World Swimming Association?

So the swimmers who get 3rd and 4th in their events at Trials are not elite? I'm going to assume you didn't mean that. If swimmers that missed the Olympics are funded, they would go to an international meet. You'd definitely get top talent. The only problem is that many countries don't have our depth. I think the assumption is swimmers would need to pick their allegiance. If they want to swim at Olympic Trials they are likely going to need to be members of USA Swimming who--almost certainly--will be aligned with FINA. I guess it's possible the third and fourth place swimmers at Trials could jump ship after Trials, but it seems like the new WSA would also need to have some kind of qualifying requirements for their international meet.

Looks like some heavy hitting politics going on. What makes you say that the IOC would not recognize a new org? I realize that there are significant political forces behind all of this, but if you can shed any light... What light needs to be shed? These are organizations that have a history of moving slowly. I'm not 100% sure that's what would happen, but lets look at tennis. When the whole tennis split took place, players had to choose between the majors and making money. When it became clear that more players chose money, the majors finally caved in. But it was money driving everything. What would the new organization have to offer the swimmers, other than a lifetime ban from FINA events, which would probably include the Olympics and World Champs. And that is where the money is. If it's sponsors driving FINA, they are unlikely to switch, when the new setup will give them all the power (oh, and, by the way, money) they want. The only possibility would be for the new group to start with some pretty powerful sponsors, and that, in my opinion, is pretty iffy. And what about the open water and synchro swimmers and divers, who get zero pub outside the Olympics and WCs? Don't get me wrong; I think FINA is a crap bunch as now configured and would welcome a new way of doing things. I just think they are too entrenched after all this time.

This happened in tennis a long time ago and took a long time to resolve ... Nice idea, but I don't have much hope for it. I don't even think it's a nice idea. Rival world governing bodies are a traditional method for taking a screwed up situation and making it even more screwed up. Consider boxing, or the sad history of the Professional Chess Association: By FIDE regulation, the bids for the World Championship final should have been decided by three parties ... FIDE president Florencio Campomanes broke these rules ... In response to this, Kasparov and Short formed the PCA ... They played their world championship match under its auspices ... FIDE stripped Kasparov of the FIDE World Championship title, and instead held a rival match between Anatoly Karpov and Jan Timman ... For the first time in chess history there were two world champions, the FIDE world champion Karpov and the PCA world champion Kasparov. To have any credibility as a world governing body, a rival swimming organization would obviously have to set up a rival world championships. Would anyone respect it? Probably yes, if the likes of Michael Phelps or Ryan Lochte participated. Maybe they'd have different rules, maybe they wouldn't. What if Ryan Lochte set a world record in the 200 IM wearing an ever-so-slightly different suit? Would FINA recognize it? Oh, yes! Let's sign up for that! Let's have multiple world champions in every event, multiple sets of rules, and multiple world records. That would be so great for the sport. NOT! If FINA is, liike FIDE was, is in need of some changes, the right way to do it is from within, as Bessel Kok tried to do in 2006 by running for President of FIDE. Kok sincerely had the interests of chess in mind, and campaigned vigorously for the office. Though he lost the election to the incumbent, relations were sufficiently improved within a few months that Kok and Ilyumzhinov collaborated to form the Global Chess Company. After more than a dozen years of chaos, the rival world championship titles were unified the following year.

What light needs to be shed? These are organizations that have a history of moving slowly. I'm not 100% sure that's what would happen, but lets look at tennis. But it was money driving everything. What would the new organization have to offer the swimmers, other than a lifetime ban from FINA events Specifically what you said about the IOC only recognizing FINA. Yes, they both move slow, but unlike tennis, it's not a matter of unseating the power player (FINA), all they have to do is convince the IOC to replace them. That's a big difference. You're also assuming that FINA would ban swimmers or not allow them to compete in both. While that's certainly possible, I'm not so sure it's any more likely than them allowing swimmers to compete in both. In any event, it will be interesting to see how this turns out.

You're also assuming that FINA would ban swimmers or not allow them to compete in both. While that's certainly possible, I'm not so sure it's any more likely than them allowing swimmers to compete in both. It certainly seems like a very petty move, but so does their "no soup for you" move wrt to rules change proposals after not getting their way with the tech suits last year.

Looks like some heavy hitting politics going on. What makes you say that the IOC would not recognize a new org? I realize that there are significant political forces behind all of this, but if you can shed any light... So the swimmers who get 3rd and 4th in their events at Trials are not elite? I'm going to assume you didn't mean that. If swimmers that missed the Olympics are funded, they would go to an international meet. You'd definitely get top talent. The only problem is that many countries don't have our depth. No, I did not mean that the 3rd and 4th place finishers are not elite. I should have been more phrased that more carefully. I don't know what the IOC would do. That's like trying to figure out what any ruling body would do.

I agree with Swimosaur: setting up an alternative body is peremptory and takes you off the main stage. Dueling meets will harm everyone. Stay inside FINA and fight. 2009 was an enormous leap forward, and shows that members and member organizations can challenge and topple the exec. ASCA's frustration is understandable. It just needs to be channeled in a way that effects lasting, productive change. FINA's vague disciplinary language about bringing disrepute on the sport has been used as a gag order and should be openly defied. Nothing like a lot of free, unfettered speech to blow a fresh wind through FINA.

I think they're trying to apply pressure on FINA. Ultimately it seems they want to reshuffle the leadership more than anything. I don't think even they expect the new WSA to usurp FINA on the world stage.

You're also assuming that FINA would ban swimmers or not allow them to compete in both. While that's certainly possible, I'm not so sure it's any more likely than them allowing swimmers to compete in both. Given the FINA reaction to WAMO I think it is a safe assumption that they will ban anyone who joins a rival organization. Check out General Rule 4: www.fina.org/.../index.php If I wanted to bring about change I would go through the FINA constitution and bylaws to check out the provisions for the members amending these documents. It would be very surprising if there weren't options for the members to override the exec committee.

What's the ultimate goal? Olympic Gold. Who controls that? IOC. Who does the insular IOC recognize and is not about to recognize any other body? The now more insular FINA. This happened in tennis a long time ago and took a long time to resolve. I think the elite swimmers would go with FINA, because the big money is Olympic Gold. Nice idea, but I don't have much hope for it.