Based on USATF's published criteria, shouldn't marathon team members be selected from 2019 results? Augustus Maiyo is the only member with a marathon performance from this year.
Dan Lilot wrote:
Dododoha wrote:
Then why can’t CIM be used for WC?
The IAAF doesn't use downhill courses for qualifying standard purposes. The Pan-Am Games, not an IAAF event, decides their own criteria.
Some of the athletes left off of the team have shared some of their pain with us today:
Siegel has a lot of tweets and retweets about sports on his Twitter, but nearly all of them are not Track and Field related. Quite the head of USATF we have.
Luv2Run wrote:
Hit em in the bank account wrote:
Every affected athlete should sue the pants off of the USATF and Siegel himself as the head man. Make it so financially devastating that he has to step down and or close down the whole organization.
Being left off the team could significantly affect future placements sponsorships and earnings. Every one of these athletes should sue for a minimum of a million dollars.
I would say that the athletes originally named to the team who should not have been have no recourse. The selection procedures need to be followed.
It appears USATF has corrected the error albeit about as cowardly as possible.
I would have far more respect for USATF to say "We made an error in putting in the 2018 times. We apologize to the athletes who were originally named to the team and to the athletes who should have been named originally and were not".
Luv2Run, I think you are severely confused about what is happening here, USATF has not rectified the situation... Not sure how you could possible think they have. They have taken off athletes who were on the team with the correct selection procedures, and replaced them with athletes from the 2018 list.
Luv2Run wrote:
NYC law firm wrote:
For athletes interested in pursuing a class action lawsuit please post your experience in this matter to this board, in addition we well be attempting to contact each of you as well also posting relevant updates to this thread.
I seriously doubt a lawsuit would get very far. If USATF had not followed the procedures it should have followed and athletes had been left off, those athletes would have a case. But I do not see how an athlete who should not have been named can sue.
The people that have the right to sue are the ones that have been taken off the team illegally, due to the fact that USATF has changed their selection procedure after the selection deadline. I can't fathom how this is confusing to you?
NYC law firm wrote:
For athletes interested in pursuing a class action lawsuit please post your experience in this matter to this board, in addition we well be attempting to contact each of you as well also posting relevant updates to this thread.
How can we get a hold of you?
I really want to emphasize to anyone reading this who is directly impacted (athlete/coach/agent) please contact the USOC Ombudsman ASAP, especially if you were not notified of last night's hearing.
Phone: 888-ATHLETE
Email:
The USOC needs to know the extent of USATF's communication failures.
andthen wrote:
Siegel has a lot of tweets and retweets about sports on his Twitter, but nearly all of them are not Track and Field related. Quite the head of USATF we have.
He's also notoriously addicted to following black female musical artists over the athletes of his own sport.
Pretty doochy.
polevaultpower wrote:
I really want to emphasize to anyone reading this who is directly impacted (athlete/coach/agent) please contact the USOC Ombudsman ASAP, especially if you were not notified of last night's hearing.
Phone: 888-ATHLETE
Email:
ombudsman@usathlete.orgThe USOC needs to know the extent of USATF's communication failures.
And what of those of us who were not directly impacted but are still mad as hell?
polevaultpower wrote:
I really want to emphasize to anyone reading this who is directly impacted (athlete/coach/agent) please contact the USOC Ombudsman ASAP, especially if you were not notified of last night's hearing.
Phone: 888-ATHLETE
Email:
ombudsman@usathlete.orgThe USOC needs to know the extent of USATF's communication failures.
Pole vault power, good thought but they are just ignoring athletes. Law firm might be better at this time
polevaultpower wrote:
A quick clarification wrote:
PoleVaultPower: A quick clarification. When USATF pulled out of Staten Island they did not have ABQ secured. In fact, the date they wanted was already contracted. There was an open date, but it was too late for them. Yes, they asked about the contracted date and facility, but it took lots of negotiation to have a chance to make it work. Actually, it still isn't settled, and USATF will have to make some serious concessions if they want the ABQ facility. It is just more of USATF incompetence that permeates everything about the sport. I still want to know how USATF pulled out of Staten Island even though they had a firm contract. I know why they did it, but I am just curious how they broke the contract. Do you have any info.
Okay, back to the topic about USATF treating athletes like garbage.
USATF has the deeper pockets and loves to pay their lawyer friends from outside law firms. Not sure it would be worth the trouble for Staten Island to go after them. But no, I never asked for any details on that side of things.
Good for ABQ if they have the upper hand here. USATF doesn't have many choices at this point. I hope ABQ gets a nice contract.
The big picture issue is that USATF keeps burning bridges with more and more facilities. Bids for USATF Championships are generally getting harder and harder to find.
Facilities that could be good hosts for USATF events see what happened to Mt SAC and Staten Island... remember that next time people complain about being in Eugene for the 50th time.
Once the new Hayward Field is complete, people are going to see and agree what a fantastic unparralled venue it is for track and field in the USA - there will be nothing like it, nothing that can come close.
A brand new high tech, comfortable, practically swanky venue / palace dedicated to track and field.
Get ready to get used to Eugene and treated like royalty in a brand new venue dedicated to your sport.
You're really not going to want to see a meet anywhere else, because no where else in the USA will present and curate a meet as well as New Hayward Field and Eugene.
Mark these words, great things are coming :)
Can I please just clarify what’s happened here - published selection criteria said best 2019 marks, a mix of 2018/2019 marks was used by “the intern”, the “mistake” was rectified so that only 2018/2019 marks were used for all selections so in fact the whole selection is wrong and there is up to 39 changes to be made in order to follow the published selection criteria? As tough as it is, shouldn’t the athletes incorrectly selected step down voluntarily - a tough call but due to a mistake you shouldn’t be in the team and I would have thought that makes selection pretty tainted. These Lists are published aren’t they? So it shouldn’t be too hard for someone to come up with the correct list based on published criteria. Maybe the athletes need to take the stand in the short term to fix the debacle. And honestly, I would guess athletes selected incorrectly probably knew all along it was a bit odd - coaches and athletes read the criteria back to front and know exactly what you need to do for selection - so if you don’t do it and get selected it’s pretty obvious there’s been a major stiff up.
Please explain wrote:
Can I please just clarify what’s happened here - published selection criteria said best 2019 marks, a mix of 2018/2019 marks was used by “the intern”, the “mistake” was rectified so that only 2018/2019 marks were used for all selections so in fact the whole selection is wrong and there is up to 39 changes to be made in order to follow the published selection criteria? As tough as it is, shouldn’t the athletes incorrectly selected step down voluntarily - a tough call but due to a mistake you shouldn’t be in the team and I would have thought that makes selection pretty tainted. These Lists are published aren’t they? So it shouldn’t be too hard for someone to come up with the correct list based on published criteria. Maybe the athletes need to take the stand in the short term to fix the debacle. And honestly, I would guess athletes selected incorrectly probably knew all along it was a bit odd - coaches and athletes read the criteria back to front and know exactly what you need to do for selection - so if you don’t do it and get selected it’s pretty obvious there’s been a major stiff up.
I disagree. An athlete who has been offered a spot should never feel compelled to give up that spot because "it is the right thing to do." It is up to the organization doing the selecting to follow their own rules. USATF is fully responsible for this. They published two sets of rules, which led to two different sets of qualified athletes. One set of rules was not released until the qualifying period had already ended. The new set of rules would have clearly changed people's season strategies. To make matters worse, they followed one set of rules for some events and the other set of rules for other events without explanation. Now you have different athletes who feel like they have qualified for the event depending on which set of rules they are looking at. Whoever does not get to go is a victim a very flawed process. People would be angry if this was the first time something like this had happened, but USATF has procedural problems like this all the time. It is their job to clean up their own mess and maybe this time, they'll learn from it. It is not the athletes' job to step away because it is the right thing to do. Stepping away is not the right thing to do.
Ozzie wrote:
Please explain wrote:
Can I please just clarify what’s happened here - published selection criteria said best 2019 marks, a mix of 2018/2019 marks was used by “the intern”, the “mistake” was rectified so that only 2018/2019 marks were used for all selections so in fact the whole selection is wrong and there is up to 39 changes to be made in order to follow the published selection criteria? As tough as it is, shouldn’t the athletes incorrectly selected step down voluntarily - a tough call but due to a mistake you shouldn’t be in the team and I would have thought that makes selection pretty tainted. These Lists are published aren’t they? So it shouldn’t be too hard for someone to come up with the correct list based on published criteria. Maybe the athletes need to take the stand in the short term to fix the debacle. And honestly, I would guess athletes selected incorrectly probably knew all along it was a bit odd - coaches and athletes read the criteria back to front and know exactly what you need to do for selection - so if you don’t do it and get selected it’s pretty obvious there’s been a major stiff up.
I disagree. An athlete who has been offered a spot should never feel compelled to give up that spot because "it is the right thing to do." It is up to the organization doing the selecting to follow their own rules. USATF is fully responsible for this. They published two sets of rules, which led to two different sets of qualified athletes. One set of rules was not released until the qualifying period had already ended. The new set of rules would have clearly changed people's season strategies. To make matters worse, they followed one set of rules for some events and the other set of rules for other events without explanation. Now you have different athletes who feel like they have qualified for the event depending on which set of rules they are looking at. Whoever does not get to go is a victim a very flawed process. People would be angry if this was the first time something like this had happened, but USATF has procedural problems like this all the time. It is their job to clean up their own mess and maybe this time, they'll learn from it. It is not the athletes' job to step away because it is the right thing to do. Stepping away is not the right thing to do.
There are many things wrong with what you are saying. You say, "They published two sets of rules, which led to two different sets of qualified athletes." This is downright false, they post one selection procedure, that was signed and dated by the CEO of USATF. This selection procedure is explicit in saying they are using the 2019 performance list, not sure why you are suggesting otherwise. The only athletes who should feel like they qualified are athletes at the top of the 2019 list, there is no way any person who has been around track and field could reasonably read the selection procedures posted and think, "oh yeah my 2018 mark will hold up based on this". Therefore, those athletes who have been wrongly placed on the team due to 2018 marks should not feel entitled to the spots on the team, when everyone hard the rules since December... The victims wouldn't be the people who have 2018 marks and were place on the team on June 26th, the victims are the people who were taken off the team, who in fact have the best 2019 marks, and by all means deserve the spot on the team.
No respect for any one that runs based on 2018 times.
Hope karma plays out for those that based on 2018 times.
Where have sport ethics declined to - grab the glory, money - no matter what, so sad.
Let's see if anyone voluntarily withdraws - that would be amazing.
A True Professional Would Decline wrote:
No respect for any one that runs based on 2018 times.
Hope karma plays out for those that based on 2018 times.
Where have sport ethics declined to - grab the glory, money - no matter what, so sad.
Let's see if anyone voluntarily withdraws - that would be amazing.
BS. The onus is on our governing body to get it right, not on athletes to remove themselves from teams they were selected for. Nothing unethical about competing for the team that picked you.
whemmy wrote:
A True Professional Would Decline wrote:
No respect for any one that runs based on 2018 times.
Hope karma plays out for those that based on 2018 times.
Where have sport ethics declined to - grab the glory, money - no matter what, so sad.
Let's see if anyone voluntarily withdraws - that would be amazing.
BS. The onus is on our governing body to get it right, not on athletes to remove themselves from teams they were selected for. Nothing unethical about competing for the team that picked you.
Is it unethical to dope? one of the girls newly placed on the team is a convicted doper Imani Oliver, and ranked 14th in 2019?
Might not be unethical but is morally wrong to feel comfortable representing your country when you know for a fact that others are more deserving and want to compete but you took their spot...
There are many things wrong with what you are saying. You say, "They published two sets of rules, which led to two different sets of qualified athletes." This is downright false, they post one selection procedure, that was signed and dated by the CEO of USATF. This selection procedure is explicit in saying they are using the 2019 performance list, not sure why you are suggesting otherwise. The only athletes who should feel like they qualified are athletes at the top of the 2019 list, there is no way any person who has been around track and field could reasonably read the selection procedures posted and think, "oh yeah my 2018 mark will hold up based on this". Therefore, those athletes who have been wrongly placed on the team due to 2018 marks should not feel entitled to the spots on the team, when everyone hard the rules since December... The victims wouldn't be the people who have 2018 marks and were place on the team on June 26th, the victims are the people who were taken off the team, who in fact have the best 2019 marks, and by all means deserve the spot on the team.[/quote]
We agree that USATF originally put out a selection criteria that allowed only marks from 2019. After that we disagree. USATF put out a new bulletin, after the qualification window had ended, that said they would also allow 2018 marks to count. That was the second set of rules. Their implementation was unfair. On that, we agree. The implementation of any set of criteria was botched. On that, we agree. But they didn't allow the 2018 marks by accident, they said (after the fact) that they were going to do that. They just said it way too late for anyone to react to it or plan for it. This puts the responsibility on USATF.
Once USATF sent the email that said they would be counting 2018 marks, in my mind, it makes those athletes victims if they are not allowed to go.
Now if I had to choose the team, knowing that someone is getting screwed over, I would select the team based on the rules that were in place in December, and not the ones in place since June 22nd. But I still believe that it is 100% the responsibility of USATF to do that and 0% the athletes'.
Ozzie wrote:
There are many things wrong with what you are saying. You say, "They published two sets of rules, which led to two different sets of qualified athletes." This is downright false, they post one selection procedure, that was signed and dated by the CEO of USATF. This selection procedure is explicit in saying they are using the 2019 performance list, not sure why you are suggesting otherwise. The only athletes who should feel like they qualified are athletes at the top of the 2019 list, there is no way any person who has been around track and field could reasonably read the selection procedures posted and think, "oh yeah my 2018 mark will hold up based on this". Therefore, those athletes who have been wrongly placed on the team due to 2018 marks should not feel entitled to the spots on the team, when everyone hard the rules since December... The victims wouldn't be the people who have 2018 marks and were place on the team on June 26th, the victims are the people who were taken off the team, who in fact have the best 2019 marks, and by all means deserve the spot on the team.
We agree that USATF originally put out a selection criteria that allowed only marks from 2019. After that we disagree. USATF put out a new bulletin, after the qualification window had ended, that said they would also allow 2018 marks to count. That was the second set of rules. Their implementation was unfair. On that, we agree. The implementation of any set of criteria was botched. On that, we agree. But they didn't allow the 2018 marks by accident, they said (after the fact) that they were going to do that. They just said it way too late for anyone to react to it or plan for it. This puts the responsibility on USATF.
Once USATF sent the email that said they would be counting 2018 marks, in my mind, it makes those athletes victims if they are not allowed to go.
Now if I had to choose the team, knowing that someone is getting screwed over, I would select the team based on the rules that were in place in December, and not the ones in place since June 22nd. But I still believe that it is 100% the responsibility of USATF to do that and 0% the athletes'.[/quote]
Yeah umm, but as you're saying the second (which was probably made up to cover their asses) selection procedure, wasn't available until after the deadline. So how on earth would the 2018 people think they deserve it? Please explain that, and then maybe I can see where you're coming from.
Yeah umm, but as you're saying the second (which was probably made up to cover their asses) selection procedure, wasn't available until after the deadline. So how on earth would the 2018 people think they deserve it? Please explain that, and then maybe I can see where you're coming from.[/quote]
Again, we agree on a main point. USATF announced a second set of rules to cover their asses. What I don't understand is why you would think that when the whole fiasco was USATF's doing, that it should be the athletes' responsibilities to relinquish the positions that they were offered. It is up to USATF to develop a selection criteria, follow it, and correctly invite athletes. The athletes' responsibility is to accept or decline the invitation. If an athlete is invited, accepts, and then is uninvited, in my opinion, that athlete is a victim of USATF's ineptitude. Also, if an athlete was supposed to be invited and was never invited, they are also a victim of USATF's ineptitude. Athletes who were supposed to receive communication and did not, were also victims of USATF's ineptitude.
So at the end of the day, I don't think that the people from the 2018 list should really feel like they deserve it. They are victims because at one point it was promised to them via an official statement.