Headline at the IAAF site

[tafnut]

"'On the road to 2005' - Flying once more!
Friday 21 May 2004

As part of our gradual build-up to next year’s 10th IAAF World Championships in Helsinki, Finland, we begin an occasional series of stories highlighting different aspects of Finland's athletics culture, both past and present."


OK, is it just me, or aren't they missing the fact that there's a pretty big meet THIS year? Who is steering this ship?

[MJD]

Re: Headline at the IAAF site

OK, is it
>just me, or aren't they missing the fact that there's a pretty big meet THIS
>year? Who is steering this ship?

Same guy/gal that hasn't taken that White diary down yet.

[tandfman]

Re: Headline at the IAAF site

>"aren't they missing the fact that there's a pretty big meet THIS year?<

Not at all. Their website is filled with stuff reflecting the imminence of the Olympics. But I think it is wise of the IAAF to remind people every now and then that track is not a once-in-four-years sport. It's never too early to look ahead to the next WC.

[gh]

Re: Headline at the IAAF site

The WC is an IAAF production top to bottom, the OG is not. OG track is likely to be completely sold out (for the evening sessions): since there hasn't been a full house at a WC session since Stuttgart in '93, the IAAF has every reason to be flogging the meet well ahead of time, even if it is being held in once-track-mad Finland.

[ycn]

Re: Headline at the IAAF site

Why don't the Olymic Games count as an IAAF world championship event? Won't the IOC allow dual sanctioning?

[gh]

Re: Headline at the IAAF site

If you look at the IAAF rulebook for 1979-80 you'll find a page entitled "World Championships" with the subhed, "held in conjunction with the Olympic Games, Montréal 1976." That was about the only time you ever heard the word World Championships in connection with track (and obviously only a handful of people ever saw it). That changed with the IAAF's creation of a separate WC in 1983.

Unless the IOC now has some strange rule against the IAAF could still call the OG a WC if it wanted, but why would it? Too many of the business/organizational details are out of their control (TV contracts, sponsor signage, accreditation). And they don't have to spend their own money promoting the thing because the Games themselves are so huge they take care of that. IAAF, as noted above, needs to ensure that the WC, for which it has sole responsibility, remain fiscally sound.