Irish Olympic Marathon selection put on long finger

Peckham

How will they select the three? Some people around a table making a subjective judgment, or something more transparent than that?

RacoonQueen

thirtyfoot wrote: »

Yes indeed.

But someone in Ireland can make it harder if they want. I think they should.

True, so we have 4 now and when the rest (we could name half a dozen) realise how weak it is they will chase it for Rio unless its toughened. Then we'll have 10!

But they all knew that the womens team was going to be competitive so even with the 'soft' standard they should have been going all out to get the fastest time possible to ensure they were selected. Unless there is 3 or less capable of hitting A-standard it shouldn't really matter what time Ireland use as a qualifier as the faster you go the more likely you are to get selected.

To be fair though, didn't they try and secure DCM as the qualifying race and the proposal got rejected?

ecoli

While I know that it is not an ideal situation and team should know by now so they can prepare the AAI/IOC could be looking at it from another angle.

If team is selected and one gets injured in a month or two time it makes it hard to call up the next person as they will have changed their focus to the 10,000m. It looks as though they are trying to not repeat past mistakes ala Pauline Curley who was called up late with her B standard for Beijing

Think of the negative press that was generated as a result. By holding off on the choice it is not fully fair on the athletes but it does create best possibility of having full roster in London

robinph

pistol_75 wrote: »

04072511 wrote: »

In Australia they have made their qualification for the men's marathon sub 2:12.

They did the same for GB but then relaxed it when Lee Merrien didn't make the time in London.

Makes no sense to keep the athletes waiting as everyone seems to agree on.

What is the best we can hope from any of them?

The additional complication for the UK mens team was that they had given a place to someone with a time slower than Merrien based on the Daegu finishing position. That is why they then did relax the standard.

Kurt Godel

thirtyfoot wrote: »

The key to preventing this happening again is to make the marathon standard in line with all other events, ie, harder. Then, for the foreseeable future, we won't have more than 3 qualifiers in an event.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the women's marathon has a low entry standard in order to increase participation from countries with little history of women's sport- to include more countries in a way that doesn't impact logistically in the same way many more entrants in T&F would.

(Agree with you that the standard should be in line with other events).

Clum

The real reason the decision date was put in June was so Athletics Ireland could spend half of April and May working out the results for the national 10km championships. One thing at a time...

Goofy

From the article in theIndo

Raheny's Barbara Sanchez is still hoping to get the qualifying standard in Copenhagen on May 20, which may yet throw up another contender.

This is the key point. The organisers set out a date of June 12. Other athletes, like Sanchez, have planned their season to run marathons between now and then to try and qualify. It wouldnt be fair on them to make the selection now.

shels4ever

Goofy wrote: »

From the article in theIndo


This is the key point. The organisers set out a date of June 12. Other athletes, like Sanchez, have planned their season to run marathons between now and then to try and qualify. It wouldnt be fair on them to make the selection now.

Yep from the Reheny site she has been in France the last few weeks with a couple or races.

Kurt Godel

Goofy wrote: »

From the article in theIndo


This is the key point. The organisers set out a date of June 12. Other athletes, like Sanchez, have planned their season to run marathons between now and then to try and qualify. It wouldnt be fair on them to make the selection now.

That's the nub of the problem though, anyone who hits the qualifying standard close to June 12 will be suffering performance-wise come the Olympics. (That's no slight on Sanchez; she's perfectly right to suit herself in determining what race to target within the selection criteria). It might not be fair to Sanchez (or other athletes targeting the time before the cut-off), but the late selection cut-off is unfair to all the athletes involved, it will do no-one in the eventual squad of three any favours.

Hard Worker

04072511 wrote: »

None of this is the fault of the athletes. It is a smart move targetting a softer standard, but there is a case for strengthening our qualification criteria for the marathon going forward.

The background is that no woman had qualified for 20 years I think. Setting a "soft" standard was a good move. It helped to form a good competitive group who will no doubt improve over the next few years. As it stands at the moment, that group would get a team medal in the European Championships.
You can't really compare sprint and middle distance standards to those of a marathon. You get one chance per year, two at most, to get qualifying standards in the marathon. People might tend to just run for the standard ( Mark Kenneally ), when in fact they may have been able to run quicker.

TJC

Clum wrote: »

The real reason the decision date was put in June was so Athletics Ireland could spend half of April and May working out the results for the national 10km championships. One thing at a time...

HAHAHAAAAA!!!:D:D:D:D

TJC

Pherekydes wrote: »

They should have set the date for the day after London, but it's too late to change it now. Others are attempting to qualify. It's only fair that they get the chance.

True on both accounts..

drrunner

I would be no great defender of how AAI conduct their business with regard to placing athletes at the forefront of consideration, however I do have a little bit of sympathy for them in this situation. 12 months ago it would have been impossible for a lot of people to realistically believe that we would have 4 qualifiers in the women's marathon and so maximising the qualifying period would have seemed like a good idea. Clearly, it would also be impossible and unfair to move the goalposts for anyone still seeking qualification. However, the situation has been exacerbated by the vagueness of the criteria by which selection will be made in a case like this. What would be really helpful right now would be if AAI published a clear set of criteria by which they will make their decision allowing for potential additional qualifiers (e.g. the fastest 3 times or whatever...)...however chance would be a fine thing

robinph

Name two people now, let them get ready, one spot left open until June for the chance that someone else makes a time.

ChickenTikka

I'd have to agree with the AAI sticking to the original date they publicised for qualification standards to be met. To do anything else would be an injustice when some athletes may be out there preparing with that date in mind. Whether we agree or not with the date, fact is thats the date that was set. Any arguments over the date should have been had before it was set. Its easy to be wise in hindsight.

myflipflops

drrunner wrote: »

I would be no great defender of how AAI conduct their business with regard to placing athletes at the forefront of consideration, however I do have a little bit of sympathy for them in this situation. 12 months ago it would have been impossible for a lot of people to realistically believe that we would have 4 qualifiers in the women's marathon and so maximising the qualifying period would have seemed like a good idea. Clearly, it would also be impossible and unfair to move the goalposts for anyone still seeking qualification. However, the situation has been exacerbated by the vagueness of the criteria by which selection will be made in a case like this. What would be really helpful right now would be if AAI published a clear set of criteria by which they will make their decision allowing for potential additional qualifiers (e.g. the fastest 3 times or whatever...)...however chance would be a fine thing

This is right.

For all the comments having a pop at the AAI here, the selection agreement has been in place for a long time and nobody had a problem with it until now. They can't change the goalposts just because we are in the seemingly unlikely position of having 4 qualifiers.

The time to take issue with the late team selection was months ago, not now.

meathcountysec

Peckham wrote: »

How will they select the three? Some people around a table making a subjective judgment, or something more transparent than that?

The nomination policy was announced last February:

http://hp.athleticsireland.ie/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=123:2012-athletics-ireland-olympic-games-nomination-policy&catid=42:team-event

thirtyfoot

Who would people select?

I'd go Ava, Linda and Catriona. Dropping Maria. She raced previously at Olympics albeit kicking and screaming so to exclude her could cause huge issues. But leaving those reasons aside and purely athletics based I'd pick the those three.

shels4ever

I'd go with Ava, Linda and Maria , Maria based on here performance over the last few years she has a few good marathons and i'd expect her to run well in London if selected, Linda as national cham and Ava as the fastest time so far but if her time has been closed to Catriona's it would have been a close call.

myflipflops

Linda Byrne is a given in my opinion. Being the national marathon champion and 10k champ on the roads has to count for something. Also, her age is a major factor. She has lots of marathons and lots of potential major champs in front of her (standards allowing).

Ava Hutchinson should be picked too. Again, her age counts and she has the fastest PB.

After that, i could not call. Maria McCambridge has been a brilliant servant (TM every rugby journo in the country) of Irish athletics. Jennings has come to the sport late and shown a large amount of talent and promise.

Whatever happens, there are arguments for them all and it will be incredibly tough on the person to miss out. Gun to head and based on purely athletics reasons: Byrne, Hutchinson and Jennings.

T runner

myflipflops wrote: »

This is right.

For all the comments having a pop at the AAI here, the selection agreement has been in place for a long time and nobody had a problem with it until now. They can't change the goalposts just because we are in the seemingly unlikely position of having 4 qualifiers.

The time to take issue with the late team selection was months ago, not now.

I'm sure plenty of people may have had a problem with it. The athletes can't really have a go until it becomes an issue.

It's up to the aai to work this out. If someone qualifies on may20 there is simply not enough time to prepare adequately for the Olympic marathon. This was just bad planning.

They should keep the policy they have advertised, but any qualifiers in late may unles they are considerably faster, are obviously at a huge disadvantage come he Olympics due to the aais I'll thought out cut off time.

RacoonQueen

Linda should be a definite, they all raced each other in DCM and she beat the 3 of them, right?

Pherekydes

myflipflops wrote: »

Linda Byrne is a given in my opinion. Being the national marathon champion and 10k champ on the roads has to count for something. Also, her age is a major factor. She has lots of marathons and lots of potential major champs in front of her (standards allowing).

Ava Hutchinson should be picked too. Again, her age counts and she has the fastest PB.

After that, i could not call. Maria McCambridge has been a brilliant servant (TM every rugby journo in the country) of Irish athletics. Jennings has come to the sport late and shown a large amount of talent and promise.

Whatever happens, there are arguments for them all and it will be incredibly tough on the person to miss out. Gun to head and based on purely athletics reasons: Byrne, Hutchinson and Jennings.

Agree with this nearly word for word. I'd hate to be the one to tell the one omitted. She'll probably hear of it on "Off the Ball".

myflipflops

T runner wrote: »

It's up to the aai to work this out. If someone qualifies on may20 there is simply not enough time to prepare adequately for the Olympic marathon. This was just bad planning.
.

I agree, anyone qualifying on May 20th needs to do something special because of the time scale to London.

I do say it is only considered bad planning because of the scenario that 4 had qualified. Not many people would have predicted this happening. If we were sitting here with 1 or 2 athletes qualified and Linda Byrne and Ava Hutchinson planning late May attempts at the standard after failing in Dublin/Hueston then we would all be cheering them on and they would be grateful for the extra time.

TJC

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Linda should be a definite, they all raced each other in DCM and she beat the 3 of them, right?

Thats very true... And she beat them all hands down on a difficult day for tunning. Although she ran a smarter race than the others that day which helped.

Ava has to go also. Quickest of 4...and her age in her favour.

For me its gona be a close call between the other 2.

Everyone wants to see Maria there after all she has done over the years. She was flying n Rome before hitting the cobbles...but that was her choice to run there i suppose..

Catriona ran a great time having been injured for a few weeks and with very few races under her belt. Was also a bit windy on race day. This would all suggest she has more in her. She would therefore be my choice...her time is also quicker than Maria.

Bad planning by AAI alright but sure we're used to aai by now. It#s a pity the girls cant just get on with their training / lives. Will be very disappointing for the one who misses out....but then again things could always change with injuries etc. (touching would yhey don't as i say that!)

Anyway best of luck to the 4 of them. Been great following their progress over last year..... 3/4 to choose. What a great problem...

T runner

myflipflops wrote: »

I agree, anyone qualifying on May 20th needs to do something special because of the time scale to London.

I do say it is only considered bad planning because of the scenario that 4 had qualified. Not many people would have predicted this happening. If we were sitting here with 1 or 2 athletes qualified and Linda Byrne and Ava Hutchinson planning late May attempts at the standard after failing in Dublin/Hueston then we would all be cheering them on and they would be grateful for the extra time.

Only one of the 5 criteria given for selecting athletes is for actually chieving the Olympic standards. The others are for distinguishing athletes who have already reached the standard. These criteria are for all Athletic events so clearly the possibility of more than 3 athletes qualifying has been thoroughly considered and take 4 out of 5 selection criteria. Also the marathon and race walk selections are earlier than others so clearly some realisation that more preparation is necessary is there.
The athletes were asked to sign an acknowledgemment of the selection criteria so they had absolutely no input in them and Patsy McGonnigles implication that athletes had shifted their position by complaining now is not correct.
Not allowing sufficient time for race preparation after selection is a blunder in planning and rests solely at the AAIs door.
Just because they didnt get lucky and have the consequences of the mistake
minimised by having fewer women than the quota with the A standard makes no difference to the poorness of the planning.
Best of luck to whomever is going for the time. It will have to be a good one: 3 of the 5 criteria for selection are concerned with race preparation.

i.e an athlete who legitimately reaches an A standard in the requisite timeframe could be penalised in 3 of the 5 selection criteria because of the closeness of her/his qualifying date to the deadline of the timeframe. Surely points to a glaring error in the parameters of that timeframe?

TheRoadRunner

If I had to pick 3 strongest runners IMO it would be Byrne, mccambridge and Hutchinson. Hutchinson may suffer as she is not based in Ireland (I think). Having said all of that, I feel for Jennings and would feel sorry if she missed out.

Byrne is a must, beat them all in Dublin and is national champ. National 10k champ on road also although I don't think that should count for much.

It would be nearly better if one of them got injured at this stage and had to rule themselves out. I know that sounds awful but as said above I'd hate to be the one to break the bad news to the unlucky one.

Whatever the result their will be conspiracy and counter conspiracy stories.

Pisco Sour

Just had a thought, and perhaps it is flawed but here it goes. Most of us here (myself included) tend to harp on about athletes (particularly young ones) needing to be sent to the Olympics for experience, so that it will stand to them for future Games'. Well Maria is the only one with that valuable Olympic experience, so would it not be a bit hypocritical to leave her at home? Surely Olympic experience has to be a huge factor in deciding who goes? I realise she wasn't very very young when she competed in the Olympics, but even still, she has what neither of the other 3 have, and her qualifying time is close to the others. IMO she has to go if that argument about "experience" is ever to be taken seriously.

TheRoadRunner

04072511 wrote: »

Just had a thought, and perhaps it is flawed but here it goes. Most of us here (myself included) tend to harp on about athletes (particularly young ones) needing to be sent to the Olympics for experience, so that it will stand to them for future Games'. Well Maria is the only one with that valuable Olympic experience, so would it not be a bit hypocritical to leave her at home? Surely Olympic experience has to be a huge factor in deciding who goes? I realise she wasn't very very young when she competed in the Olympics, but even still, she has what neither of the other 3 have, and her qualifying time is close to the others. IMO she has to go if that argument about "experience" is ever to be taken seriously.

But what about giving somebody else the experience with the view they could push on from it? This will probably mccambridges last Olympics. I see your logic though.

runjb

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/0505/1224315653146.html

They've brought the date forward to May 21st. So at least it's someway sooner...

brutes1

What are the chances of any one else hitting the times , as far as I can see Prague and Copenhagen only chances left ...??...

thirstywork2

Womens marathon team will be announced Monday :eek:

Izoard

Could be 5 into 3, if Barbara Sanchez does the business in Copenhagen over the weekend...

RacoonQueen

As expected it's McCambridge that misses out.

Following the meeting the athletes nominated for selection are:

50km Race Walks:
Rob Heffernan
Brendan Boyce
Colin Griffin
Men’s Marathon
Mark Kenneally
Women’s Marathon
Linda Byrne
Ava Hutchinson
Caitriona Jennings

Hard Worker

RacoonQueen wrote: »

As expected it's McCambridge that misses out.

Following the meeting the athletes nominated for selection are:

50km Race Walks:
Rob Heffernan
Brendan Boyce
Colin Griffin
Men’s Marathon
Mark Kenneally
Women’s Marathon
Linda Byrne
Ava Hutchinson
Caitriona Jennings

As expected....?

I thought she would have been selected.
It must have been a difficult job for the selectors and I don't envy them.

Middle Distance

I would love to know what selection criteria they used because if they were going on current form Maria would have to be the next selected after Linda Byrne. Would like to know how the selectors came to their decision to drop Maria rather than anyone else!!!!

shels4ever

Middle Distance wrote: »

I would love to know what selection criteria they used because if they were going on current form Maria would have to be the next selected after Linda Byrne. Would like to know how the selectors came to their decision to drop Maria rather than anyone else!!!!

Yep everything set down seemed to suggest maria would be selected, but then again that was just my reading of the criteria. Best of luck to the girls selected.

RacoonQueen

Hard Worker wrote: »

As expected....?

Sorry, as I expected...

Pisco Sour

So much for the whole argument of sending B-Standards to the Olympics to gain valuable Olympic experience. Maria is the only one with such experience and it seems like she may have been punished because of it. How can such a point be taken seriously now.

Not an easy job for the selectors but would be nice if they made public the reasons behind the selection.

RacoonQueen

04072511 wrote: »

So much for the whole argument of sending B-Standards to the Olympics to gain valuable Olympic experience. Maria is the only one with such experience and it seems like she may have been punished because of it. How can such a point be taken seriously now.

Not an easy job for the selectors but would be nice if they made public the reasons behind the selection.

My guess would be they want to give these 3 experience thinking they'll qualify again in 2016. Main reason I expected Maria to miss out was because the other three are younger than her and are more likely to be looking to run again in Rio.

ecoli

04072511 wrote: »

So much for the whole argument of sending B-Standards to the Olympics to gain valuable Olympic experience. Maria is the only one with such experience and it seems like she may have been punished because of it. How can such a point be taken seriously now.

Not an easy job for the selectors but would be nice if they made public the reasons behind the selection.

You could argue its one thing to have track experience but she doesnt have Marathon Championship experience and with the likes of Byrne, hutchinson and even possibly Jennings (only 31) may have another chance at Rio and this experience could stand to them

Having said that I would have liked to see Maria on the team in terms of current fitness and potential for high finishing I could see here being second only to Linda on the team IMO

shels4ever

RacoonQueen wrote: »

My guess would be they want to give these 3 experience thinking they'll qualify again in 2016. Main reason I expected Maria to miss out was because the other three are younger than her and are more likely to be looking to run again in Rio.

Yep a very good case for that, can't remember if that was one of the criteria they put down.

A. Consistency and Repeatability of performance in the 2011 and 2012 domestic and international seasons. Repeatability
indicates consistency of performance and soundness of athlete preparation necessary to compete at the Olympic Games;
B. Statistical data (ranking/performance list, performance-time curves derived from longitudinal data);
C. On‐Demand Performance and success at the Olympic Games requires the ability to compete on‐demand at a level equal
to or better than the qualifying standards. The ability to achieve standards and to win at specific high performance
competitions is a principle for nomination. The history and performances at previous European, World Track and Field
Championships, and Olympic Games, in particular the history of the athlete’s on-demand performances at those major
championships by reference to the level of performance expected of the athlete at those championships will be considered.
D. The competitive record of each athlete against other athletes under consideration for nomination in the same event.
Emphasis will be placed on such results achieved in national championship events, as will achievement of performance
targets in championship conditions.
E. The Final Phase Readiness in the final build-up phase is a fundamental principle for nomination. The ability to achieve
the Olympic Entry Standard(s) indicates performance readiness in the main competition period and ultimately for the main
competition.
2.3 The Selectors may nominate up to three athletes for each event provided they have met the 2012 Olympic Games Entry
Standard. Where there are more than three athletes who have bettered the “A” Standard in one event, the Selectors will decide
which of the athletes is to be nominated for selection by reference (including but not limited) to the factors set out in section 2.2.

Ar Strae

The die is cast

Women’s Marathon
Linda Byrne
Ava Hutchinson
Caitriona Jennings

ecoli

I have merged the two threads as they are discussing same topic

rom

ecoli wrote: »

I have merged the two threads as they are discussing same topic

4 into 3 doesn't go but 2 into 1 does

tunguska

Im shocked by that. Maria regularly gives catriona jennings a pasting. Has jennings ever finished ahead of maria mc cambridge in a race?
Thats a joke.

Pherekydes

tunguska wrote: »

Im shocked by that. Maria regularly gives catriona jennings a pasting. Has jennings ever finished ahead of maria mc cambridge in a race?
Thats a joke.

That's a bit unfair. How many times have they raced over the marathon? Jennings is 5 years younger and is improving rapidly. Maria has already had the opportunity to represent Ireland at a games.

ultrapercy

tunguska wrote: »

Im shocked by that. Maria regularly gives catriona jennings a pasting. Has jennings ever finished ahead of maria mc cambridge in a race?
Thats a joke.

always respect your views and opinions, and your argument is valid but be fair to two great athelets.

tunguska

Pherekydes wrote: »

That's a bit unfair. How many times have they raced over the marathon? Jennings is 5 years younger and is improving rapidly. Maria has already had the opportunity to represent Ireland at a games.

How is it unfair, its calling a spade a spade. Tell me when did catriona jennings ever finish ahead of maria mc cambridge in a race? Dublin marathon last year maria finished a full 3 minutes ahead of jennings. Rome marathon is a lot tougher than rotterdamn. If the two were to run a marathon tomorrow maria would beat her, that im 100% sure of.

ultrapercy wrote: »

always respect your views and opinions, and your argument is valid but be fair to two great athelets.

I dont want to take you up the wrong way, so could you elaborate on how Im being unfair?

macinalli

tunguska wrote: »

Rome marathon is a lot tougher than rotterdamn.

This was always going to be a hard call as no two marathons are the same, but do you think this was a bad decision by Maria to race in Rome? Given that the likes of Rotterdam & Berlin are supposed to be faster courses, it seemed odd to pick a course like Rome for such an important race.