bound to come up at some point. If a review board would have looked at the footage from the event, they may have seen it, etc.

Besides... You people can't tell me that you wouldn't have done the same thing? I'm sure, if not all of you, at least a few of you would have.

[ShimmeringFaerie]

I do feel sorry for her, I think it's a little harsh to say "well, she broke the rules". She did, but I believe this rule would be in place due to safety issues? And disqualification doesn't really fit her crime. I'm not a sports person, so I don't know what other sorts of penalties are available, but disqualification should really be a punishment for actual cheating. And how many professional athletes do we see get away with steroids use, other illegal activity and nothing ever happens to them?

I also think it was weird that no one said anything to her prior to competing. Surely they have people to check this sort of thing? And I agree that if she hadn't won, no one would have called her up on it. If rules are going to be enforced, they should be enforced all the time, not just when it matters.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by ShimmeringFaerie

I do feel sorry for her, I think it's a little harsh to say "well, she broke the rules". She did, but I believe this rule would be in place due to safety issues? And disqualification doesn't really fit her crime. I'm not a sports person, so I don't know what other sorts of penalties are available, but disqualification should really be a punishment for actual cheating. And how many professional athletes do we see get away with steroids use, other illegal activity and nothing ever happens to them?

I also think it was weird that no one said anything to her prior to competing. Surely they have people to check this sort of thing? And I agree that if she hadn't won, no one would have called her up on it. If rules are going to be enforced, they should be enforced all the time, not just when it matters.

It's like executing someone for stealing some bread..

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by Cas*

I think it's just stupid. If it hadn't effected thewinning, then fine. But it did, it'd let the other team win. Yes it's a rule, but the coaches should also make sure it's enforced before the meet, not at the end of it. Her coach should have made her take it off before the meet, and chances are she might not have been aware of it. We are not suppose to wear jewelry at work, but everyone does, and most people don't even know it is a rule. Besides that, a bracelet did not help her win, so why should she be disqualified?

It's not about whether the bracelet helped her win or not, it's the fact it's against the rules. Why the rules are in place do not matter unless you wish to challenge them but when they are being enforced, it does not matter. If the rules state disqualification when said rule is broken, then it is fitting she gets disqualified.

It wasn't very sportsmanlike of the other coach but when you look at it, what he did was right in that he ensured the competition ended fairly. The girl's coach and team members should have alerted her but you cant point fingers as to whose fault it is for that other than hers.

Originally Posted by ShimmeringFaerie

I do feel sorry for her, I think it's a little harsh to say "well, she broke the rules".

How is it a little harsh? The rules said not to wear jewlerry and she wore jewlerry, thus she broke the rules. It'd be harsh to make extrapolations from this to her as a person but that's not what happened. What wording would you prefer to use?

Originally Posted by ShimmeringFaerie

She did, but I believe this rule would be in place due to safety issues? And disqualification doesn't really fit her crime. I'm not a sports person, so I don't know what other sorts of penalties are available, but disqualification should really be a punishment for actual cheating.

Doesn't matter why the rules was made. Perhaps it was for safety, perhaps not but its reason for being there doesn't matter when a rule is broken. Disqualification perfectly fits it if that is what the rules state.

Originally Posted by ShimmeringFaerie

And how many professional athletes do we see get away with steroids use, other illegal activity and nothing ever happens to them?

How is this even relevant?

Originally Posted by ShimmeringFaerie

I also think it was weird that no one said anything to her prior to competing. Surely they have people to check this sort of thing? And I agree that if she hadn't won, no one would have called her up on it. If rules are going to be enforced, they should be enforced all the time, not just when it matters.

The rules were enforced at all times just nobody called her cheating out beforehand. I agree, she should have been disqualified from the start or at least told to take off the bracelet otherwise she gets disqualified. If she had not won then you don't know what the outcome would have been, although it is plausible to suspect she would have not been disqualified. But then again, she lost so it really wouldn't matter because she'd be out anyways.

[Cosmo]

A piece of string is not jewellery.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by RainOnMe

A piece of string is not jewellery.

To the conventional definition you may be right however that definition does not quite matter. In the rules, if it is something unnecessary and not part of the uniform, it gets considered jewlerry regardless of material it is composed of.

[Xujhan]

If it had been on the Monrovia team I would not have been cheering; in fact I'd encourage my teammates to give the trophy or whatever the prize was to the winning team. Say what you like about rules, but part of being a decent person is accepting a loss when you've earned one. I'd rather come in second than cheat my way to an undeserved first.

[TakeTheLeap]

This comes from Virginia High School League Strokes & Turns Disqualifications. I'm sure the wording of the rule in question here is similar:

Jewelry—nothing is permitted other than medical or religious medal that is securely taped to the skin.
Functional items such as elastic hair ties are not considered jewelry, if worn in the hair. The rule now

provides that only the refusal to remove jewelry when directed to do so is a disqualification.

Therefore, any piece, including a hair tie around the wrist is considered a piece of jewelry and is against the rules. Also, if the rule says that the team member shall be disqualified for not following that rule, then that is the punishment. I don't care if you think it's harsh - it's clearly a part of the rule. This isn't a matter of referee's discretion. The rule is the rule.

As I said before... If you agree to play the sport, you agree to ALL of the rules. The point is that she made a mistake and she got called on it. I'm not going to question whether or not the opposing coach's actions were sportsmanlike or not. Why would the coach -not- want to call her on it? His team members, I would assume, followed the rules as they were supposed to. Should another team's actions not be held to the same standards as his own? It's about accountability; it's not about being a spoil sport. The girl didn't follow the rules and she had to pay the price.

[Pelios]

Originally Posted by ~Emily~

But the point is... A rule was broken, plain and simple. It may not have been sportsmanlike, but it was bound to come up at some point. If a review board would have looked at the footage from the event, they may have seen it, etc.

Besides... You people can't tell me that you wouldn't have done the same thing? I'm sure, if not all of you, at least a few of you would have.

If he really wanted to be a hero why not take her aside and tell her that's illegal you should probably take that off, talk about sportsmanship. Also I don't believe he didn't see the bracelet until she was runing to jump, but if he is ok with winning that way, be my guest even his athletic director said it was nothing to be proud of no one would be proud to win that way. Sore loser...

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by ~Emily~

This comes from Virginia High School League Strokes & Turns Disqualifications. I'm sure the wording of the rule in question here is similar:


Therefore, any piece, including a hair tie around the wrist is considered a piece of jewelry and is against the rules. Also, if the rule says that the team member shall be disqualified for not following that rule, then that is the punishment. I don't care if you think it's harsh - it's clearly a part of the rule. This isn't a matter of referee's discretion. The rule is the rule.

As I said before... If you agree to play the sport, you agree to ALL of the rules. The point is that she made a mistake and she got called on it. I'm not going to question whether or not the opposing coach's actions were sportsmanlike or not. Why would the coach -not- want to call her on it? His team members, I would assume, followed the rules as they were supposed to. Should another team's actions not be held to the same standards as his own? It's about accountability; it's not about being a spoil sport. The girl didn't follow the rules and she had to pay the price.

Did you read the last bit? She never refused to remove it.

[ShimmeringFaerie]

Originally Posted by ~Emily~

This comes from Virginia High School League Strokes & Turns Disqualifications. I'm sure the wording of the rule in question here is similar:


Therefore, any piece, including a hair tie around the wrist is considered a piece of jewelry and is against the rules. Also, if the rule says that the team member shall be disqualified for not following that rule, then that is the punishment. I don't care if you think it's harsh - it's clearly a part of the rule. This isn't a matter of referee's discretion. The rule is the rule.

As I said before... If you agree to play the sport, you agree to ALL of the rules. The point is that she made a mistake and she got called on it. I'm not going to question whether or not the opposing coach's actions were sportsmanlike or not. Why would the coach -not- want to call her on it? His team members, I would assume, followed the rules as they were supposed to. Should another team's actions not be held to the same standards as his own? It's about accountability; it's not about being a spoil sport. The girl didn't follow the rules and she had to pay the price.

Your quote actually says that only refusal to remove the jewellery results in disqualification. Exactly how does that prove your point? She didn't refuse, in fact, she took it off as soon as it was pointed out.

And I don't understand why people who are religious don't have to follow the rule. Medical bracelets, I understand, but religious ones? So you basically have two rules for different people? How is that fair?

Doesn't matter why the rules was made. Perhaps it was for safety, perhaps not but its reason for being there doesn't matter when a rule is broken. Disqualification perfectly fits it if that is what the rules state.

Why does disqualification fit? She didn't cheat. Breaking the rules is not the same as cheating. A more suitable punishment would have been confiscating her bracelet or something like that. Having disqualification as a sort of blanket punishment isn't just.

How is this even relevant?

Because how can we expect teenagers to follow little rules like that, when professional athletes get away with so much worse? In fact, a lot of people jump up and down when you try to take away a professional athletes' medals for cheating, but in this case, people are just like "well, she broke the rules". If rules are basically seen as jokes in professional sport, why should they be taken seriously in non-professional sport?

[TakeTheLeap]

"Refusal to remove jewelry" is actually an addition to the previous rule, which is exactly as stated up until the, "The rule NOW states..." starts. In the past year or two, they have added on to the original rule by saying that if a judge or referee sees the infraction, they must warn the competitor before they enter into competition. If, at that point, the competitor refuses to remove their jewelry, they will be disqualified.
However, before this addition was put into place, the rule for this track competitor was the exact same.

Disqualification fits because that is what the rule states. It doesn't matter if there is a justification for the rule; the fact is that that is how the rule is written and exactly how it is carried out. The way I see it, she didn't follow the rules, and she knew the consequences.

Just as another addition... I'm sure this is not the first time this competitor has violated the rule unless said friendship bracelet was put on between the last track meet and the championship track meet. It just so happens that she eventually got caught and now she has to pay for it.

Speaking as a judge myself, you don't always catch the competitor for the infraction the first time. The fact that they got away with it before, do the same thing again, and get caught doesn't mean they were right to violate the rules the first time.

[Cosmo]

Still, the more talented team are the ones who truly won this one..

[ThrashAttack]

Originally Posted by RainOnMe

Still, the more talented team are the ones who truly won this one..

And that Kids, is todays morale lesson

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by ShimmeringFaerie

Why does disqualification fit? She didn't cheat. Breaking the rules is not the same as cheating. A more suitable punishment would have been confiscating her bracelet or something like that. Having disqualification as a sort of blanket punishment isn't just.

It doesn't matter why it fits when the rules are enforced, it only matters when you are going to challenge the rules. She did cheat by knowingly breaking the rules. What part of following the rules and enforcing the consequences when the rules are broken is so hard to grasp? You may not like it but that's what it is unless you want to complain to the group that makes those certain rules.

Originally Posted by ShimmeringFaerie

Because how can we expect teenagers to follow little rules like that, when professional athletes get away with so much worse? In fact, a lot of people jump up and down when you try to take away a professional athletes' medals for cheating, but in this case, people are just like "well, she broke the rules". If rules are basically seen as jokes in professional sport, why should they be taken seriously in non-professional sport?

Rules are not seen as jokes in professional sports by any means, you seem to think so though from that statement. In professional sports, you get die-hard fans, family and locals who go wild in joy when the athlete they cheered for wins. When the athlete gets their medal revoked, an opposing athlete gets the medal and for those reasons, the fans get angry.

Rules are enforced in professional and non-professional sports but they're not caught all the time, doesn't mean they're taken as jokes. Where are you getting the information for this babble?

[Toast]

This never really stated clearly what was considered "jewelry". From what some of you have said, it sounds like sweatbands are also not allowed. Personally I think that might be somewhat useful if you're pole vaulting...

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by Toast

This never really stated clearly what was considered "jewelry". From what some of you have said, it sounds like sweatbands are also not allowed. Personally I think that might be somewhat useful if you're pole vaulting...

Sweatbands do serve a purpose of aiding the competitor in a way that is legal despite perhaps not being part of the suit. They may very well be banned also although the rules may be more specific in specifying them as being allowed.

[BDF]

That's not jewellery... that's a piece of string tied round ur wrist. Anything that isn't part of the uniform is considered jewellery? Ok... so how about underpants? Do they go as far as telling you what collor and what brand of underwear you should wear... or do they even mention anything about it at all? I doubt it... so would it also be considered jewellery? Would they consider a tooth filling jewellery, gold or not? So should you have to remove it before taking part in the jump?

Lol... shit on the on rules and that dude with no clue, what a dirty win. Im sort of convinced that everyone hates that sucker now. Drink and live and die alone from now on lol.

[Toast]

Originally Posted by WOW!USaidSomethingSmart!

Sweatbands do serve a purpose of aiding the competitor in a way that is legal despite perhaps not being part of the suit. They may very well be banned also although the rules may be more specific in specifying them as being allowed.

That's true, but you could technically argue that a friendship bracelet aids her in giving her moral support.

Does anyone know if religious jewelry is allowed?

[Goatboy]

That coach should ashamed of themselves. I mean come on, how cheap can you get.

[TakeTheLeap]

Originally Posted by Toast

That's true, but you could technically argue that a friendship bracelet aids her in giving her moral support.

Does anyone know if religious jewelry is allowed?

If it's like the rules in Virginia, yes, religious and medical jewelry are allowed, but they -must- be taped down.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by Toast

That's true, but you could technically argue that a friendship bracelet aids her in giving her moral support.

Even then, I still think it's only religious and medical jewlerry that is allowed, so if it only gives moral support then it still may not be allowed.

[Guardian_Angel]

Haha, am I the only one who says fair play to the coach?

I mean come on, you obviously want your team to win, the fault was hers, she left herself open for attack. All is fair in love and war my friends...

I mean I doubt his team would become morally skewed from this, I think they would be glad they won. An morally ambiguous victory is a victory nonetheless?

And whether or not the rules were just were neither here or there, them the rules unfortunatally, if you don't like it don't play the game. xD

And if you break them then don't blame the guy who pointed it out!