If I am reading this right, Swiminfo.com is reporting that Craig Stevens is indeed going to back out of the 400 and leave it up to Australia Swimming to "pick another member of the Olympic Team" to swim that race in Athens. If I am ANY other country, swimmer, the 3rd place finisher at the Trials or an organization interested in ethics, then I am raising a stink on this one!!!! Thorpe DQ'd and the Aussies are going to skirt the rule and get him in anyway. They would be relegated to the status of Ben Johnson, Rosie Ruiz, and the 60+% of MLB who are on steriods! This is FREAKIN' UNBELIEVABLE. I have no respect for any of the aforementioned and if this happens, none for Ian Thorpe and the Australian swim federation (or whatever official name they hide behind) are in that seeming, stinking pile.
Parents
Former Member
Originally posted by knelson
I don't know the exact rules Australia follows for choosing its Olympic team, but I keep hearing if one of the qualifiers steps down, they have the authority to pick his or her replacement. So apparently Australia is allowed to pick Thorpe to replace Stevens. I think at this point it's a case of what can they do, versus what should they do. I believe, ethically, what they should do is pick the third place finisher, not a non-finisher.
Actually, their own rule is that if a swimmer drops out before the games, his spot goes the next place swimmer. You would think that the plain meaning is obvious -- it goes to the third place finisher, then fourth place and so on. But they've come up with a convoluted -- and vaguely Orwellian -- interpretation of "next," so that it means a NON-finisher and that the spot can go to Thorpe and ONLY to Thorpe. Read here:
sport.independent.co.uk/.../story.jsp
Of course they're not breaking any IOC rule, but they seem to be manipulating their own rules, after the results are posted, to come up with whatever result suits them.
Originally posted by knelson
I don't know the exact rules Australia follows for choosing its Olympic team, but I keep hearing if one of the qualifiers steps down, they have the authority to pick his or her replacement. So apparently Australia is allowed to pick Thorpe to replace Stevens. I think at this point it's a case of what can they do, versus what should they do. I believe, ethically, what they should do is pick the third place finisher, not a non-finisher.
Actually, their own rule is that if a swimmer drops out before the games, his spot goes the next place swimmer. You would think that the plain meaning is obvious -- it goes to the third place finisher, then fourth place and so on. But they've come up with a convoluted -- and vaguely Orwellian -- interpretation of "next," so that it means a NON-finisher and that the spot can go to Thorpe and ONLY to Thorpe. Read here:
sport.independent.co.uk/.../story.jsp
Of course they're not breaking any IOC rule, but they seem to be manipulating their own rules, after the results are posted, to come up with whatever result suits them.
