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 aquageek
Somehow I imagine the money will soothe the angst and pain.
As for rationalization, don't see your point there. Seems ole Stevens is rationalizing his grief and overwhelming emotional burden with an old fashioned tonic, dollars.
Well, since you asked -- the powers of Australian swimming have said that Stevens is dropping out "voluntarily." They've even announced his decision before he's actually made it. And they've put him under so much pressure he's needed to see a psychologist. Under the circumstances, given the pressure they've put on him, I don't see how his "decision" can be truly voluntarily, even if he does make money from it. I consider that conduct unconscionable -- you may not.
Excusing the pressure because Stevens may ultimately make money from it, doesn't really make it his own freely made decision -- it assumes that money was his only goal in the first place. If it is, fine -- but at this point we'll never know. To me, that's a rationalization.
Anyway, I think I'll drop this point before I go into the ionosphere.
As for the rule being changed -- I cited it in two previous posts (I even included a link to an Australian newspaper that stated it). Under Australian swimming rules, if a swimmer drops out, his place goes to the next placed swimmer. They've re-interpreted it -- after the fact -- to mean the best swimmer available, but that doesn't seem to be the plain meaning of the words. I suppose they can do this if they want -- no one can stop them.
Originally posted by aquageek
Somehow I imagine the money will soothe the angst and pain.
As for rationalization, don't see your point there. Seems ole Stevens is rationalizing his grief and overwhelming emotional burden with an old fashioned tonic, dollars.
Well, since you asked -- the powers of Australian swimming have said that Stevens is dropping out "voluntarily." They've even announced his decision before he's actually made it. And they've put him under so much pressure he's needed to see a psychologist. Under the circumstances, given the pressure they've put on him, I don't see how his "decision" can be truly voluntarily, even if he does make money from it. I consider that conduct unconscionable -- you may not.
Excusing the pressure because Stevens may ultimately make money from it, doesn't really make it his own freely made decision -- it assumes that money was his only goal in the first place. If it is, fine -- but at this point we'll never know. To me, that's a rationalization.
Anyway, I think I'll drop this point before I go into the ionosphere.
As for the rule being changed -- I cited it in two previous posts (I even included a link to an Australian newspaper that stated it). Under Australian swimming rules, if a swimmer drops out, his place goes to the next placed swimmer. They've re-interpreted it -- after the fact -- to mean the best swimmer available, but that doesn't seem to be the plain meaning of the words. I suppose they can do this if they want -- no one can stop them.
