I must say you are a complete B****, don't respond with such negativity and not put your name. Dont talk about a man to such degrees without being a man. I totally agree with some of the points against Kyle King (even as a fan and I have competed against him for years), but you don't talk like that and not put your name.
Where I come from you would be smacked in your damn mouth talkin like that. In fact, I prob would do it for Kyle If I knew who you were to be honest
I second that. You have to think, if he sent this directly to Logan what do you think would happen? I have worked in human relations offices where paper work comes in from wherever i.e. applications and letters, half of them hit the trash can right off the back. Logan may have opened it but as soon as he knew what it was about...Trash can. So great idea to post on here Kyle
If that's the case, then maybe sending a letter to Logan isn't the right form of communication. It seems as though King is upset with the rules and how they are enforced. Maybe he should become more active with the USATF so he can bring change to the rules. Or he can piss and moan on a message board. Much better venue.
Exaactly. Did Kyle King show up to the convention to convey this message? Hell No. Did Pete Rea have the balls to step up with Joe Driscoll to lodge an honest appeal over the 10K fiasco? Hell No.
bitterness is ugly wrote:
Exaactly. Did Kyle King show up to the convention to convey this message? Hell No. Did Pete Rea have the balls to step up with Joe Driscoll to lodge an honest appeal over the 10K fiasco? Hell No.
Cowardness is ugly. You and Sagarin are certainly entitled to your opinions, but have the balls to put your name down if you're going to be so damn ugly in your responses.
I understand the philosophy of putting our very best in the Trials despite a lack of qualifying time and/or making the Trials even more "elite" with tougher standards, but they were setup to allow a certain number of people to mimic the rounds/fields of the Oly Games and athletes were moved up accordingly when other athletes scratched or didn't declare. Driscoll did qualify when he ran the "B" standard. It didn't guarantee him a spot in the race, but he did qualify for a chance to run in the Trials. And as we witnessed in the 800, sometimes those ranked near the bottom actually qualify for the Olympic team. Do I think there was anyone that missed making the team due to Goucher's free pass? No. Kyle King and others are just looking for some consistency and fairness in the application of the rules. Mr. Rose's article points out many cases where it seems that consistency and fairness were not executed.
I'm not familiar with the fine print of the USATF guidelines regarding last year's Oly Trials, but some have pointed out that Goucher followed the rules with his appeal. If so, are those appeals granted fairly accross the board? Under what criteria is an appeal granted and when is it not? If Goucher had a 28 flat PR, should his appeal have been granted? On the other hand, if my memory is correct, others pointed out that the rule states that those ranked in front of an athlete with a granted appeal should also be put in the race. If that's the case, it does seem as though Driscoll and others had a legitimate gripe.
You guys are re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
I know this has been a cause celebre for Letsrun types who think that if they just got a break, they could be national class, but let's keep the big picture in mind.
Our sport is facing big problems. They're almost too numerous to name: drugs, lack of interest, lack of personalities, lack of sponsors, etc. And you guys are worried about fringe athletes who don't show up on the radar of 99% of fans.
Yes, it sucks for those athletes who weren't able to run in the Trials despite their spot on a list, but in the big picture, we've got MUCH more important things to worry about, and while I think Mr. Logan needs to be aware of such things, I think it will be No. 8976 on his list of things to attend to.
Kyle King wrote:
(2007 – Men’s 5000 – Matt Gabrielson and Giliat Ghebray, Indoor 2006 – Chris Estwanik left off of the World Indoor Team because of a late added rule change, just to name a few more).
These two times seemed much more shady than Goucher this year. It is a shame that the trials are so much higher profile and they get attention where some of the other championships seem to slide under the radar.
Matt and Giliat had no business in the 5k in 2007. Matt cut a deal and Giliat's coach happened to be an old friend of Chaplin's. If this would have happened last year it would have caused quite a stir.
I can understand the arguments for Goucher... for Giliat and Matt, it is a much different story.
Giliat and Matt are nice people and they are just fending for themselves, just like Goucher... but they are playing with a stacked deck of cards.
Tell me what was so ugly about my reply, besides the fact that you don't share my opinion? I am being pragmatic. If I were on the appeals committee, I would have put Goucher in on common sense alone. And if Alan Webb appealed into the 5000, I would've granted that to. I have no problem with the grievance that the USATF may have violated the letter, NOT THE SPIRIT, of their own ethical standards, but no athlete was wronged here, at least not in the 10,000. That is a strawman and a complete fallacy. The appeal was submitted, heard, and ruled upon. Not everyone always likes the verdict. Me senses some good ole' fashioned dissent, adversarial relationships, and vitriol between the varying factions in the state of Oregon.
Kyle King wrote:
At what point did the Qualifying Standards become suggestive?
I think it was the Suzy Favor Hamilton calendar, although others will probably cite the Amy Acuff pictorial.
Actually, I never said that I didn't believe the Gouchers of the track community shouldn't have opportunities to file appeals in certain situations. However, I do believe the process needs to be more transparent. Politics, favors, etc. shouldn't be involved in who gets appeals and who doesn't. Does an athlete with similar credentials sponsored by Adidas, without a high-profile coach, get the same consideration under someone like Chaplin? By the way, I'm far from anti-Nike.
USATF should reorganize their structure to reflect the highest standards of fairness and transparency. These decisions should be moved from the political appointees, perk swappers, and glad handers, to the certified judges who have had background checks and cleared as impartial individuals. The judges cannot be affiliated with any shoe company, running club, university, etc., but can be certified officials, coaches, etc. Part of the selection process must include a background check by sworn law enforcement / private investigators.
Sagarin wrote:
I am being pragmatic. If I were on the appeals committee, I would have put Goucher in on common sense alone. And if Alan Webb appealed into the 5000, I would've granted that to. I have no problem with the grievance that the USATF may have violated the letter, NOT THE SPIRIT, of their own ethical standards, but no athlete was wronged here, at least not in the 10,000. That is a strawman and a complete fallacy.
Gosh, I really disagree with you on this. First, although I understand that there may have been some discretion for the committee to place participants into events for which they had not otherwise qualified, I don't believe that Adam's circumstances were sufficiently compelling for him to be placed in the 10,000 finals. What circumstances would be compelling enough for me? I don't know; I just didn't see them here.
Second, although I could be wrong, I seem to recall that the rules did not allow for more than 24 runners in the 10K without a semifinal. Even if the appeals committee had the discretion to place a runner into the trials despite his failure to qualify by time, placing Adam into the finals violated USATF rules. And unlike you, I believe that it was a violation of the spirit as well as the letter of the rules, because I believe that the spirit of the rules includes the notion that we don't bend the rules in favor of particular individuals, organizations, companies, or coaches, even if we think that we might have a more interesting race by doing so.
It would be intersting to see what Adam goucher has to say about him entering in the race while other runners had a better mark!
What's his point of view?
What if he was on the other end? How would he have reacted then?
Does he feel it was fair?
I don't think we are as far apart as you think. I respect your opinion, but, as to point #1, I don't think Adam would have filed the petition if he didn't think he had a real chance to compete. And he did. Personally, while he did not finish fourth, I think if Rupp would have put the accelerator down earlier to drop Torres, who was barely hanging on, he would have done Adam a huge favor. Adam has generally been an athlete who has delivered upside surprises his entire career, and certainly had as much raw talent as any of the guys who made that team. If he hadn't been a former Olympian and US champ, been competitive in world cross with 13:00/27:00 guys just two years earlier, and run 13:10, I may not have had the same opinion. Would've, could've, should've.
As to point #2, you're the lawyer. Hard to argue with you here. Yes, they did seem to violate their own policy of 24. As to the "spirit" I am referring to, why wouldn't you want to put our very BEST talent on the line, with a chance to represent our country and be competitive? I'm not talking about an egregious, blatant bending of the rules here. As I said, I would've put 3:46 and 13:10 (only time he's ever run it I believe) Alan Webb into the 5000 field on petition, even with a rule bend, because I know his potential to be competitive. By the same token, I'm sure there are many guys who lined up for that 10,000, full well knowing they were well past their peak, would not be competitive, and may even get lapped. They were just taking in the ambience, and to me, that could just as easily be referred to as a violation of the "spirit" and taking someone else's place.
My ultimate point in deference to the OP's own verbiage, and I am paraphrasing, USATF did not "pass up" on Joe, athlete #25. Joe athlete #25 was never in consideration. Neither was Goucher, until he petitioned. Goucher did not "take" anyone's spot. The USATF bent their own rules to accommodate an athlete who they felt should be there. So did I.
It's not like the USATF kicked out qualifier #24 and replaced him with Adam. That, of course, would have been acceptable to no one. But I don't think the USATF put Adam in to make the race "more interesting." I think they really thought he could compete for a spot on the team.
What i gather from all these posts is that there are no clear rules, and even where there are rules USATF applies them in an arbitrary manner. There are enough runner lawyers (me included) who could draft some clear guidelines and procedures that USATF could apply and follow. With a groundswell of outrage and criticism perhaps USATF would be compelled to form some type of committee to analyze and possibly reform the system. I'd be interested in particpating in such an effort.
Neill Clark
To "Bitterness is Ugly" and "Sagarin":
I am thankful for your responses. I posted this here with the intention of creating discussion. That's the point. For without discussion, change will never happen. My whole intent was to possibly inspire other elite athletes and individuals to take an active role in trying to bring about change. (I would love it if you actually had the audacity to provide your actual names next time :) maybe?)
My beef is not with Nike. With all due respect, if you had read the entire letter, you would see that I am an equal opportunist in that regard. It just so happens that half of the athletes involved were from Nike. In fact, Ryan Bak and Estwanik were both Nike athletes when they got hosed. I personally feel that the responsibility lies with USATF (hence the letter to Doug Logan and not Phil Knight).
I simply care about this sport too much to see it languish on tape-delayed television, or page 8 of the sports section. America identifies with the underdog. Why is the NCAA tournament so popular? Why is Nick Symmonds so popular (graduated from a non-D I school)? Why was it so awesome watching Christian Smith make the Team? Why was it so awesome watching Nick Rogers make the Team in 2000? Because it inspires the next generation that anything is possible, if it's your night. That's why it inspired me. In a country where Track and Field fights with Football, basketball, baseball, soccer, etc, it is important that the next generation see opportunities and fairness, and not simply a cookie-cutter National Championship recipe with athletes playing the "appeal" card. Or else, we might just wake up in ten years with a sport that only receives attention with a steroids bust.
The fact is, before programs like ZAP, Hansons, USA Minnesota, the qualifying standard was 13:51 for the A. That's not a misprint. I am merely hoping that things change before too many people get turned off at the current system, and USATF is forced back to the old standards. But then again, maybe I am too passionate about the sport.
As for not attending the conference, my job, coupled with full-time graduate school did not allow me the time. I appreciate the discussion. I feel it is needed to bring about any substantive change.
Kyle
Anyone who is inspired by a politician is truly a sap.
Sagarin wrote:
If I were on the appeals committee, I would have put Goucher in on common sense alone. And if Alan Webb appealed into the 5000, I would've granted that to.
And that type of common sense makes you a complete idiot. It appears you have a thing for washed up runners. She if Dicky Beardsley petitions for the marathon I suppose you will let him in? Let's let Bob Kennedy in the 5K too.
Goucher NEVER had a chance in the 10,000. He sucked last year and sucks even more this year.
I suggest you put on a pair of racing flats and go run 92 miles this week on concrete as punishment for being so dumb. Maybe the pounding will knock some sense into you.
the thing with goucher can be argued. he filed a 'petition', okay, fine.
the thing with rupp and rohantinsky, however, is absolutely wrong. i couldn't believe they did that. Kyle you are right in saying that it was nothing more than a glorified workout. no point whatsoever in doing that. esp. when it ruins a shot for another guy.