Nope. Try again. There are FOUR athletes this year who either have to make more standards (100, 200, hammer) or have been cut off from the opportunity (marathon). This is in FIVE events - which is actually the more relevant metric, obviously.
The decision to say "only" depends how many IAAF A qualifiers you think is acceptable to leave home. I say zero. You seem comfortable with at least two (the female marathoners).
You. Keep. On. Proving. My. Point.
If for an A qualifier it is "not onerous" or even a "measly" achievement to get the B once or twice between hitting A and trials, then WHY MAKE THEM DO IT? Either it is a "real" standard, expected to improve the team (fine motivation), or it is a "measly" exercise and the same people will make the team anyway (ridiculous). WHICH IS IT? You seem to be suggesting it will have no impact on team selection. So why have those criteria?
And again, Sultana has not only an IAAF A but an AC "A+" - from March 2012. And needs to get not one but two Bs. If this doesn't seem ridiculous to you, you must truly be a toady.
Sorry. TWO marathoners who have made the ---IAAF A--- won't be going. Thanks for clarifying that their being kept home is ENTIRELY due to arbitrary Athletics Canada "A+" standards. The fact that Ireland does the same doesn't really justify it. This isn't the 2:43:00 B-standard we're talking about. This is keeping home our two best female marathoners, who have the 2:37:00 ---IAAF A---.
"A little tougher"? Wait a second. I thought you just said that the added standards of repeatedly hitting Bs rather than just accepting an A were "measly"? Now you're saying it's "a little tougher"? You keep contradicting yourself and refusing to answer: What justification is there for making athletes with an A-standard in 2012, as accepted by the IAAF, pick up one or more Bs? (Saying it's easy doesn't answer the question, although it does show you to be clued-out on how throwers (for example) organize their training.)
Please just answer the last question. I get that you don't think our ---IAAF A-standard marathoners--- should go to the Olympics while many other countries are sending a B-standard holder. I disagree, but I see that's your view. But I am utterly fascinated at how you think this makes sense:
Brown: 10.18 (A) in May 2012. Now needs to run 10:24 to qualify.
Brown: 20:55 (A) in May 2012. Now needs to run 20.65 to qualify.
Frizell: 75.04 meters ("A+") in March 2012. Now needs to throw 69.00m to qualify.
I simply can't imagine the sort of clowns at AC who know this to be the case and think all is well with the criteria.