Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chambers out

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Chambers out

    >It seems that the process works much more swiftly in other pro sports -- we
    >have stronger commissioners in basketball, football -- they've suspended
    >athletes for various drug offenses (mostly the recreational drugs, though we'll
    >see this Spring about steroids), and though the athletes may protest or appeal,
    >it doesn't seem to drag out. My guess is there's more empowerment for the
    >commissioners -- if you're an athlete in this league, you MUST comply. Is
    >track just too loose a deal (no league) to do it this way? We do have
    >governing authorities -->>

    What the pro sports have is a union (separate unions for each sport). As part of their collective bargaining agreement they agree to certain levels of drug testing (which in most cases has been basically zero) and certain penalties. They sign a contract stipulating this. Why don't track athletes have contracts? Don't know where Diack and current Council as a whole stands on it, but Nebiolo was always forcefully loud about stating "there will be no union." With a union, too much of the power devolves away from "management" and goes to the athletes and the IAAF understandably doesn't want to give this up. They'd view it as the inmates running the asylum.

    The other reason things proceed quickly in the pro sports is because the penalties have traditionally not been made to hurt (in a relative sense). The amount of money these guys make, suspensions amounting to 10s (100s?) of thousands of dollars are just a hiccup; part of the price they have to pay for staying on the cutting edge.

    And if it doesn't hurt that much, you simply accept it and walk away. To put it in personal (and reductio ad absurdum) terms, if a cop walked through your door in the next 5 minutes and gave you a $25 parking ticket,you'd almost certainly shut up and pay it. If he walked through the door and charged you with armed robbery you'd hire a lawyer. If he charged you with multiple murder and said you'd hang, you'd hire 127 lawyers and spend the next 10 years fighting execution.

    Which is why, IMHO, track got off on the wrong footing in a PRACTICAL sense (although not a moral one) with 4-year penalties. They were in effect death penalties, and the reaction of those charged was to fight it to the bitter end. By doing the right thing we succeeded mainly only in convincing the public we were a dirty-dirty sport.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Chambers out

      At this point a post was removed in which the poster named several baseball players he was convinced--citing anecdotal evidence--were steroid users. T&FN doesn't allow such accusations, no matter how "obvious" it might seem to one and all. We try to stick to facts only. Thanks.

      gh

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Chambers out

        Butch Reynolds and I have the same clearing house cheques for millions sitting in an drawer waiting to be cashed if we just send in the next sweepstakes entry form...........

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Chambers out

          If someone had first hand knowledge about an impropriety performed by a track athlete and shared his anecdote here, would that be against the rules, even if it is a fact that the person witnessed or participated in it?

          Comment

          Working...
          X