|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/tracka...ory?id=2538181
BERLIN -- Marion Jones will not be invited to the final Golden League meet in Berlin in September because of her past links with coach Trevor Graham. The American sprinter and other athletes linked to Graham will be barred from the Sept. 3 meet in Berlin, chief organizer Gerhard Janetzky said Thursday. Graham is the coach of Olympic and world 100-meter champion Justin Gatlin, who faces a lifetime ban after failing a drug test in April. Several other athletes coached by Graham have been suspended for doping. Jones is no longer coached by Graham, and works with Steven Reddick. The five-time Olympic medalist has been dogged by doping allegations but has never failed a test and denies using performance-enhancing drugs. But Janetzky said she "belonged to the circle of suspected even if nothing has been proven." All Golden League meets should adopt a "common line," Janetzky said. More at the link. So it looks like you can now be banned/excluded for having known / been associated with, in the past, that has been accused of maybe being involved in doping. I wonder if they'd take the reasoning "I left because I suspected their methods?" Probably not since this is about bodycount. If cycling adopts this it's going to be awfully quiet around here, since that would eliminate 99% of the riders above low amateur. "Let the bodies hit the floor!" Bill C |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
in 520437 20060803 164451 "Bill C" wrote:
So it looks like you can now be banned/excluded for having known / been associated with, in the past, that has been accused of maybe being involved in doping. It's not a matter of being banned or excluded, more one of not being invited. Surely any event organiser can invite who he likes? No-one has a god-given right to participate (if they did I'd be driving in the next F1 race). |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
Bob Martin wrote: in 520437 20060803 164451 "Bill C" wrote: So it looks like you can now be banned/excluded for having known / been associated with, in the past, that has been accused of maybe being involved in doping. It's not a matter of being banned or excluded, more one of not being invited. Surely any event organiser can invite who he likes? No-one has a god-given right to participate (if they did I'd be driving in the next F1 race). So elite events can not invite elite athlete's because they don't like who they have associated with? That opens the door for every bigot out there to have a field day. If it's an accredited event, then any athlete not sanctioned by the GB should be able to do it period. Discipline needs to come through the system, not individual predjudices. Apartheid rules! Bill C |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
in 520462 20060803 182628 "Bill C" wrote:
Bob Martin wrote: in 520437 20060803 164451 "Bill C" wrote: So it looks like you can now be banned/excluded for having known / been associated with, in the past, that has been accused of maybe being involved in doping. It's not a matter of being banned or excluded, more one of not being invited. Surely any event organiser can invite who he likes? No-one has a god-given right to participate (if they did I'd be driving in the next F1 race). So elite events can not invite elite athlete's because they don't like who they have associated with? That opens the door for every bigot out there to have a field day. If it's an accredited event, then any athlete not sanctioned by the GB should be able to do it period. Discipline needs to come through the system, not individual predjudices. Apartheid rules! Bill C You seem to have forgotten why Ullrich and Basso didn't ride the TdF. I thought TdF entry had always been by invitation (or not). Also, international events are not normally organised by bigots. Why does Marion Jones's absence upset you so? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
Bob Martin wrote: You seem to have forgotten why Ullrich and Basso didn't ride the TdF. I thought TdF entry had always been by invitation (or not). Also, international events are not normally organised by bigots. Why does Marion Jones's absence upset you so? I don't give a rat's ass about Marion Jones. It's aboput the principle of innocent until proven guitly. I have no beef with Jan's firing because he failed to meet a clearly specified clause in his contract. It's a technicality, but a huge one. How about Astana? How about all the stories "clearing" riders now in the "Operation"? Looking suspicious, or knowing the "wrong" people is not justification to penalize someone. That's a really ugly slippery slope and I object to getting on the sled. Bill C |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 17:51:56 GMT, Bob Martin
wrote: Also, international events are not normally organised by bigots. Why does Marion Jones's absence upset you so? Stick the word 'ostensible' or 'ostensibly', I might agree. My personal experience is that sports has pretty much as many bigots as non-sport activities and some sports are hot beds of bigotry. These events are using the IAAF jackpot as part of the promotion and the Berlin event is excluding AFAIK an IAAF athlete in good standing. He should announce that he is forgoing the Golden League participation as well, as he disagrees with their position on the athletes participating. Instead, he is using both side as publicity - his denial of participation to Marion Jones and the Golden League jackpot as a promo. He is IMO a self-serving hypocrite. Whether he is a bigoted hypercrite only he and perhaps some of his friends would know. Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
Bill C wrote: Bob Martin wrote: You seem to have forgotten why Ullrich and Basso didn't ride the TdF. I thought TdF entry had always been by invitation (or not). Also, international events are not normally organised by bigots. Why does Marion Jones's absence upset you so? I don't give a rat's ass about Marion Jones. It's aboput the principle of innocent until proven guitly. Bill C No, Bill, it's not about innocent until proven guilty, either. It's about professional (key word: professional) being BIG business. Say you're a promoter of pro track & field events in Europe. You've worked for years to build your reputation and your events so that you can compete for and get the big sponsorship dollars AND the big TV packages. Maybe your event is so big you don't have to pay the exhorbitant appearance fees that other promoters pay to the athletes in order to build the prestige of their events. Sure, you pay, but not through the nose. You've got an organization of over 100 full time employees who work to make this happen. You've got thousands more who work the event itself. You make a nice living as do most of those who work for you. So, you want to risk losing all that because someone thinks it's unfair to exclude someone who may bring disrepute on the event. Just like the Tour organizers do, I'd look at any premier athlete and determine from a dollars and cents basis whether they were going to likely ADD to, or DETRACT from, the quality of the event. I don't fault the promoter one bit for excluding her. He has every right to protect his investment, and she has none to demand entry to an invitational event. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
Curtis L. Russell wrote: On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 17:51:56 GMT, Bob Martin wrote: Also, international events are not normally organised by bigots. Why does Marion Jones's absence upset you so? Stick the word 'ostensible' or 'ostensibly', I might agree. My personal experience is that sports has pretty much as many bigots as non-sport activities and some sports are hot beds of bigotry. These events are using the IAAF jackpot as part of the promotion and the Berlin event is excluding AFAIK an IAAF athlete in good standing. He should announce that he is forgoing the Golden League participation as well, as he disagrees with their position on the athletes participating. Instead, he is using both side as publicity - his denial of participation to Marion Jones and the Golden League jackpot as a promo. He is IMO a self-serving hypocrite. Whether he is a bigoted hypercrite only he and perhaps some of his friends would know. Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels... Thanks Curtis The fact that a snactioned meet is denying a sanctioned athlete the right to compete would seem to me to violate the implied contract between the athlete and the sanctioning body. That IMO is a two way contract. The athlete agrees to follow the rules that have been established or they will be disciplined for the privilege of participating in that sanctioning body's events. She has not been suepended by the sanctioning body so IMO there is no right to ban her from a sanctioned meet. As you say the GB needs to step up and force them to let her race, or prosecute her for something. I really dislike most of the US player unions for their stupidity and greed, but the events in cycling, and others like this, point out the need for them to exist and protect the athletes. Bill C |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Is this just and reasonable?
in 520485 20060803 201535 "Bill C" wrote:
OK, let's throw around some names here of people who've caused ugly scenes at events. Terrell Owens, Zidane, John Rocker, John McEnroe, etc... they have all caused major negative scenes at events in the past so they should be excluded for fear they might cause a problem? You are completely missing the point that people went to see John McEnroe BECAUSE he created a scene. The crowd loved it. The organiser's first responsibility is to his investors, and he carries that out by attracting and pleasing the spectators. If they don't want to see Marion Jones then he doesn't invite her. Why on earth do you think that athletics are run by a different set of rules to other commercial enterprises? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|