Runthedistance2 wrote:
Cheruiyot is racing, Rudisha raced in Paris, AK said they were going to let whoever wants to race outside do so, the athletes are the ones who do not want to race
You're missing the point. Which was that Kenyans are not "hidden" away somewhere. They are either in camp, at a meet, or on a plane between the two.
Currently the IAAF has a rule for everything that hurts the athletes but no rules for selecting athletes for meets. Even sponsored meets.
How can you have a Samsung Diamond League series if there is no consistent way to pick the athletes allowed to enter. They get points for the championship and cash prizes for winning.
Both of these athletes PR's would have won in London (not saying they would have). And that is $10,000 for first place if it was a Diamond League race.
This would be the equivalent of a sport like NASCAR having a points race and telling one of the top athletes they could not race because they do not like how they have acted publicly although they have not violated any rules or bylaws.
No meet director should have enough power to affect an athletes livelihood, especially in a championship style series.
Contact the marketing department at Samsung and Aviva, the sponsors of the meet, and let them know that the meet director and his wife abuse their positions and sponsorship money to carry out personal vendettas against people they don't personally like. Also, let the marketing departments know you will be boycotting their products and services.
Also, the athletes excluded from the meet should sue USATF for purposely sabotaging their Olympic preparations because of personal vendettas.
Just found the following blog post detailing the whole controversy
http://tracksuperfan.com/symmonds-stewart-controversy
Some interesting statements (many of which have been brought up here)
"It appears that Symmonds is not welcome at any meet organized by Ian Stewart because of his guerrilla marketing tactics" (the shoulder tattoo)
"USATF president Stephanie Hightower “scolded [athletes] angrily” and when Nick calmly but firmly spoke up for the athletes, she “just yelled louder and wagged her finger more”
"Quotes attributed to [Ian Stewart] at that meeting include “you say you’re professionals; act like it” and “if you think you’re gonna walk into one of our track meets wearing Axer across your chest, it’s not gonna happen”
Sensationalist BS wrote:
Grow up. "not invited " does not equal "barred"
This is a total non-story
When the husband of the president of the USATF blacklists prominent American athletes, that's a hell of a big story for track and field.
Especially when there's reason to think that he is blacklisting American athletes because they have challenged the status quo in the USATF. You would think USATF would stand up Brits blacklisting Americans but that's obviously not going to happen because of Hightower's conflict of interest.
Sensationalist BS wrote:
Grow up. "not invited " does not equal "barred"
This is a total non-story
What the hell else does it mean? This is an invitational meet. If you refuse to invite specific athletes, you are barring them.
vaultpurple wrote:
Currently the IAAF has a rule for everything that hurts the athletes but no rules for selecting athletes for meets. Even sponsored meets.
How can you have a Samsung Diamond League series if there is no consistent way to pick the athletes allowed to enter. They get points for the championship and cash prizes for winning.
Both of these athletes PR's would have won in London (not saying they would have). And that is $10,000 for first place if it was a Diamond League race.
This would be the equivalent of a sport like NASCAR having a points race and telling one of the top athletes they could not race because they do not like how they have acted publicly although they have not violated any rules or bylaws.
No meet director should have enough power to affect an athletes livelihood, especially in a championship style series.
Very good analogy.
The IAAF should penalize Diamond League meets if they do not let top athletes accumulate points.
Well, let's be sympathetic to Stewart for a moment. Obviously he views himself and the Diamond League as the last bastion of amateurism, holding the line in the face of capitalism's colonization of every last niche in the sport. Tatoos on athlete's shoulders! I mean ca maaaaaahn. If he doesn't hold the line with Symmonds, pretty soon every athlete on the track will be a walking ad consortium, proclaiming his or her fealty to a corporate sponsor.......
Oh, wait. When I search "Diamond League" on Google, what comes up?
Samsung Diamond League
When I do a Google image search for "Diamond League," what comes up?
You don't have to scroll down through the photos very far to find the Nike swoosh on athletes numbers.
Memo to Ian Stewart: This isn't about integrity--your integrity or the integrity of your sponsoring organization. It's certainly not about an idealist trying to hold the amateurist line against craven entrepreneurial athletes like Symmonds. It's about money, power, and control. Specifically, it's about you striving by any means necessary to maintain control of the corporate honeypot in the face of athletes who are trying to make a living. You helped sell out your sport to the corporations years ago. You bought into the neighborhood, as it were. Now more people are clamoring to be let in, and you've decided to scapegoat the ones you adjudge most dangerous.
You've lost your soul and don't realize it.
And what does it matter if someone is a walking billboard? The more money in the sport, the more athletes that can keep running after college, and the better quality of athlete the sport will develop.
I am pretty sure that people want to watch the fastest athletes, not the poorest that are just doing it for the love of the game.
In NASCAR, these are the following points (and please don't take me to be a fan).There is a Lowes Motor Speedway in North Carolina (I think). They do not/cannot ban the Home Depot team car.The Coca Cola 600 did not ban the Big Red-sponsored car.The Fed Ex 400 did not ban the UPS-sponsored car.The Kobalt Tools 500 did not ban the Dewalt-sponsored team.The Toyota/Save Mart 350 was won by a Dodge!!!!Yet, this sport can have people dictate who can do business with whom, not out of "we are full in that event," "you aren't qualified", "we couldn't come to financial terms, etc. but rather I will put you in your place. Wow. And some on this thread think it OK.....
vaultpurple wrote:
This would be the equivalent of a sport like NASCAR having a points race and telling one of the top athletes they could not race because they do not like how they have acted publicly although they have not violated any rules or bylaws.
No meet director should have enough power to affect an athletes livelihood, especially in a championship style series.
Our sport sucks, it really does. People like Stewart and Hightower ruin it.
Also, Brojos, let's talk about your freaking site. You put up the Mark Block thing for two days which was honestly overkill. I liked that you broke the story but that was ridiculous. Then you don't put up a black screen for Eaton, barely any mention of Ajee Wilson's world junior win, you're not covering this. What is your deal?
Dennis Reynolds wrote:
Our sport sucks, it really does. People like Stewart and Hightower ruin it.
Also, Brojos, let's talk about your freaking site. You put up the Mark Block thing for two days which was honestly overkill. I liked that you broke the story but that was ridiculous. Then you don't put up a black screen for Eaton, barely any mention of Ajee Wilson's world junior win, you're not covering this. What is your deal?
I totally agree. It is like Letsrun has been hung over since the trials. I don't totally blame them because I was hung over for a while after the trials but it is time to wake up and get back to work.
I have seen a thread once where Ian Stewart posted on LR. I think it was about Pre years ago. Fingers crossed he stumbles upon this one and posts.
Tiger_runner wrote:
I have seen a thread once where Ian Stewart posted on LR. I think it was about Pre years ago. Fingers crossed he stumbles upon this one and posts.
That would be great. Hopefully there is a logical and legitimate reason for the entrance restrictions. As odd as the bans of Symmonds and Lolo seem the ban of the entire Schumacher group is just confounding.
Ian Stewart hates nike, oh, and he's a nasty little man.
Wouldn't you become nasty if you were married to her?
Bedford D wrote:
Ian Stewart hates nike, oh, and he's a nasty little man.
Jurgis Rudkus wrote:
"It appears that Symmonds is not welcome at any meet organized by Ian Stewart because of his guerrilla marketing tactics" (the shoulder tattoo)
I'd be interested to hear Stewart's opinion on why, from the perspective of a meet director, "guerrilla marketing" is any different from regular marketing. I show up for a race with a logo displayed. That logo is either legal or it is not. The process by which I came to have the particular logo is really none of a meet director's business.
i asked for a lane in the mile, and was told to "f**k off". a week later i was asked to pace the race to 800m, so guess what i told him.....
britishrunner wrote:
i asked for a lane in the mile, and was told to "f**k off". a week later i was asked to pace the race to 800m, so guess what i told him.....
Lots of great comments and analysis on this today.
It's a scandal. What the hell was Ian Stewart doing speaking at a USATF event? How rinky dink can you get.
Shameful.
Azaleas wrote:
Sensationalist BS wrote:Grow up. "not invited " does not equal "barred"
This is a total non-story
What the hell else does it mean? This is an invitational meet. If you refuse to invite specific athletes, you are barring them.
No. Better luck reading simpler sentences
Steve ovett wasn't invited. Was he barred?
No. Get over yourselves. This "barring American athletes " line is really laughable.