Let me see if I am following the logic here.
1.We think that the Canadian pool was properly measured and the right length. So the times are valid.
2. We agree that FINA rules were complied with as required by Canada. Therefore, the results are valid times everywhere else in the world.
3. We agree that the previous policy would have allowed those results.
4. We agree that the USMS in the future (hopefully before Worlds) will again accept times from (major) international meets that comply with the standards of that federation.
5. The results from Stanford Worlds and previous Canadian National Meets were granted exemptions from USMS standards.
6. A motion to grant the same exemption was not granted for the 2011 canadian Nationals.
Can anyone explain to me how denying the exemption for Montreal is a proper, well reasoned decision? It flaunts the precedent set in the Stanford and previous Canadian Nationals decisions. It punishes USMS members who were unaware of the rule, reasonably I might add, since it had not been applied in similar situations. It punishes some of our members and rewards others whose times were not as fast. It appears to be an arbitrary decision. It is offensive to some of us, since it could be perceived as an attempt to force the Canadians to apply our rules to their meets.
As John Kennedy said, "An error is not a mistake until you fail to correct it."
So, correct it USMS!:canada:
Let me see if I am following the logic here.
1.We think that the Canadian pool was properly measured and the right length. So the times are valid.
2. We agree that FINA rules were complied with as required by Canada. Therefore, the results are valid times everywhere else in the world.
3. We agree that the previous policy would have allowed those results.
4. We agree that the USMS in the future (hopefully before Worlds) will again accept times from (major) international meets that comply with the standards of that federation.
5. The results from Stanford Worlds and previous Canadian National Meets were granted exemptions from USMS standards.
6. A motion to grant the same exemption was not granted for the 2011 canadian Nationals.
Can anyone explain to me how denying the exemption for Montreal is a proper, well reasoned decision? It flaunts the precedent set in the Stanford and previous Canadian Nationals decisions. It punishes USMS members who were unaware of the rule, reasonably I might add, since it had not been applied in similar situations. It punishes some of our members and rewards others whose times were not as fast. It appears to be an arbitrary decision. It is offensive to some of us, since it could be perceived as an attempt to force the Canadians to apply our rules to their meets.
As John Kennedy said, "An error is not a mistake until you fail to correct it."
So, correct it USMS!:canada:
