Did a World Athletics ruling keep a Canadian out of the 1,500m final?

If there’s one theme running through these 2025 World Championships, it’s the carnage in the distance races. Falls, wipeouts and collisions have been so frequent that they’ve seemed to sideline half of Canada’s men’s distance team. In one case, a questionable fall ruling from a World Athletics referee may have cost Foster Malleck of Kitchener, Ont., a spot in the men’s 1,500m final.

On Monday, Malleck went down in the semi-finals after appearing to be clipped by Germany’s Robert Farken. To many, Malleck’s fall looked to be a clear obstruction. But to World Athletics, it was ruled nothing more than a “racing incident.”

“I’m disappointed. I felt really good,” Malleck told CBC’s Devin Heroux after the race. “I feel like I did not get the opportunity to prove myself against a field like this.”

Athletics Canada did file a protest, but World Athletics rejected it. And critically, the process did not have to stop there. Athletics Canada could have escalated Malleck’s case to an appeal, an investment of US$150 (which is refunded if the appeal is successful), that puts the decision in front of a senior panel. But a World Athletics spokesperson told Canadian Running the appeal never came.

This wasn’t an isolated case. These championships have been full of falls in the tactical distance races, and Canada previously paid the cost to file an appeal. In the opening men’s 1,500m heats, Kieran Lumb went down with 200m to go. Athletics Canada protested, then appealed, but both were rejected.

Italy’s Federico Riva, who was also tangled up in the same fall, did appeal. His case was approved, he advanced to the final, and he finished seventh in 3:35.33. A top-eight placing for many Canadian athletes can carry serious weight, including extra funding and money for training expenses. Malleck never got that chance.

This wasn’t the only controversial fall. In the women’s 800m heats, Australia’s Jessica Hull was clipped by South Africa’s Prudence Sekgodiso and taken down in almost the same spot. Her federation protested immediately, and the ruling went in her favour. Hull advanced to the semi-finals. Watching the videos side by side, both her fall and Malleck’s look like classic racing incidents, with neither athlete at fault. So why does one get the benefit of the doubt and the other does not?

Who knows? Maybe the World Athletics referee has a different angle than what track fans are seeing on the broadcast, but the difference to me seems to come down to who appealed. Hull is a global distance star and an Olympic silver medallist who had already won a medal at these championships. Malleck is a young Canadian with plenty of promise, but in comparison, a relatively unknown athlete.

World Athletics prides itself on fairness, yet this ruling jeopardizes a 24-year-old’s first global championships, and feels anything but fair. The blame isn’t entirely on World Athletics. For the price of $150, why wouldn’t Athletics Canada give a young athlete the opportunity to prove himself on the biggest stage?

I get the men’s 1,500m is in the rearview, but the bigger question lingers. Why does World Athletics have a formal review process if the rulings aren’t going to be consistent?