rojo wrote:
. . . or give me a call 607-330-4786.
90lb VS. 180lb wrote:
rojo wrote:
. . . or give me a call 607-330-4786.
Did you really just post your phone number on this message board?
Not Buying It wrote:
Fabulous job by Rojo in pulling in a couple hundred hits ($$$) by making spurious and fabricated statements about one Mr. Block. Block may be a bad guy, but Rojo has absolutely no evidence that:
1. He was ever invited into the Nike tent;
2. That anyone who knew him didn't tell him to leave;
3. That the "supposed" photo of Capriati and Block, is not a photo of a pissed off Capriati, telling Bloc to leave.
4. That Block had any sort of "credentials" other than a ticket to the Oly Trials,
5. That Jeter has anything to do with Block (she did ignore him in the athlete area, didn't she).
6. The the 10 year ban says that he can't attend track and field events around the country/world.
Were Rojo a real investigative reporter, he would have:
1. Researched and understood the language contained in Block's ban;
2. Noticed that in the photo on the tent steps and in the video in the athlete area, Block did not have any credentials displayed.
3. Avoided the multiple "ASSumptions" that he has made, without any legwork, checking out anything.
This is either a SAD, SAD example of an investigative report of of a incompetent human being with a chip on his shoulder and jealousy seeping through his skin.
dd wrote:
A Duck wrote:
3. As several others pointed out, either there was a simple story to why said banned person/friend was admitted into the Nike area, or their was a loophole allowing the guy to attend meets. I took no dog in this fight, because I didn't know the facts. Once the story came to light, I figured legitimate news sources...like the Oregonian would get an official response...and that the story, whatever legs it might have...would evolve from legitimate news sources like that, or TFN (way down the line).
So out of all the possible scenarios explaining how a guy who is disgraced in the T&F world ends up in the VIP box at the Olympic trials, you've managed to narrow it down to 2. Either a simple story, or a loophole in his ban. I can think of another 20 off the top of my head, some innocent, some not, but regardless, it's worth looking into. If it turns out that an old buddy smuggled him in with a borrowed pass, great. End of story. But since he's been photographed out for celebratory dinners with 2 sprinters with medal aspirations in London, perhaps we shouldn't be so quick to dismiss this. The world press will certainly ask the hard questions, even if the US press isn't up to it.
Not Buying It wrote:
Fabulous job by Rojo in pulling in a couple hundred hits ($$$) by making spurious and fabricated statements about one Mr. Block. Block may be a bad guy, but Rojo has absolutely no evidence that:
1. He was ever invited into the Nike tent;
2. That anyone who knew him didn't tell him to leave;
3. That the "supposed" photo of Capriati and Block, is not a photo of a pissed off Capriati, telling Bloc to leave.
4. That Block had any sort of "credentials" other than a ticket to the Oly Trials,
5. That Jeter has anything to do with Block (she did ignore him in the athlete area, didn't she).
6. The the 10 year ban says that he can't attend track and field events around the country/world.
Were Rojo a real investigative reporter, he would have:
1. Researched and understood the language contained in Block's ban;
2. Noticed that in the photo on the tent steps and in the video in the athlete area, Block did not have any credentials displayed.
3. Avoided the multiple "ASSumptions" that he has made, without any legwork, checking out anything.
This is either a SAD, SAD example of an investigative report of of a incompetent human being with a chip on his shoulder and jealousy seeping through his skin.
Not Buying It wrote:
Fabulous job by Rojo in pulling in a couple hundred hits ($$$) by making spurious and fabricated statements about one Mr. Block. Block may be a bad guy, but Rojo has absolutely no evidence that:
4. That Block had any sort of "credentials" other than a ticket to the Oly Trials,
Clifford Diffley wrote:
Hayduke wrote:
ps I would rather laugh, groan, and ignore loser message board posters than spend 5 minutes filling out a registration form!
with OAuth affiliation, you wouldn't have to. you could assert your facebook or other social media credentials and login with that.
dd wrote:
[quote]A Duck wrote:
3. As several others pointed out, either there was a simple story to why said banned person/friend was admitted into the Nike area, or their was a loophole allowing the guy to attend meets. I took no dog in this fight, because I didn't know the facts. Once the story came to light, I figured legitimate news sources...like the Oregonian would get an official response...and that the story, whatever legs it might have...would evolve from legitimate news sources like that, or TFN (way down the line).
anonomie me wrote:
This site is unprofessional -- to the point that it cannot be taken seriously by a lot of people as a source of professional journalism.
