Off the Couch


Discussion guidelines | Privacy policy | Terms of use

Limit of 2000 characters, 2000 characters remaining

  1. At least, i hope they put her name back in as an official finisher just like the others who finished and took "extra" aid.

    I have to agree that as an elite athlete with a chance of winning, she shouldnt have tip-toed the line and followed the USAT rules rather than the LFM rules; which is clearly different.

    Prize money aside, it sounds like she would rather be recognized as a finisher...and wow at 3:02:09.

    That or arrange the $500 -plus- the 2nd place purse to be divided between Cassie and the next female finisher.
  2. I understand that if rules aren't enforced, then people will just do whatever they want. But in this case, it seems like a silly thing to enforce considering it probably didn't affect her run that much. In professional cycling there are rules about not hanging onto support cars when getting food/bottles, and you're also not supposed to draft on cars, but riders still do sometimes, but only if it's something they do more than a couple times do they enforce the rules.

    I think the Milwaukee Marathon should at the very least add her name to the list of finishers, and put her in the first-place spot with an asterisks by her name that says, "*1st place female finisher *Took an extra sip of water." It's not like she had a hand-up every five miles or something. I hope she boycotts the Milwaukee Marathon but does more in other cities.
  3. Well put, One cog. As a former cyclist myself, I thought the enforcement of this rule seems a bit harsh and petty. Also, in regards to the rule in general, wouldn't some sort of time penatly be more appropriate?
  4. A quick internet search reveals no silly DQs of marathon runners. One additional gulp of water offered no unfair advantage to this young woman. I'm not sure why this race committee has put itself in such a position. The outcry certainly is in favor of the runner. This decision should be reconsidered.
  5. This absolutely ridiculous. A little kid offers you a water bottle at a marathon and you take it after 19 miles. Was there a judge there who said shame on you? Did someone simply rat out this girl? Someone who prepares for a 26 mile run and in doing so competes and in this case wins, shouldn't be the slight bit punished for a little kid offering some water. Had it not been a little kid, this girl wouldn't have probably even taken it. She probably felt some remorse for the kid, having no knowledge that his water was inefficient. Did this kid have some kind of special water? This whole situation needs to be taken care of and a course of action is needed now. Give Cassie Peller her 500 dollars she worked hard for and EARNED and slap the kid on the wrists and say no more marathons for him.
  6. This girl EARNED her right for 500 dollars and the overall female winner in this marathon. Give her her earnings and tell the kid not to give water at marathons anymore
  7. tpelballer -- this has nothing to do with aid she received from a child on the course. Accepting aid like that is allowed in the rule guidelines, as it is something that citizens set up and is generally available to all runners. I suspect that issue was brought up to try to garner sympathy for her position, but it has absolutely no bearing on this issue.

    She was DQ'd because a friend came out of a van, ran with her a short while, and gave her water. That kind of aid is absolutely enough to give someone a 44 second advantage (so much of running a marathon is mental...)

    And, race officials communicated that to all registered runners many times in the weeks leading up to the race. She knew or should have known the rules. She just made a bet that she wouldn't get caught and she lost that gamble.
  8. Count me as one of those who supports the DQ.

    I don't think I have EVER heard of of an elite runner having someone come up alongside and having someone jump out and run with them (pacing them perhaps?) and offering additional aid.

    With money on the line for the winner that is simply an unfair advantage.

    And frankly, she should have known better. The 2010 race was selected as the National Championship for road racing so people knew that there would be USAT officials there and they would be monitoring things very closely.

See all Journal Sentinel Twitter feeds