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.
I think you missed a small part of the Foster story. They have already changed the rules. It appears that Matthew Kidd is on the team (which is terrific) when he did not make the cut in the 100 free which he won (he missed the cut by .49) nor in the 50 in which he took second to Foster.
For discussion sake, let's say that Thorpe cramped up on the last 50 and finished third.
Would you support pressuring Craig Stevens into stepping aside under those conditions?
Michael
Originally posted by Bert Bergen
He is not entitled to the spot this time because he didn't earn it when the rules said he was supposed to. Black and white.
And if he's offered the spot by the Australian Olympic Committee, he's supposed to turn it down? Maybe Stevens just wants Australia to send the best team possible, or maybe he doesn't think he earned the spot.
Originally posted by Bert Bergen
I don't think that is their (Australian swim officials) spot to "offer." It is earned by swimming 8 lengths of the pool, by the two fastest guys in the water on that day. He wasn't one of them. My thoughts.
Well, who's decision is it? Of course it's the Australian swim officials' decision. There's no other governing body.
I'm still waiting for the rule that is allegedly being broken.
This is all silly. No one seems to care we have professional athletes in the Olympic yet people are all hot and bothered by one country, using their own rules, making an exception for the worlds best swimmer, or almost the best anyway.
Personally, the Olympics without Thorpe suffers. If he used an illegal stroke or was hopped up on gull80's magic swim potion, then ok, keep him home.
Swimming takes the stage front and center once every four years. It's the best we can get right now so put aside your little pet peeve and watch some great swimming. Now, that's only assuming the Greeks remember to put water in the pool, if the budget still allows for that.
Taking an example from another sport, I'm sure many of you watched the final round of The Masters last weekend. Phil Mickelson made a tremendous 18 foot clutch putt to win. What if his putt missed by a fraction of an inch (and there weren't any huge explosions to nudge it in like in Caddyshack)? Would it be ok for the referees to say "we'll give you a mulligan on that, try it again. Ernie Els agrees it's o.k." I don't think anyone would say this is fair. I don't really think the Thorpe situation is too far from this scenario.
Knelson, excellent point! I agree with you totally. Although the Olympic 400 free won't be the same without him, he screwed up by DQing himself! He should not swim. The 3rd place swimmer should move into this position, as the rules say. You better believe if I was the 3rd place swimmer, I would want that spot!
Based on the current rules I think what is a happening with Ian is wrong - the other guy should go. I, however, have always thought that there should be some kind of wild card entries for athletes that have proved they have the potential to medal at the Olympics. The Olmypics should be where the best are going to be. Why should we not allow a current world record holder or #1 ranked swimmer to not compete because they were DQ, are sick at trials, or miss their taper slightly. I think the US and Aussie trials add excitement to achieving the goal of making the Olympics, but there are times when the best swimmer based on past performances isn't allowed to compete at the Olympics.
I say let them both swim. Give Ian a wild card entry.
This analogy to The Masters is very ill conceived.
First, all PGA events are governed by a single set of rules. It's not like each event has it's own rules and then The Masters maintains a separate set. That is not the case for the Olympics.
Australia has been given the freedom to choose their Olympians. If they decide to be somewhat shady, so what? That's their call, not the IOCs. You may not like their random use of their own rules but you can't randomly enforce an IOC rule that does not exist and claim some higher moral ground.
