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
What selection process was changed? Provide the proof. As I understand it no process was changed, there is an interpretation over the "next-ranking" phrase.
You cannot continue to dwell on a rule change that you cannot quote and cannot prove.
Geek - my understanding is that this is an interpretation over "next ranking" phrase. So in that regard we are in agreement. And I aree, this isn't a black and white issue. Very few things in life are. If anything, maybe the Aussies will define "next ranked" as either next ranked in the world, in Australia or in the results of the trials.
But tell me this (not just Geek, everyone answer. If Stevens is under pressure from someone (Aussie Olympic Committe, Aussie public, Thorpe himself, whoever..) and withdraws because of it and if the 3rd place finisher is overlooked and Thorpe selected, does it feel like the right thing is being done? To me, it doesn't feel right. That is the root of my opposition to it.
I know that as of now, that is a hypothetical question, but this whole thread is a hypothetical discussion.
One other thing - I am glad to see that we can all debate and even argue this point - without name calling as we have in some other threads.....Y'all aint so bad afterall!!!:D:D :D
Originally posted by aquageek
What selection process was changed? Provide the proof. As I understand it no process was changed, there is an interpretation over the "next-ranking" phrase.
You cannot continue to dwell on a rule change that you cannot quote and cannot prove.
Geek - my understanding is that this is an interpretation over "next ranking" phrase. So in that regard we are in agreement. And I aree, this isn't a black and white issue. Very few things in life are. If anything, maybe the Aussies will define "next ranked" as either next ranked in the world, in Australia or in the results of the trials.
But tell me this (not just Geek, everyone answer. If Stevens is under pressure from someone (Aussie Olympic Committe, Aussie public, Thorpe himself, whoever..) and withdraws because of it and if the 3rd place finisher is overlooked and Thorpe selected, does it feel like the right thing is being done? To me, it doesn't feel right. That is the root of my opposition to it.
I know that as of now, that is a hypothetical question, but this whole thread is a hypothetical discussion.
One other thing - I am glad to see that we can all debate and even argue this point - without name calling as we have in some other threads.....Y'all aint so bad afterall!!!:D:D :D
