New USATF CEO Blogs


This Forum was created to divert traffic from Current Events at the height of the BALCO scandal. It comes and goes as "needed"; it's back to being locked.

Postby DTG » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:15 pm

I think he's doing the right thing. As far as the timing is concerned, his only crime is that he assumed the CEO position just before the start of the Olympics. But he's trying to send a message, and that message is that USATF is changing its course from the former leadership's resistance to cooperate with USADA and WADA to one that takes an active role in cooperation and collaboration.
Many people - including some on this message board - felt like the former leadership was ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. The former leadership's background in law probably worked against T&F in its efforts to curb PEDs because of the perceived concern for "personal rights" of the accused. Good for individuals perhaps, but bad for the sport and athletics in general.
Mr. Logan is new to his position and I suspect his fervor will mellow over time. But I feel he MUST dissociate himself from the course USATF was taking formerly.
DTG
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tandfman » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:30 pm

DTG wrote:Many people - including some on this message board - felt like the former leadership was ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. The former leadership's background in law probably worked against T&F in its efforts to curb PEDs because of the perceived concern for "personal rights" of the accused. Good for individuals perhaps, but bad for the sport and athletics in general.
Mr. Logan is new to his position and I suspect his fervor will mellow over time. But I feel he MUST dissociate himself from the course USATF was taking formerly.

I never got any sense that his predecessor was soft ono doping issues, nor do I think what the new CEO has done is at all inconsistent with the course USATF had been taking.

Of course, USATF has not completely eradicated doping, but I think their public statements in recent years have been unambiguous in stating that we must rid the sport of doping cheats.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby DTG » Thu Jul 31, 2008 7:06 pm

[

Of course, USATF has not completely eradicated doping, but I think their public statements in recent years have been unambiguous in stating that we must rid the sport of doping cheats.[/quote]

I guess that's part of the problem I was referring to - there was a discrepancy between what was SAID (in public) and what was DONE.
DTG
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tandfman » Fri Aug 01, 2008 4:29 am

But USATF is certainly not alone. Nobody--WADA, the IOC, the IAAF, the Cycling guys--nobody has been able to completely eradicate doping. But USATF has been among the leaders in speaking out on the issue and urging stronger penalties for violators. I don't know what more a national governinig body can do, given limited resources and given the magnitude of the problem.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby gh » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:04 am

Column in the Indy paper thinks his latest missive was a mistake too.

http://blogs.indystar.com/woods/2008/07 ... d_whe.html
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby EPelle » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:05 am

A blogger about a blogger. Interesting.
EPelle
 
Posts: 21442
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Marlow » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:06 am

EPelle wrote:A blogger about a blogger. Interesting.

EPelle - you have a blog - you should blog about the blogger blogging about the blogger. We could do the Infinite Mirror thing again!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21128
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Postby EPelle » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:09 am

How far did that one go? Who broke the mirror? It is somewhere in "Things" section.

Blog has been replaced with youtube stuff for the time being.
EPelle
 
Posts: 21442
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tandfman » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:13 am

gh wrote:Column in the Indy paper thinks his latest missive was a mistake too.

http://blogs.indystar.com/woods/2008/07 ... d_whe.html

As far as I can tell, that appeared only as a blog, not as a column in the paper.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Daisy » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:16 am

tandfman wrote:
gh wrote:Column in the Indy paper thinks his latest missive was a mistake too.

http://blogs.indystar.com/woods/2008/07 ... d_whe.html

As far as I can tell, that appeared only as a blog, not as a column in the paper.


Possibly but it is an official blog of the newspaper. Not just a random blog.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby gh » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:18 am

"in the paper" no longer necessarily means ink & paper.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby tandfman » Fri Aug 01, 2008 10:38 am

To me it does. Call me old-fashioned (or worse).
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Marlow » Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:06 pm

gh wrote:"in the paper" no longer necessarily means ink & paper.

zackly - our local rag actually has a very good web-site, so I often go there to 'read the paper' - stuff that's not even in 'the paper'. :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21128
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Postby tandfman » Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:43 pm

I read my local newspapers as much on line as in print. But I never look at the blogs. There's an infinite amount to read out there, and a limited amount of time. I let the editors do the first cut for me. If it ain't good enough to make the paper, I'm not going to waste my time on it.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby gh » Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:55 pm

Big mistake. Among other things, remember the dictum "electrons are free," which means that people have the freedom to ramble on a little on-line, not constrained by paper cost or fitting copy into an x by x box.

And they don't have to meet (not so much at least) the preceonceived prejudices of the editorial board and can write what they find interesting.

The movie and food columns in my local rag are fabulously well served by having their main people blogging in addition to the limited ink they get. And their best sports columnist (irreverence unlimited) appears only in the online version.

So, you wanna be called worse? LUDDITE! LUDDITE! :-)
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby tandfman » Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:21 pm

gh wrote:So, you wanna be called worse? LUDDITE! LUDDITE! :-)

But I don't want to destroy the blogs--just ignore them. (Yeah, I know, "Luddite" has taken on connotations beyond its original meaning. I'm also a conservative about language, in case you hadn't noticed. :) )
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Marlow » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:26 pm

tandfman wrote:I'm also a conservative about language, in case you hadn't noticed. :) )

Yeah, but ya ain't dead! Adapting to the New World Order (MattM!), which involves getting your input digitally, ensures that just because you're old, you're not ready for Droopy Drawers Senior Center.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21128
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 1 guest