Announcement

**Guest** · 09-10-2003, 05:35 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

>I've compiled the following information from the
>IAAF website to demonstrate that Europe does
>indeed dominate the IAAF and it's decisions. As
>you'll see, 10 of the 28 IAAF Council positions
>are currently held by the relatively tiny land
>mass of Europe as compared with the rest of the
>world.

"Relatively tiny land mass"? How should council positions be allocated? If you want land mass, then make room for some more spots from Canada and Russia. If you want purely population, then US will again be overshadowed by China and India, among others.

I don't have a clear answer for this one, but how different is it than your senate giving two spaces to Delaware and two to California in terms of power distribution?

I'm posting this information, not as a
>rant against any individual European country or
>any individual in particular. Instead, I am
>trying to alert my fellow USA citizens that no
>legally recognized body (and the USATF and USOC
>are definitively one of those) should be
>subservient to any foreign bodies where their
>systems conflict with our US Constitution. We
>fought a revolution over issues such as these!

Now this just sounds silly to someone who is not one of your fellow USA citizens. Pro sports have all kinds of conflicts with your constitution, whether those are strictly US based sports (NFL, NBA) or international ones like track and field.

The underlying point is that if you want to be part of the global game, then you submit to playing by the rules as they are established. If you don't like them, you lobby and try and change them, but not by arbitrarily deciding which ones you do or don't want to follow. The alternative is to exercise your free will and choose not to play. I don't think this is a viable solution for any of the parties.

**Olegi2** · 09-10-2003, 05:56 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

Is it a regime change that you are suggesting?

**Guest** · 09-10-2003, 06:07 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

well craig ought to get together with this whizkid from Austin and make a campaign plan. that kid is one sharp lawyer and he gave me his lowdown on the situation the other day.he was in touch with US and international track and field sounded very intelligent and had this excellent "blocking tactic" approach that seemed entirely achievable over the short term.

**MJR** · 09-10-2003, 08:04 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

IAAF Council positions are a political process, like any other election. In this case, the European nations have most of the back-door power, so their candidates win seats. This is the same on the lower-level committees too. Yes, it stinks, but thats the way it is, and there is little chance of changing it. Europe has more nations that are active IAAF members than any other continent. This is how they can get more seats, as they can have more people on the ballot(s).

**Powell** · 09-10-2003, 08:22 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

If it wasn't for Europe, there wouldn't be any money in T&F, either. It's an example of the 'golden rule' (the version that says 'he who has the gold makes the rules).

**Bob H** · 09-10-2003, 08:28 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

Just for the record, let me make two corrections to the list that started this thread. First, that Council list shows the Council whose term ended August 31. Number 18 has retired, and numbers 7, 20, and 23 were not re-elected. They were replaced by individuals from FIN, GBR, GRE, and QAT. Thus, the number of Europeans does not change, but there is one more from Asia and one less from NACAC.

That's the other correction--your geographic division is not meaningful in IAAF terms. The IAAF has Area Associations. These are generally aligned with geographical continents, but the Western Hemisphere is divided into two IAAF Areas--NACAC and South America. NACAC stands for North America, Central America, and the Caribbean.

**Guest** · 09-10-2003, 09:33 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

( I'm posting this information, not as a rant against any individual European country or any individual in particular. Instead, I am trying to alert my fellow USA citizens that no legally recognized body (and the USATF and USOC are definitively one of those) should be subservient to any foreign bodies where their systems conflict with our US Constitution. We fought a revolution over issues such as these! I've been fairly pleased with regard to the current reign of Craig Masback as head of USATF. He's a good lawyer and is well aware of conflicts of IAAF and IOC procedures and rules with our system of government. I hope that he will continue to put up diplomatic road-blocks against their intrusive and un-constitutional efforts in the future. He's a good man.)

If its not a rant, is it because you have no case to support? The big meets are in Europe. People there enjoy their track, and support it, and the ''stars'' stay in the sport and work for it after they retire. That's why I have seen more track on TV in the UK in the last 6 months than I have in the last 15 years in the States. Including the Olympics. Don't try to push the BS that the reason the US doesn't ban their drug takers because of due process.

I have been especially disappointed with Masback, but then he's a lawyer, why should I be surprised, athletics is his client.

If you want to get on the council, run for office. Change the rules, dose them all up and see who can run the fastest. It would be good television for some, but not all of them would live to old age. I am sure, if you searched the records, you could see evidence of upper echelon semi finalists who made miraculus changes to their physiques, then set the record where no one could match it.

**Guest** · 09-10-2003, 09:45 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

Thank you, Mr. Hersh for the update and corrected information. I wish that the webmasters at the IAAF were as up-to-date as yourself.

As for the geographic reference, I didn't mean state that representation should be based on relative percentage of geography. I meant that given Europe's relative lack of size (ignoring Russia's land mass beyond the Ural Mountains that extends to Pacific Coast) and population compared to the rest of the planet as a percentage, then I'd say that 36% representation in the IAAF council is a bit out of whack. I am no dreamer, however, and I realize that the IAAF is a European created entity and has it's headquarters in Monte Carlo. I doubt that the IAAF will ever change these facts.

What I am most disturbed about, Mr. Hersh, is the blatant hypocrisy of the IAAF as a whole with regard to it's continued public support of "World Records" of KNOWN & WILLING drug users from clearly documented files under the old DDR and Soviet federations. I know that you are very well aware of this and I'm sure that this has certainly been discussed within the IAAF. Until the day comes that the IAAF publicly renounces it's current view that such records should remain intact while currently condemning both athletes and coaches for drug violations that occur on the part of using over-the-counter medications in many cases, I will pursue this issue and intend on becoming a bigger thorn in the side of the IAAF and will continue to active stir debate on the issue of whether the USATF should remain a member of the IAAF.

I hope that you and the rest of the IAAF will take such matters under advisement and act on them according to principle, not financial expediency. Of course, I realize that the two do not necessarily go hand-in-hand. I, and others, will be watching and listening to future actions and pronouncements by the IAAF and USATF.

Kurt Francis
Former USATF Member

**Guest** · 09-10-2003, 09:57 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

Like the UN their is obviously anti-American sediment in the IAAF. The IAAF would be thrilled if US track and field when downhill.

**michael lewis** · 09-10-2003, 10:00 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

While allowing some athletes to retain records/medals/their existence in official results, despite evidence from the horse's mouth (oral-Fuchs, written-Koch) showing they are guilty, they use the same behaviour to condemn others who admit to drug use (Issajenko, stripped of record, medals, stricken from results). I DARE ONE SINGLE IAAF OFFICIAL TO EVEN TRY TO JUSTIFY THIS CRAP.

**tafnut** · 09-10-2003, 10:40 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

"The IAAF would be thrilled if US track and field when downhill."

Doubt it. As FIFA (world soccer org.) has found out, the USA is the sleeping giant of moneybags. FIFA wants us to do well, because it would bring in more $$$ to their coffers. Likewise with IAAF, we have the money and power to make them someBODY in the world's sports arena.

gh · 09-10-2003, 10:45 PM

Re: IAAF - European domination

What drivel. If anything there's a pro-American bias in the IAAF, which bends over backwards to accomodate the nation which it knows still provides the bulk of the talent.

If you want a prime example, try the blind eye it turns towards declaring NCAA competition a free zone where convicted druggies (from multiple nations) have been allowed to compete. As were football pros back in the days when they were banned from IAAF competition.

And while the Council may be Euro-centric, note that things like the false-start rule were voted in by 208 (or whatever the number was in Edmonton) nations, not the Council.

**michael lewis** · 09-11-2003, 12:17 AM

Re: IAAF - European domination

Gary Hill, have you ever written about the glaring double standard applied to Issajenko (stripping her of a 50m record, world indoor 60m silver, and removing her name from official WIC results), while Ruth Fuchs can "come out" about her steroid use and nobody bats an eye?

**torpedo** · 09-11-2003, 12:40 AM

Re: IAAF - European domination

>What drivel. If anything there's a pro-American
>bias in the IAAF, which bends over backwards to
>accomodate the nation which it knows still
>provides the bulk of the talent.

If you want a
>prime example, try the blind eye it turns towards
>declaring NCAA competition a free zone where
>convicted druggies (from multiple nations) have
>been allowed to compete. As were football pros
>back in the days when they were banned from IAAF
>competition.

And while the Council may be
>Euro-centric, note that things like the
>false-start rule were voted in by 208 (or
>whatever the number was in Edmonton) nations, not
>the Council.

I agree with Kurt that the IAAF has its Eurocentric elements. It admits it, which it did when it recently unveiled its draft plan to globally promote the sport. Yet as long as athletes make their bread & butter in Europe, it won't change. However, I don't think there is rabid anti-Americanism within the IAAF, so I must side with Garry Hill here. Although Garry, the NCAA is separate from USATF (does USATF even sanction its meets?)

Announcement

IAAF - European domination

Unconfigured Ad Widget

IAAF - European domination

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment