You may all be interested in this article in the Sydney Telegraph http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5909970%255E2 771,00.html
regards Steve Bennett www.oztrack.com AthleticsTraining.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dan Kaplan Sent: Thursday, 30 January 2003 6:55 AM To: track list Subject: Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task --- ghill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Unfortunately, we're also back at that same horrid place we've been so > many times before, with track's governing bodies attempting to put out > fires by pouring gasoline on them. I guess I didn't really state it clearly, but that is precisely why I think this is such a great opportunity to finally get the IAAF to clean up their act! Between Francis, Jones, and Montgomery -- and Nike probably has a wee bit of influence in that group -- I just don't see that this one can be put to bed quietly. There are a lot of very difficult questions on the table that I'd really like the IAAF make an attempt at answering. If Marion and Tim stay the course, the IAAF will have little choice but to do that or take the whole sport down with them... If the latter happens, something will surely rise up (eventually) to fill the void. --- Randall Northam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan > You've confused me here. Not a difficult task I will admit but let me > see if I've worked out your logic. > The IAAF are upset at answering questions about drugs whereas if they > turned a blind eye to it (in other words ignored "the whole sordid > mess") it would go away. Is that right? No, that's not quite what I meant. Ignoring it wouldn't make it go away, although it certainly could have been smoothed out somewhat. What I meant is that the IAAF created this very situation, and now it has come full circle and smacked them square between the eyes. There's no reason to feel sympathetic for their current plight, which is what they're angling for ("there must be hundreds of good sprint coaches in the US, why Francis?" Uh, maybe because a "good" coach doesn't quite cut it at the very top level?). > If the IAAF said they had no problem with Francis coaching again you > don't think there'd be an even bigger mess? I'm not sure. My gut feeling is the current mess would be much less, but the future mess is anyone's guess. I'd be curious for a show of hands: How many people on the list feel Charlie Francis is the only active T&F coach who is a proponent of drug use? There are two reasons I can think of to single him out: 1) He's a known commodity (i.e. laziness) 2) He's a danger to the sport's management (i.e. fear) Neither is a very compelling reason in my mind to be the sole target of the IAAF's attacks... If Francis had his way, we'd have an incredibly exciting sport to watch, and much of the negativity we always complain about would fall be the wayside. I'm reminded of Tim Robbins' classic line from Shawshank Redemption; paraphrasing: "The ironic thing is I was straight as an arrow on the outside. I had to go to jail to become a crook." Francis had to cheat and be busted to be revealed as one of the most honest people within the sport... Dan ===== http://AccountBiller.com - MyCalendar, D-Man, ReSearch, etc. http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Fantasy T&F ------------------------------------------------------------ @ o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] <|\/ <^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) _/ \ \/\ (503)370-9969 phone/fax / / __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
