I took the Safesport training. I'm not sure what Alberto Salazar violated

Gwalkerruns wrote:

P.S. when an athlete fails a drug test for a ped the coach (Schumacher and Flanagan) need to be banned too.

Wouldn't that be nice. Also then Salazar would have been banned in 1996.

Aden, Berardelli, Flanagan, Salazar, Sang, Schumacher, ... quite a list, and there a lot more coaches of drug cheats.

When was Safe Sport created? Apparently it was created in 2017:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Center_for_SafeSport

Can a subsequent organization be created such as UltraSafe Sport with its own requirements?

Gwalkerruns wrote:

All I know is that all his runners did their best running under him and, unlike Schumacher, nobody tested positive for peds.

False - see Slaney.

Disgusting to support this scumbag.

Safe sport should have a rule that bans coaches from dating athletes regardless of age. Many of the responses on here restate that coaches are seen as authority figures. Yet some of Salazars accusers have done that in the past. Why are there no issues with that?

hmm- wrote:

An alternate view from someone who preceded Mary Cain in the same situation (except she lived with the Salazars) and who had the same results on the track. (written in 2013)

https://www.runnersworld.com/races-places/a20841935/what-its-like-to-be-coached-by-alberto-salazar/

Wow, he sounds really abusive and a terrible person. He told her ‘stay the course?’ That’s blatantly sexist

rojo wrote:

We live in a day and age when we want the death penalty abolished...and Salazar is banned for life without even a decision being published

Wow.

Respectfully, you need to check yourself here.

The massive, destructive (and racist) impacts of the death penalty have NOTHING to do with a coach being banned for bullying and emotional abuse.

Good post. Someone who gets it.

From a middle aged guy with two daughters, who run:

Rojo, I get where you're coming from. There should be due process and a fair process. And maybe Salazar's only crime is being an insensitive jerk and making running miserable for his female athletes. If so, a lifetime ban is may or may not be too harsh. But at the same time, I think there needs to be consequences.

I don't want my kids in a situation where some jerk is putting them on a scale telling them they're fat in front of other people. Do you? Sorry man, but that's bull---t. It's one thing to handout a study that says, "Ideal BMI for long distance runners is _____" and leave it at that. But the abusive stuff is not necessary, or worth it, in my opinion.

I wouldn't subject my daughters to verbal abuse in exchange for a gold medal. I'm sure some people would. But I wouldn't. I'd prefer they take their chances with someone more professional, perhaps with a less impressive resume.

And unless this stuff is put out in the open, there's no way to know ahead of time which type of setting you're sending your kid into.

I'm all for shining a light on this type of behavior. At the same time, I'm not sure what the correct consequences should be, for Salazar.

casual obsever wrote:

https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=10738395

Why do you fight for this banned abuser without looking into the facts?

I'm not fighting for an abuser. I didn't know the info and am trying to get everything in order so I can go to Tokyo. I was hoping an expert could answer my questions - you did. Thank you. That' why we have the Internet. It drives me nuts when people think everyone should take 5- hours becoming an expert on every topic by doing google searches,.

oatmeal135 wrote:

When was Safe Sport created? Apparently it was created in 2017

That's another good point here. For the vast majority of his coaching career SafeSport didn't exist.

When Salazar was first banned, I was of the opinion that if he has broken the rules, then he has broken the rules.

With the latest developments such as the private investigator following him around taking photos of his family, and now the 'safesport' lifetime ban, I cannot see this as anything else but a witch hunt.

Salazar has pissed off someone in a high place and they are out to get him.

Gwalkerruns wrote:

Mary's email asking to return should be included in his defense. Kara? She is obsessed with the man and if tomorrow someone said they saw him murder someone she would jump in and say she did too. All I know is that all his runners did their best running under him and, unlike Schumacher, nobody tested positive for peds. He needs to go on offense and start suing some of these folks. P.S. when an athlete fails a drug test for a ped the coach (Schumacher and Flanagan) need to be banned too.

Alberto was coaching Mary Slaney when she tested positive, just so you know.

rojo wrote:

It's like you know someone who works for you did something really bad but you don't 100% have proof so you fire them and hope they don't sue?

On a related note, have you ever had a real job?

Countless folks have health, mental health, body-image, and eating-disorder issues.

Others with these struggles do not blame-shift every defect and problem onto someone else.

Cain needs to own these.

Salazar's coaching didn't create these - any more than him not coaching fixed them.

I hold many liberal, leaning views but this fiasco seems another example of Snowflake Cancel Culture run amok.

Safe Sport, and most everyone else, kowtows in fear of vengeful woke mobs rounding up the next witch to stake to the pyre. This requires postures of maximal political correctness, even at the expense of fairness, due process or (what used to be) common sense.

You voluntarily sign a contract with a certain brand and pick your training group/Coach. You also voluntarily pick a college and there’s 100s to choose from. Sometimes things happen outside your control (a coach leaves or get fired and you dislike the new coach), but even then, you can transfer.

Of course, a lot of people feel like they can’t leave or transfer-for whatever reason. In reality, they usually have more options than they think, but the human mind isn’t always completely rational, so it’s insensitive to argue as if humans are robots with no emotions that only make the best logical decisions. So for practical purposes, it’s not entirely voluntary. However, the amount of people I’ve known to quit or transfer because of a coach is very very high and it honestly didn’t take much for people to quit. So although some feel trapped, many will leave at even the slightest inconvenience.

Coaches ‘power’ is interesting. In present times. I don’t think coaches have as much power. With the Internet, very few athletes think their coach is all-knowing. In fact, most probably think the opposite. Athletes can get advice and attention from literally anyone on social media-so coaches don’t really fill that role as much. The majority of athletes now see their coach more as a boss than a ‘surrogate-father’. From the athlete perspective, Coaches are just people that help the team function and it’s the coaches ‘job’ to make the athletes good. That’s about it. There’s some exceptions of course, but as a coach, I can confidently say many athletes really don’t care that much about what their coach says or thinks. And listening to many talk about their high school coaches, they either critiqued most of what the coach did, or they simply had no opinion. If athletes describe you as ‘fine’, that’s about as good as you can do. If you are a male and connect with the female athletes enough to develop a trusting relationship, a minority of females will find you creepy. I don’t even think this is bad- it just is what it is. The days of automatically having trust and respect because you are ‘coach’ is over. Older people will argue with this, and a few younger ones won’t agree with it either, but this is how it is. If you are younger and disagree, you likely valued your coach more because you have a much higher interest in the sport than most others your age-which is why you’re on LetsRun.

There will always be a few that view their coaches as a father figure- so SafeSport is important- and coaches should always be held to a high standard. But it’s also important to understand the present reality that the majority of athletes simply don’t have a big personal connection with the coach. The majority of those athletes will put up with minor irritations like they would from their boss at their entry-level job, but not any form of abuse. And there’s others that will complain about literally anything, bad mouth the coach, and constantly make accusations.

SS permanent ineligibility sanction against Salazar has nothing to do with the private investigation debacle.

sleazazar wrote:

Gwalkerruns wrote:

All I know is that all his runners did their best running under him and, unlike Schumacher, nobody tested positive for peds.

False - see Slaney.

Disgusting to support this scumbag.

You're forgetting his own son.

colorunner1234 wrote:

This "power discrepancy" stuff is so incredibly stupid. The relationship between an athlete and their coach is entirely voluntary. If you think their coaching style is "bullying" then find a new one.

Just observing that someone might theoretically have the ability to use their influence to punish someone doesn't change that. Did Cain ever accuse Salazar of threatening to have Nike cut her contract? Has anyone? I haven't seen it if they did. We've entirely skipped past the part where you actually have to accuse someone of abusing their power. Just having power is now prima facie abuse.

You might as well say she had no choice because Salazar was bigger than her so he could have beat her to a pulp if she quit. It would be just as true and just as stupid.

There is nothing stupid about the power discrepancy. It happens in every sport. Why did those girls not just leave Bela in gymnastics? Because he was in a position to select the members of the team. It does not take much to put 2 and 2 together to know that if you push back on the coach that coach can stop putting you in meets or have influence over if you get to go to a training camp or not. I doubt there is an Olympic sport where such abuses of power have not taken place.

It might be easy to find a new coach, but is that going to invalidate your shoe contract? I am pretty sure shoe companies have a great deal of influence over what coach one of its runners chooses.

There is an investigation that takes place where allegations have to be verified sufficiently. I am not shocked at a male coach making comments about the weight of a female athlete. It is easy for you to say "suck it up", but ask a decent sample of female endurance athletes and I bet you will get a very different perspective.

I saw this first hand with a national team coach and the how it affected the players. The situation got so rotten the coach was eventually let go because some of the top women on the team were going to refuse to play for the national team. These women were not "soft" and went on to medal at world championships and Olympics.

The idea that demeaning and emotionally abusing athletes is the way to get them to perform at their best is one that needs to be buried with a stake in its heart forever.

Ever wonder why so many of those talented runners did not reach what we thought their potential was? Psychology plays a HUGE role in high level performance.

SafeSport was part of the USOC and other NGBs (swimming for one) had it in place before the USOC. Swimming was hit hard with a scandal around 2010.

SafeSport became its own separate entity from the USOPC and then Congress granted it the powers to investigate in part because of USA Gymnastics scandal (but there were lots of others).