Kirk - you are right. I wrote that several people 'claimed' we are without a suitable representative in the 100, and this was really my inference from the discussions - a statement that we might not have a medal contender, that we will be without the number one seed from the U.S., and the idea that her actions were 'selfish.' If folks posting here aren't concerned that the U.S. will miss its best shot at a medal in this event, then why is her decision an issue?
Some of those girls looked pretty disgusted when they looked up at the results of their 100 finals. Maybe this is their chance to quit their bitching - vocal and facial expression - and let their swimming do the talking. This is a great chance for someone else to step up and become a "suitable" representative for the US.
But in the grand scheme of things, who cares if we don't have a medal contender in this event? There are enough other events where we'll have a nice haul.
Kirk - you are right. I wrote that several people 'claimed' we are without a suitable representative in the 100, and this was really my inference from the discussions - a statement that we might not have a medal contender, that we will be without the number one seed from the U.S., and the idea that her actions were 'selfish.' If folks posting here aren't concerned that the U.S. will miss its best shot at a medal in this event, then why is her decision an issue?
Some of those girls looked pretty disgusted when they looked up at the results of their 100 finals. Maybe this is their chance to quit their bitching - vocal and facial expression - and let their swimming do the talking. This is a great chance for someone else to step up and become a "suitable" representative for the US.
But in the grand scheme of things, who cares if we don't have a medal contender in this event? There are enough other events where we'll have a nice haul.
