View Single Post
Old April 21st 04, 05:35 AM
Count Scrofula
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a
Default "The rules are the same for everybody..." - Sweetenham

"Fran" wrote in message
(gmail) wrote in message

. com...
"...and there has to be a cut-off somewhere. He is the most
experienced swimmer in Britain and he misjudged."

Bill (an Australian who was recruited by Britain to be their
performance director) was speaking about Mark Foster, a World-Record
holder in 50 Free SC. Foster had a slow swim in the Trials, and
although he won, failed to make the standard set by the selectors.

Two things.

1. As I've said elsewhere, using just one selection tool is not the
best way to select the best team. The problem here is far more
foreseeable than what happened to Ian Thorpe and that's why it's poor.

Okay, we all agree on that one.

2. At least he got a chance to swim the trial. He presumably knew how
fast he had to go to get in, and failed.

thorpe didn't have a chance to swim the trial? he sure did, and he screwed
the pooch!

There are were no reports of Sweetenham's reaction to the strange
events following his native country's Trials, where a similar
situation involving Ian Thorpe seems to have resulted in legal and
verbal gymnastics aimed at getting Thorpe back in his event despite
his failure to qualify. If Thorpe repeats his error in Athens then no
doubt the loss of this no-nonsense attitude from Australian Swimming
will be doubly felt.

If he does he'll probably deserve a kick in the butt, but Australian
Swimming's attitude was complete nonsense. A person who makes this
mistake is most unlikely to repeat it. Most never do it, and few do it
twice. Excluding someone from the Olympics because they made the one
mistake is irrational -- if you want the best team.

Cruel irony is waiting with a DQ for the aussies

If your car doesn't start first time do you get out and take the bus?
Do you have the car towed so as to avoid running the risk of it not
starting a second time? Do you ask the mechanic to go over it looking
for the fault before replacing the entire electrical and fuel
distribution system based on not finding a fault? While this is going
on do you take pride in a "no-nonsense attitude" to motor vehicle

Or do you do what most do and just kick it over a second time?

Do you use valid analogies, or just spurious crap?