Rosanna Davison denies mini marathon cheat claims

micropig

Amigomenor wrote: »

Is Glenda behind this story, trying to shame poor Rosanna.

I heard she stopped off in Morocco last minute resulting in her race delay.:D

What time did she finish? 15 mins, she would have done it in 12 only for the stop in Morocco;)

cbyrne11

stimpson wrote: »

That's the gun time - not the chip time. The chip time starts when the runner crosses the start line.

Why is no one asking her about why she was seen coming out of a house at the 9K mark? that's where all these stories are coming from no one would have batted an eyelid otherwise!

jennyq

cbyrne11 wrote: »

Why is no one asking her about why she was seen coming out of a house at the 9K mark? that's where all these stories are coming from no one would have batted an eyelid otherwise!

It's very telling that while several people have come out and said that they saw her at the 9km mark, not a single person has come forward to say that they spotted her in the mid-race stages.

stupidusername

If she really did run it in 51.54 last year, then it's quite feasible that she did 43 this year. however last years would have to be verifiable and the truth to the 43 this year would depend in part on how far back she begun. can anyone confirm at what stage she began?

Spread

Let's hope it wasn't Horseface's ticket she used when heading off to Marrakesh.

Amigomenor

Spread wrote: »

Let's hope it wasn't Horseface's ticket she used when heading off to Marrakesh.

Dont think Glenda would make excuses for her like Carmel has!

oddman2

Maybe she was trying to take a leaf out of Fred Lorz's book.

In the marathon at the 1904 Olympic Games, Lorz stopped running because of exhaustion after nine miles (14.5 km). His manager gave him a lift in his car for the next eleven miles (17.7 km), after which it broke down; Lorz then continued on foot back to the Olympic stadium, where he broke the finishing line tape and was greeted as the winner of the race.

cbyrne11

stupidusername wrote: »

If she really did run it in 51.54 last year, then it's quite feasible that she did 43 this year. however last years would have to be verifiable and the truth to the 43 this year would depend in part on how far back she begun. can anyone confirm at what stage she began?

apparently she did it in 49 mins in the great Ireland run, but the fact is the stories coming out seem like bull****, people saw her coming out of a house at the 9K mark, she hasn't addressed this. unfortunately though none of the papers will actually quiz her on this because she is a media darling for the Indo and Sindo.

Not that this is a huge deal but feel it's making a mockery of a good charity and she should just come clean, saying I wanted to look good at the finish line because that's all I actually have going for me!

coffee_cake

MistyCheese wrote: »

There ya go I think I've covered most of the annual anti-marathon grumbling.

nobody's grumbling about an actual marathon

they're grumbling about a 10k people insist on calling a marathon

Jimoslimos

witnessmenow wrote: »

So Carmel started the race before Rosanna, so the time for that number started counting before Rosana even started her race

Not necessarily.

“Carmel was ahead of me so it clocked her start time and she ran back and gave me the number so it clocked my finish time, giving me a time of 43 minutes,” she explains.

Doesn't mean that Carmel started ahead - she could have passed her out

stimpson

stupidusername wrote: »

If she really did run it in 51.54 last year, then it's quite feasible that she did 43 this year. however last years would have to be verifiable and the truth to the 43 this year would depend in part on how far back she begun. can anyone confirm at what stage she began?

She did the Great Ireland Run in 49:37 just a couple of months ago. 8 minute improvement in 8 weeks? I don't think so.

Bad Panda

MistyCheese wrote: »

..not a real marathon...

...take longer walks with me dog...

...fat arsed women claiming they've done a marathon...

There ya go I think I've covered most of the annual anti-marathon grumbling.

I've never heard anyone who's ran a mini marathon claim they 'completed a marathon'.

And how dare they want to do something for charity!!

Paparazzo

ThisRegard wrote: »

They weren't. http://www.independent.ie/multimedia/archive/01061/0706-rosanna_1061747a.jpg

Her story has more holes than a colander.

I'm not Poirot, but that banner in the background doesn't look like the start line! If you take getting through the slow runners and walkers into account, I think we have a definite olympic gold medalist on our hands here. She looks better than Sonya in fairness

Wossack

stopped in leeson street to touch up the makeup / take a dump? wouldnt be surprised..

The Big Red Button

Bad Panda wrote: »

I've never heard anyone who's ran a mini marathon claim they 'completed a marathon'.

And how dare they want to do something for charity!!

Unfortunately I've seen plenty claim it on Facebook the past couple of days.

There is a massive difference between 10 km and 26.2 miles. It just looks completely stupid when you see people patting themselves on the back for having completed their first marathon, when all they've done is a 10 km stroll!

stimpson

chatterpillar wrote: »

when all they've done is a 10 km stroll!

Some of them didn't even do that!

flynnlives

I have a suspicious story regarding Rosanna Davison's illeged participation in the mini marathon....
I saw her coming out of a house on Leeson street and joining in the race at around 9km. Of course this in itself is not evidence enough as to her lack of running the previous 9km. However - then I tried to check what time she ran, and her name didn't appear in the finish list. There was a photo of her at the finish and I searched her number to find that the person with that number had run it in 43mins. This I found particularly bizarre since in a newspaper interview she said she ran it in just over an hour. The name associated with the number was Carmel Murray - who just happens to be the ISPCA public relations officer - the charity Rosanna ran for!!
So delving into further detail I looked up Rosanna's time from 2011 which was 51.54 - making 43mins an almost Michelle Smith-esque improvement of 9 minutes. Also Rosanna posted a photo on twitter showing her `starting' way back in the joggers section. 43 minutes would basically be impossible from starting so far back with so many walkers etc. to dodge. So my surmise is this:
Carmel Murray started the race in the joggers section but it took about 20mins for her to cross the start line. Her chip was not activated then till abut 3.20pm. She then left the race and ran over to leeson street and gave Rosanna her number. They planned that Rosanna would `finish' the race in about an hour. But they forgot about how long it took to cross the start line so Rosanna accidentally came in 20 mins early!! And suspiciously didn't even realise it!!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79048189&postcount=52

i call shenanigans!

Jarren

who the f..k is Carmel ?






























Nevermind:pac:

stupidusername

Well yeah there's a chance she stopped at 9km to top up the make up, knowing that at the finish line, she'd be photographed.

chatterpillar wrote: »

There is a massive difference between 10 km and 26.2 miles. It just looks completely stupid when you see people patting themselves on the back for having completed their first marathon, when all they've done is a 10 km stroll!

Let's be fair though, it could be an achievement to lots of people.

hondasam

chatterpillar wrote: »

Unfortunately I've seen plenty claim it on Facebook the past couple of days.

There is a massive difference between 10 km and 26.2 miles. It just looks completely stupid when you see people patting themselves on the back for having completed their first marathon, when all they've done is a 10 km stroll!

It's not a stroll to some people, everyone has to start somewhere and get to the marathon stage.
Of course if you do marathons then the mini marathon is child's play.

coffee_cake

hondasam wrote: »

It's not a stroll to some people, everyone has to start somewhere and get to the marathon stage..

pretending they've done a marathon when they haven't isn't the way to get there

seamus

stupidusername wrote: »

If she really did run it in 51.54 last year, then it's quite feasible that she did 43 this year.

Perhaps. Though as others say, if you see the clock behind her shows 1:08, which means that whoever started the race in that number, started it around 25 minutes behind the kick-off. In other words, way back with the grannies holding hands.

So to make a 43 minute run would have involved quite a lot of weaving and overtaking, which would easily add around 1:20 to someone's run. Which would actually make for a 10k run closer to 41:40 on Rosanna's part, or a ten minute (20%) improvement in time in a year. Feasible if she'd trained hard for the last twelve months. But considering that it would be an 8-minute improvement in 7 weeks, that's not quite feasible.

None of the stories really add up tbh unless she ran the 43 minutes from the front in that number, came in with about 50 minutes on the clock and then went to a house in Leeson St to freshen up before coming back to the finish line 18 minutes later for the photos.

Diabhal Beag

When in doubt always use the "I played a Junior B hurling match this morning" excuse.

jennyq

stupidusername wrote: »

Well yeah there's a chance she stopped at 9km to top up the make up, knowing that at the finish line, she'd be photographed.

True, but given her chip time of 43 minutes, taking away 5-10 minutes for a makeup top-up and 5-10 minutes for the supposed delay of the other woman running back to her at the start to swap the numbers, you're left with a time of less than 33 minutes, which was approximately the time of the winner, an Olympic standard runner.

thesimpsons

stupidusername wrote: »

Well yeah there's a chance she stopped at 9km to top up the make up, knowing that at the finish line, she'd be photographed.

.

so that 43 mins run includes the time she did her makeup ??? what time would she have run in if she hadn't touched up so ???

hondasam

bluewolf wrote: »

pretending they've done a marathon when they haven't isn't the way to get there

I'm not sure people pretend they did a marathon, it's just a figure of speech, marathon, mini marathon. Everyone knows it's a mini marathon.

JP Liz V1

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/independent-woman/celebrity-news-gossip/rosanna-davison-denies-mini-marathon-cheat-claims-3131761.html

However, Rosanna blames being ‘disorganised’ on the number mix up.
“I registered and paid to enter as an elite runner but the acceptance letter was packed in a box when we moved house,” she told ‘The Star.
“This mean I wasn’t able to collect the number from the RDS and they don’t let you in without a form,” she said.
The ISPCA’s press officer Carmel Murphy gave Rosanna her number.
“Carmel was ahead of me so it clocked her start time and she ran back and gave me the number so it clocked my finish time, giving me a time of 43 minutes,” she explains.
The model says she finished the race in just over an hour.

“Anyone suggesting that I tried to pull a fast one is talking nonsense,” she says.

So Rosanna ran in place of Carmel

jennyq

bluewolf wrote: »

pretending they've done a marathon when they haven't isn't the way to get there

To be fair, most people who enter the race do not go around claiming they've done a full marathon and are fully aware of what distance the race really is. Just because a few idiots do think it's a marathon doesn't mean you can dismiss everyone taking part.

coffee_cake

jennyq wrote: »

To be fair, most people who enter the race do not go around claiming they've done a full marathon and are fully aware of what distance the race really is. Just because a few idiots do think it's a marathon doesn't mean you can dismiss everyone taking part.

where on earth did i dismiss everyone taking part?
we're talking specifically about those few idiots

stupidusername

seamus wrote: »

None of the stories really add up tbh unless she ran the 43 minutes from the front in that number, came in with about 50 minutes on the clock and then went to a house in Leeson St to freshen up before coming back to the finish line 18 minutes later for the photos.

jennyq wrote: »

True, but given her chip time of 43 minutes, taking away 5-10 minutes for a makeup top-up and 5-10 minutes for the supposed delay of the other woman running back to her at the start to swap the numbers, you're left with a time of less than 33 minutes, which was approximately the time of the winner, an Olympic standard runner.

thesimpsons wrote: »

so that 43 mins run includes the time she did her makeup ??? what time would she have run in if she hadn't touched up so ???

gah! I dunno, jut trying to work it out. my first reaction was to believe she probably did cheat, but benefit of the doubt etc etc...