Alberto Salazar BANNED For Life for "Sexual Misconduct"

[quote]RedorGreen wrote:

2. SafeSport has a enormous place in our community in regards to protecting children/athletes. I am sure that there is ample evidence surrounding AlSal and this case, but I do fear encompassing ALL innappropriate behavior as sexual misconduct. Being a sleazeball and subsequently not fit to coach USATF sanctioned events doesn't require labeling something what it is not. If more facts come out showing AlSal's behavior fit the mold of sexual misconduct, then okay.

I totally agree. Protecting children/minor athletes. The original purpose, perfectly appropriate and just.

So how the hell did this unaccountable, semi governmental body achieve so much unilateral power over professional sports?

Those are not necessarily SafeSport violations.

Body fat is not inherently a banned topic (especially in elite sports), it just has to be handled appropriately for the situation. Conversations about body fat should be rooted in science and losing body fat should be monitored by qualified professional, not a situation where a coach just doesn't like how an athlete looks.

Yelling is not banned. You could yell out times, tell an athlete they need to go faster or slower, anything else that is relevant to the sport performance. You can't do stuff like call them names or berate them. Most coaches do not struggle to figure out where that line is.

These are things that do violate the SafeSport Code and we should not be tolerating in our sport. The last sentence is the biggest problem, other coaches turn a blind eye to the abuse.

I get that in many other countries, these things may not violate any rules they currently have in place, but they are still wrong and World Athletics should be advocating that all Federations begin offering some basic level of protection for athletes to be free from abuse by their coaches.

mendo ponyo wrote:

I totally agree. Protecting children/minor athletes. The original purpose, perfectly appropriate and just.

So how the hell did this unaccountable, semi governmental body achieve so much unilateral power over professional sports?

Because turning 18 is not some magical number that makes it OK for a coach to abuse you. Because athletes of any age should be able to participate in sport without having to worry about their coach pursuing them romantically.

umstead wrote: I have not seen a single person defending behavior that has already been made public. The only point we have made is that this process held in secret seems unfair, unjust and un American.

You need to read a couple of the other threads on this very board. There are many people defending behavior that has already been made public.

polevaultpower wrote:

One longtime ex-German coach cussed every second word and often screamed things like "you run like a girl!" This coach worked J.D.

Another coach slept with a long string of female athletes, which everyone knew about, but was awarded by his peers.

These are things that do violate the SafeSport Code and we should not be tolerating in our sport. The last sentence is the biggest problem, other coaches turn a blind eye to the abuse.

I get that in many other countries, these things may not violate any rules they currently have in place, but they are still wrong and World Athletics should be advocating that all Federations begin offering some basic level of protection for athletes to be free from abuse by their coaches.

You have a problem with two consenting adults sleeping with each other? And you want to force your woke agenda on other countries that are mature enough to let athletes and coaches decide if they want to date each other? Is this where your racial epithet against "middle eastern" countries came from? You don't get a pass just because you think you are better than everyone

Becca, thanks. Understood. But the fact is that Alberto Salazar is being destroyed and ripped to shreds due to his supposed SEXUAL MISCONDUCT, understood by 99 percent of the general public as PREDATOR.

If there was no true Sexual Misconduct, but actually multiple (and yes, serious) violations under their very bizarre technical definition of "Sexual Misconduct"....is that a fair way to brand a person for the rest of his life? A red letter permanently scarring the person. Fundamentally unfair.

We do know this. It's "preponderance of evidence" aka more likely than not. That's spelled out in the SafeSport manual.

Becca,

Thanks for your insight. What are the penalties normally? Is it normally a lifetime ban or nothing?

I'd like to see resources spent on prevention. Like all coaches when they are hired at a HS or college should be required to at least watch some video. Teach them the basics, there is a power imbalance, be professional, don't sleep with them, etc.

polevaultpower wrote:

mendo ponyo wrote:

I totally agree. Protecting children/minor athletes. The original purpose, perfectly appropriate and just.

So how the hell did this unaccountable, semi governmental body achieve so much unilateral power over professional sports?

Because turning 18 is not some magical number that makes it OK for a coach to abuse you. Because athletes of any age should be able to participate in sport without having to worry about their coach pursuing them romantically.

no Becca, that's again not OK. But it should not be regulated by a secret court system, originally set up to deal with the terrible abuse of minors in sport, affording a coach in professional sports none of the usual rights guaranteed to American citizens. Their definitions of Sexual Misconduct are bizarre, to say the least.

Becca, you mentioned the pursuit of the coach's athletes being pursued romantically. That is a new one we have not heard about... We can only assume you are presuming the pursuit of an adult athlete....right?

So why is Alberto Salazar singled out here for lifetime punishment, when that very scenerio has occurred hundreds of times in the last decade in the sport of track and field? Certainly well known to multiple people in high places. With adult coaches and adult athletes. You know this, everyone knows this.

There is very likely more to this folks. But I will add that so am not sure what gender many people are these days so I am not sure how commenting on their appearance is a sexual act, as I cannot even ascertain a gender.

OozmaKappa wrote:

not very old sac joaquin guy wrote:

Any interaction with a woman can be considered sexual harassment if the woman seems it so. The woman also has as long as she wants to decide to take action, in any way, shape, or form.

Pretty much. If a woman wants to ruin a mans life she can do so on a whim.

Nothing stopping men from adopting female gender. You also get to win most races and are safe from the mob.

I agree with much of your post.

1) We need to hold coaches to a VERY high standard

2) It's good some body exist to keep track of allegations or otherwise you end up with something like the Catholic church. A school just has you resign and you move onto the next school to do it all over again.

3) Where i disagree is the lifetime ban for Salazar if there's not more than what we know. It's over the top if all we have is him telling adult women many of whom who were making six figures a year that they need to lose wait (Cain being a minor may be another story - that makes me super nervous) but I do recongize even if they were star athletes, the power imbalance here is clear as Salazar controls the nike pursestrings.

I just don't think the first infraction of anything save for something really egregious like sexual assault should be a lifetime ban.

Do we really need an outside entity telling us how mean someone can be before they are banned from life for a first offense, particularly when the actions took place before that entity even existed? Shoud we go back and sanction Mark Wetmore for telling a guy he "should look like a skeleton with a condom pulled over his head?"

I'd almost rather Safesport be a place where they protect the hell out of kids and then just note accusations for adults. An athlete says "Salazar did this." Then any potential employers or athletes can read it and decide if they want to hire them/employ them. Of course that might be unworkable as rivals could just make up accusations.

It's a difficult thing for sure to implement.

I do have one real strong feeling - I'm pretty certain I don't like a lifetime ban for sexual harrassment that isnt' sexual in nature if it occurred before anyone was even trained in this stuff or Safesport existed. And I don't like how the findings aren't made public. If you are confident in your work, you should publish the arbitrato'rs decision while removing any identifying information.

"...the power imbalance here is clear as Salazar controls the nike pursestrings."

No he didn't. He was not a party to the athletes' contracts.

Rojo maybe you could give Al a call and see if he has something to say.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

"...the power imbalance here is clear as Salazar controls the nike pursestrings."

No he didn't. He was not a party to the athletes' contracts.

He might not have had control over the contracts, but was certainly in a position to undermine the athletes when the time came to renegotiate a new contract. Nike was going to listen to Al Sals advice whether not to re-sign an athlete.

Good riddance to sinister trash. He was a blight on clean and safe sport for over a decade, and everyone knew.

Seems like an extreme charge and punishment for something that should be termed “use of insulting/insensitive language” and punished with a private warning and in his letter in his folder.

These “facts” are in fact “plaintiff allegations” (see page 1 - “Plaintiff alleges” …).

casual obsever wrote:

FYI, Mary's lawsuit states as "facts":

a) That defendant Salazar had committed sexual misconduct with another athlete;

b) That defendant Salazar had possessed and trafficked testosterone in violation of anti-doping regulations;

c) That defendant Salazar had experimented with athletes on how far he could push the envelope with performance enhancers without getting caught by anti-doping regulatory bodies;

d) That defendant Salazar used female athlete’s weight as the primary performance variable, and commented negatively on female athletes’ bodies, commenting on their “asses” and “boobs” as being too large; and required runners to weigh themselves publicly and discuss weight publicly as a matter of course;

It's unusual for institutions to several y discipline their own stars. It usually means that only the tip of the iceberg is visible.