[London DL: m800—]Symmonds not invited

[gh]

since people here seem more interested in pissing on each other's shoes than addressing what's truly important, I've split off the posts about how one might actually better fill lanes. Please go to that thread for discussions along that line.

[Anthony Treacher]

We are giving a very bad impression, insulting and authoritarian. To American readers: I apologise for my British countrymen on this thread.

fromage. Do not ever tell anyone, let alone a world-class American athlete like Nick Symmonds, to "shut up."

Tuariki. It is not alright for an athletics officer from a position of superiourity to insult a dependent athlete, provided that nobody else hears it.

And there can be no doubt that it happened. British meet director Ian Stewart not only called American athlete Nick Symmonds a "liability," he also called American lady athlete Lolo Jones a "liability." Too much to ignore. Very unfortunate.

This spat - the insult - originated with Ian Stewart. Accordingly meet director Ian Stewart should apologize. Then the spat would end. As simple as that. It would do wonders for his image and official relations with the athletes generally.

[jb]

To make it easier for him has he beaten Kaki? or Yego? or Mulaudzi? or Lalang? or Kiprop? or Aman?

Career Statistics
Symmonds vs. Kaki: 1-9
Symmonds vs. Yego: 8-6 (Symmonds has won their last six meetings)
Symmonds vs. Mulaudzi: 0-11 (no meetings since 2010)
Symmonds vs. Lalang: 3-5
Symmonds vs. Kiprop: 1-3
Symmonds vs. Aman: 1-1

[gibson]

i think this discussion is very fruitful here.

GH, by far the top seed in the conversation/s has been good enough to enlighten some of us on the reality of the processes, a contribution toward transparency and accountability.

also this thread puts on the table the idea that the meet promoters in question may not be acting in the best interests of the meet. and that an individual in the USTAF may be acting out of less than altruistic interests.

don't underestimate the impact of these forums, max siegel quite probably is reading, many players as well.

i think all is good, hightower is going to be asked some questions, like what are you doing?
are you sabotaging US athletes???

max, time to clean house.

[jjimbojames]

Given how many US athletes ARE invited to UK meets, shouldn't the question be "are you sabotaging Symmonds and Jones?" as a LOT of Americans make those meets - and of differing abilities...

[Tuariki]

Tuariki. It is not alright for an athletics officer from a position of superiourity to insult a dependent athlete, provided that nobody else hears it.

And there can be no doubt that it happened. British meet director Ian Stewart not only called American athlete Nick Symmonds a "liability," he also called American lady athlete Lolo Jones a "liability." Too much to ignore. Very unfortunate.

This spat - the insult - originated with Ian Stewart. Accordingly meet director Ian Stewart should apologize. Then the spat would end. As simple as that. It would do wonders for his image and official relations with the athletes generally.

I have never said it is OK for Stewart to insult Symmonds. What I have said is that I have never seen any evidence of it other than what Symmonds has been reported as saying.

You say "there can be no doubt". On what evidence to you make that claim?

I haven't read anything about Lolo Jones crying all through the social media. Maybe I missed it?

If Symmonds chooses to make very public a private conversation then that is his right.

However,getting ones knickers in a twist because his feelings are hurt because someone said he was a liability is laughable.

[Tuariki]

My use of the term "journeyman" was never meant to be my way of denigrating NS as some posters to this forum seem to think.

To illustrate what I mean I provide the following definitions of journeyman in terms of the year 2012.

woman's shot. Any thrower not named Adams or Ostapchuk

men's 100m. Any sprinter not named Bolt, Blake, Gay or Powell

men's steeple. Perhaps anyone not from Kenya (or originally from Kenya).

men's 400. Anyone not named Merrit, James, Santos,Warriner or Pistorious

With Pistorious not being there because of his 400m qualities but for other obvious marketing qualities.

men's shot. Annyone not named Cantwell, Hoffa, Storl,Whiting, Armstrong, Majewski
or Gill

With Gill being there because of his marketability as a 17 year old ""shot putting freak".

men's 800. Anyone not named Rudisha

[gibson]

on Ian Stewart selection's based on HIM - see quotes

Stewart selected an unranked "B" 800m runner to go to the olympics ...
Seems Stewart is trying to collect B athletes for his competitions whether it be for one of his track meets or one of his olympic games.

THE selection of Lynsey Sharp as our only competitor in the women’s 800 metres at the Olympics has been the big talking point since the team was announced on Tuesday, particularly as international rules meant that if she was chosen, no-one else could be selected with her.

It was because Lynsey only has a B time that we were unable to select anyone else to join her in the 800m. I feel sorry for Jenny Meadows, who has been an excellent competitor for Great Britain, but she has been struggling with injury and at present it looks unlikely that she will run at Crystal Palace next week in the Aviva London Grand Prix.

Her coach Dave Sunderland has done a great job with her so far, and I think we could have a major talent on our hands if she keeps developing in the way she has been doing this season.

because i'm convinced that steward's selections are not necessarily based on quality, I'm wondering if coach sunderland has some advice on what the criterion is? and how nick should have behaved?

i'd bet my bottom dollar that if sunderland was coaching nick, he'd would have been in the meet even if 1:46 (B) was his best time.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/athletics ... -1-2392472

[rsb2]

@ tuariki
You are kidding, yes? Only a very select person, or couple, or few, are anything other than journey-persons? And that's not meant to be a negative? You must be just trying to stir the pot, or you are illiterate beyond belief, which is it? Perhaps you may choose to enlighten us by clarifying which fields of human endeavour do you need to be ranked in the top few in the World, before you can honour them with a title "above" journeyman. It sounds to me that you are representing one of the real issues in our sport, which is that seriously world-level athletes are labelled with some sort of pejorative, and dismissed even by the few of us who really should know and understand what it takes to get anywhere near that level. Very sad!

[Tuariki]

@ tuariki
You are kidding, yes? Only a very select person, or couple, or few, are anything other than journey-persons? And that's not meant to be a negative? You must be just trying to stir the pot, or you are illiterate beyond belief, which is it? Perhaps you may choose to enlighten us by clarifying which fields of human endeavour do you need to be ranked in the top few in the World, before you can honour them with a title "above" journeyman. It sounds to me that you are representing one of the real issues in our sport, which is that seriously world-level athletes are labelled with some sort of pejorative, and dismissed even by the few of us who really should know and understand what it takes to get anywhere near that level. Very sad!

In my use of the term journeyman it is being used to define from what I believe is the perspective of the DL meet directors.

And I happen to believe that, whether you like it or not, that the examples I used are pretty reflective of the commercial marketing realities that meet directors base their decisions on.

As the 5th fastest sprinter in history Nesta Carter is a great athlete. He is a great sprinter. But in terms of his commercial marketing value to DL meet promoters I believe he qualifies as a journeyman. As good an athlete that Nesta Carter is, he is not someone who will put bums on seats. And I don't say that to denigrate Nesta Carter. It is just commercial reality.

However, if Nesta Carter comes to run in New Zealand he will be the star attraction and be a very commercially attractive proposition. So in terms of competing in a low level track meet in New Zealand he will not be a journeyman - he will be promoted as a super star.

[jjimbojames]

In my use of the term journeyman it is being used to define from what I believe is the perspective of the DL meet directors.

Exactly how I've perceived your take on things from the get go. The fact that one of the few people to show sound reasoning is being called illiterate beggars belief.

Second only, of course, to how long this thread has gone on for. Like Flumpy, I'm out of this one but felt Tuariki deserved credit for his work on this topic

[26mi235]

Anyone that thinks that 'journeyman' is not being used pejoratively here in the majority of its applications is fooling themselves rather badly. After people of reacted to the use of the term repeatedly they should have rejected that use and said that they meant something else. In terms of communication, its use was distinctly a knock on Symmonds.

[Michak]

In my use of the term journeyman it is being used to define from what I believe is the perspective of the DL meet directors.

I totally agree.
If I was a meet director of a DL meet their would be 5 types of athletes I would want at my meet.
1. Athletes known by the general population
2. Defending Olympic and world championship medalists
3. World Record holders and current World Leaders (and anyone who has a shot at at WL/WR)
4. Any athletes that represent a meet sponsor.
5. Any local athletes that are competitive on a national scale.

And after that I would pick "Journeyman" athletes that fit well into my meet.

[26mi235]

Symmonds was ranked #10 in 2009, #6 in 2010 and 2011. Over the last two years he is the THIRD ranked 800 runner in the World (using linear points across the years) behind only Rudisha and Kaki.

Now, I suppose that you should use journeyman for any athlete not ranked in the top two. On the other hand, you an admit that you are needlessly ignorant about the true state of the event.

In terms of prep for London, he ran his SB of 1:43.91 in cool and rainy conditions in Eugene -- maybe he is ready for the other meet in London. Given that Kaki can be a bit erractic (dropping out at 450 earlier, etc) he might even beat Kaki.

[marknhj]

In my use of the term journeyman it is being used to define from what I believe is the perspective of the DL meet directors.

Exactly how I've perceived your take on things from the get go. The fact that one of the few people to show sound reasoning is being called illiterate beggars belief.

Second only, of course, to how long this thread has gone on for. Like Flumpy, I'm out of this one but felt Tuariki deserved credit for his work on this topic

That's exactly right. Tuariki has consistently and coherently described his positioning of the word and the context in which it belongs. That others chose to keep ignoring his posts, and prattle on regardless, should beggar belief, but when you've been around here awhile, it doesn't. I'm in full agreement with all his points as they relate to the real world of international athletics.

[jazzcyclist]

Journeyman is a subjective word like pretty, not an objective word like pregnant.

[Anthony Treacher]

.....
You say "there can be no doubt". On what evidence to you make that claim?

tuariki. What 'evidence' do I have that meet director Ian Stewart told athlete Nick Symmonds he was a "liability?" None at all, of course. Like everyone, I read the news and I make my judgement based on the credibility of the parties and my experience. My experience unfortunately is that athletics officers believe it their privilege - their right - to comment on the athletes in this nasty way. Athletics officers will lie, dissemble and stonewall rather than own up to the truth. So I believe in the athlete Nick Symmonds. Nick did the athletics community a service by bringing this to our attention.

May I reverse the burden of proof tuariki? What evidence do you have that Ian Stewart did not tell Nick Symmonds that he was a liability?

and tuariki:

.....
However,getting ones knickers in a twist because his feelings are hurt because someone said he was a liability is laughable.

Wrong again. Judging from his red-blooded TV appearance, Nick Symmonds is what the Cousins call a "jock." These guys field jockstraps, not knickers.

Instead it seems that it was meet director Ian Stewart who got his knickers into a twist, if you insist on that metaphore. Like most track and field authoritarians, he could not tolerate an athlete speaking out. And he probably wet his knickers at being able to insult the athlete from a safe distance. With all respect tuariki, rather like you.

[Tuariki]

tuariki. What 'evidence' do I have that meet director Ian Stewart told athlete Nick Symmonds he was a "liability?" None at all, of course. Like everyone, I read the news and I make my judgement based on the credibility of the parties and my experience. My experience unfortunately is that athletics officers believe it their privilege - their right - to comment on the athletes in this nasty way. Athletics officers will lie, dissemble and stonewall rather than own up to the truth. So I believe in the athlete Nick Symmonds. Nick did the athletics community a service by bringing this to our attention.

May I reverse the burden of proof tuariki? What evidence do you have that Ian Stewart did not tell Nick Symmonds that he was a liability?

Of course you are so right. I apologise. Athletes never lie. How dare that officials accused Marion Jones of lying, and countless others of lying.

Hitler, Stalin and Mao also subscribed to your standards of justice. "We say you did it now you prove you didn't".

And by the way I am NOT implying Symmonds is a liar. But I am saying you don't know if he is telling the truth. But what i do know is that Stewart has acted professionally by refusing to buy into Symmonds little tirades.

[portsea57]

If Stewart called Symmonds a liability, what did he mean?
Did Stewart, for example, feel that Symmonds might do something to compromise the events relationship/agreements with its sponsors?
Can anyone put the "liability" comment - if it happened, in context.

[Tuariki]

If Stewart called Symmonds a liability, what did he mean?
Did Stewart, for example, feel that Symmonds might do something to compromise the events relationship/agreements with its sponsors?
Can anyone put the "liability" comment - if it happened, in context.

And therein lies the problem - not one of those "people with nothing better to do than waste time commenting on Nick Symmonds"' can put Symmonds' comments in context. Because none of us were there.

We have only heard Symmonds point of view and because he is an athlete Anthony Treacher has stipulated we must believe Mr Symmonds.

However, the only person who can give the context that you crave is Ian Stewart - and he clearly isn't talking. I guess he has better things to do than those "people with nothing better to do than waste time commenting on Nick Symmonds".

[26mi235]

Logic would lead one to believe NS's Tweet. Why would he say it if it were not true? He has a lot to lose if it is not true, and nothing that Stewart has said or not said leads us to believe that he made up the comment.

[Tuariki]

Logic would lead one to believe NS's Tweet. Why would he say it if it were not true? He has a lot to lose if it is not true, and nothing that Stewart has said or not said leads us to believe that he made up the comment.

And because I am one of those "people with nothing better to do than waste time commenting on Nick Symmonds" I can only say you would make a great addition to the British trade unions, who are hell bent on sabotaging the Olympics, and who have a mentality and a sense of judicial righteousness as equally as deranged as yours.

You are entitled to believe Symmonds. That's your right. But that doesn't make Symmonds truthful - and it doesn't make him a liar either, I hasten to add. It is just that none of us actually knows what the truth is.

GH must be going stir crazy over the two NS tweet threads. Nearly 250 postings now for a completely irrelevant and meaningless topic - but oh so much fun to have a philosophical debate now and then.

Probably should now focus on that other meaningless debate - Lolo Jones - her butt and her virginity.

[kuha]

who have a mentality and a sense of judicial righteousness as equally as deranged as yours.

This IS an idiotic "debate" for sure, but why sink to this level? Nothing he has stated is at all righteous or deranged. These words, like "journeyman," are very badly chosen--and add nothing of value.

[Tuariki]

who have a mentality and a sense of judicial righteousness as equally as deranged as yours.

This IS an idiotic "debate" for sure, but why sink to this level? Nothing he has stated is at all righteous or deranged. These words, like "journeyman," are very badly chosen--and add nothing of value.

Oh, so Ian Stewart is guilty because NS says he is - without any independent witness.

[kuha]

who have a mentality and a sense of judicial righteousness as equally as deranged as yours.

This IS an idiotic "debate" for sure, but why sink to this level? Nothing he has stated is at all righteous or deranged. These words, like "journeyman," are very badly chosen--and add nothing of value.

Oh, so Ian Stewart is guilty because NS says he is - without any independent witness.

Nice try. You have sidestepped the point I raised. why attack him for his "mentality," his sense of "judicial righteousness," and call him "deranged"? None of that shit is justified and you really should know that.

[gh]

<<14. This isn't a personal message board. If you want to get into a 2-person debate—.....please take it off-line.>>