Bob Hersh Responds to USATF Board’s Memo That He Claims “contains many incorrect and/or misleading statements”

I totally disagree that being political would have the same effect. Being political means not taking a stand and using a bunch of words to say nothing. He was defending himself against a board that has shown that it will stoop to very low levels to try and discredit him.

I thought the tone of his letter was perfect. He pointedly countered their arguments and put the ball in their court to either explain themselves or not respond and show their constituency how inept they are.

Your post makes no sense. He extended meets for no reason? Not sure what that means nor how it makes him corrupt.

Confused2015 wrote:

Your post makes no sense. He extended meets for no reason? Not sure what that means nor how it makes him corrupt.

He is obviously a troll that must have gotten bored trolling on the troll threads so came to a thread where mature adults are having a conversation to troll.

Stating the obvious wrote:

A great read, but he could have written this much better (I wanted so much to redline it). He could have stayed classy and just clarified some things and not be political. It would have had the same effect. But he has taken a much more publicly adversarial position. I don't think its the best tone for getting what he wants. He's almost going for overthrowing of the whole regime than keeping his job. It's the equiv to we have a cancer in the White House.

I think its absolutely true of course, the cancer, but the question is what is he trying to achieve here. If he wants to start an overthrow, great. If he wants his job back, not so good.

Sorry, have to disagree. Hersh is the only one showing class in this situation.

Good on Bob for not getting irritated about how his not being a black woman was held against him.

Hi Stephanie

Can someone please explain to me, or at least provide a link to the thread that describes how Hersh can win the vote for the IAAF position by a huge margin and then be denied the spot? It's not like this is 2004 gore v bush where some hidden votes and Jeb came into effect, this was a 1984 Reagan Landslide!? Is the USATF voting process nothing more than a facade, like the senate during Imperial Rome, meant to give the illusion that members have a say in what happens to the sport they love?

According to the rules, the board could pick their own candidate regardless of the vote.

Late to the Game wrote:

Can someone please explain to me, or at least provide a link to the thread that describes how Hersh can win the vote for the IAAF position by a huge margin and then be denied the spot? It's not like this is 2004 gore v bush where some hidden votes and Jeb came into effect, this was a 1984 Reagan Landslide!? Is the USATF voting process nothing more than a facade, like the senate during Imperial Rome, meant to give the illusion that members have a say in what happens to the sport they love?

The rule is that the Board can overrule the membership vote with a 2/3 majority vote of the Board. That is what they did.

The membership voted 85%+ for Bob.

I think one interesting thing to note is that the USATF membership changed the rule this year so that the membership (not the USATF Board) could pick the IAAF council member. I believe as a courtesy to the board the membership made the rule so the Board could overrule them with a 2/3 vote. Never in a million years did they think they would get overruled with an 85%+ vote. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the membership easily could have made the rule that they chose the IAAF member and the board could not overrule them. Instead the put in the 2/3 overrule in there and it bit them.

Short term the Board can ignore the membership. Long term it can't. Ultimately it is the members that the Board serves.

Could Stephanie post her signature with offices she has held. That would be an interesting comparison.

Well you can start with her bio on the website:

Elected President of USA Track & Field in December, 2008, and selected by the Board as its Chairman, Stephanie Hightower in 2011 was named CEO of the Columbus Urban League, becoming the first woman to hold the position. At CUL, she is responsible for managing overall operations, maintaining a viable budget and sound fiscal policies, generating funding sources and implementing its long-term strategic plan. She previously was Vice President for Institutional Advancement for the Columbus (Ohio) College of Art & Design, where she completed a $12 million comprehensive campaign for scholarships and facilities development. A former world-class hurdler, Stephanie has served the sport in countless capacities, beginning with USATF’s Athletes Advisory Committee and concluding as USATF women's track & field chair and as team leader, team manager and chef de mission for Team USA at international competitions. During her athletic career, she was named to the roster of 12 national teams, held several records, including the American and world records in the 60 yard dash and 100m hurdles, and she was a member of the 1980 Olympic Team. As a civic leader in her hometown of Columbus, Ohio, Stephanie served for five consecutive years as President for the Columbus Board of Education, a $1.3 billion enterprise. She also currently serves as an Advisory Officer for US Bank and is a member of several education and cultural boards.

Who are her allies in the IAAF? She isn't going to accomplish squat in that organization with her high school political skills.

You can read over it quickly to see she has 1/20 of the experience as Hersh. Also, you can see quickly she loves pointing out she is a female in power. Too bad her resume is built around non running experience at the international level because at least then she would have some ground to stand on when it come to getting on the IAAF Council. She seems to have relied on manipulation rather than experience to get the board's vote. I love how she said she is new era when Hersh pointed out that the people getting the nod to move up within the IAAF are his current coworkers. if anything this is the best time to keep him because they can bring him with them to the top and we can gain more power within the IAAF.

ish wrote:

Great, great response from Hersh. Professional, factual, and yet very damning.

USATF is really in a tight spot now. We need to continue organizing the membership and pushing against the favoritism and corruption that is tarring our sport.

Agree; and I'd go further, USATF needs to be blown up. A lot of growth and changes have evolved since TAC/USATF was instituted -- USATF hasn't shown the ability to adapt/evolve appropriately with the growth and changes and realities needing attending to in the sport from a USA athlete side of things...

Disband it, and start it, re-org it, or as we say in startup land - "new-co" it.

IfUonlyNu wrote:

I'm hearing from many in the UK the IAAF wanted Bob out. They were sick of his antics and always extending meets for no reason. He was just as corrupt as the people everyone in this thread compare him to.

He did nothing to help the state of the USA on the global front. Nothing.

I understand you want to keep your sources close to the vest but could you give us an idea how many and what their connection to the IAAF is. To be specific how are your scources aware of what The IAAF wants and what exactly is the makeup of this group "the IAAF'? Is it the IAAF Council who voted Hersh Senior VP? Is it The IAAF membership that voted him onto the IAAF council with the highest vote total of all the candidates? Is it the "Double Thumb Pinky Tickle Handshake Group" that makes up the until now unknown IAAF Illuminati Steering Committee ?

Is Ian "The Flying Scot" part of your UK coterie?

thanks in advance.

Let me try to explain things as simply as possible (because it will be tl;dr otherwise).

Prior to this year's Annual Meeting, only the Board got to choose the IAAF rep.

This was not an L&L year, but because the Board introduced emergency legislation elsewhere in that article, it opened things up for David to be able to change the bylaw for members to vote.

He also submitted a bunch of other counter proposals to the Board's emergency legislative proposals.

During the week, David and Becky Oakes (representing the Board) worked out compromises on everything except this. The Board wanted to be able to overturn the vote of the people with a simple majority, David was willing to let them overturn it with a super majority. The L&L committee voted and approved the supermajority, but the Board still had the ability to fight it at the Closing Session.

We were going to mud wrestle for it in a Closing Session Floor Fight but the Board caved at the last minute and did not fight it and the 2/3 overturning thing passed.

The Board met and voted and overturned the floor vote (in executive session, a totally inappropriate use of executive session IMO)

Sorry that was still long...

The funny thing is, the Board caved in on most of the other proposals they made, in order to focus on fighting this issue. That could have ramifications with the USOC, as they were allegedly the ones pushing for the other changes.

What were some of the things the USOC wanted?

wejo wrote:

What were some of the things the USOC wanted?

How come no one is ever this interested before the Annual Meeting? :)

Lots of documentation in the first link:

Not sure how many folks in the national track community also know Ms. Hightower's reputation in Ohio. Speaking as a long-time educator in the greater Columbus area, Ms. Hightower's professional activities in this region have been very frustrating to deal with. In short, she is the least competent administrator I have ever observed. She has a strongly mean-spirited attitude, never seems to be well informed about the issues at hand, and basically seems to focus on dividing, rather than uniting. I personally wish her nothing but the best, but I cringe at the thought of those who have to work closely with her.