Craig Stevens: I'll step aside

[otaku]

Originally posted by feher
makes no sense, he didn't finish the race, do you understand that? if i was buddy with stevens could he chose me to take his spot? i doubt it!

again - stevens doesnt chose who goes.

not responding to insults, reword it and i will respond.

well, if you are going to be idiotic about this, then be prepared for insults. Why should Stevens be banned?

what? where is the logic of thorpe going and not the 3rd place finisher? where is the logic that thorpe automatically gets the spot?

Cause the third place finisher has even less of a chance of winning?

Wat is the point of letting someone who is worse than Stevens take his spot?

Cant you see the reason behind this race? To chose the best team for the olympic squad. What is so hard to understand?

 

[feher]

Originally posted by otaku
again - stevens doesnt chose who goes.

ok, then please tell me why thorpe is the automatic 3rd selection? he didn't finish the trial to goto the olympics in the 400m, at the end of the day you win, i don't totally know what your bitching about.

Originally posted by otaku
well, if you are going to be idiotic about this, then be prepared for insults. Why should Stevens be banned?

hmm, i don't know, how about the fact he is giving up his spot for no good reason, and no thorpe going/champ is not a valid reason cos thorpe did not finish 3rd.

Originally posted by otaku
Cause the third place finisher has even less of a chance of winning?

at least he made it past the heat stage and finished.

ok what if it was say 3 false starts and thorpe stuffed up 3 times, does he still deserve to go?

Originally posted by otaku
Wat is the point of letting someone who is worse than Stevens take his spot?

because the guy has actually earnt the right to go, and may actually want to go!

Originally posted by otaku
Cant you see the reason behind this race? To chose the best team for the olympic squad. What is so hard to understand?

semi-correct, thorpe didn't qualify, they were qualifiers! otherwise why would stevens earnt the right to swim the 400m?

The best team as such was not chosen as thorpe failed to finish the race. thorpe maybe a better swimmer then all the others, but the others earnt the right by abiding by the rules.

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by feher
ok, then please tell me why thorpe is the automatic 3rd selection? he didn't finish the trial to goto the olympics in the 400m, at the end of the day you win, i don't totally know what your bitching about.

show me a rule where it says the selectors cant chose who they want if a qualifier steps down

hmm, i don't know, how about the fact he is giving up his spot for any good reason, and no thorpe going/champ is not a valid reason cos thorpe did not finish 3rd.

read above

at least he made it past the heat stage and finished.

ok what if it was say 3 false starts and thorpe stuffed up 3 times, does he still deserve to go?

but it wasnt - if anyone fell over into the pool (Thorpe or Stevens or anyone) i would say they should get out and run the race, not be disqualified.

because the guy has actually earnt the right to go, and may actually want to go!

semi-correct, thorpe didn't qualify, they were qualifiers! otherwise why would stevens earnt the right to swim the 400m.

read my first statement, and then stop bitching about it, eh?

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by feher
The best team as such was not chosen as thorpe failed to finish the race. thorpe maybe a better swimmer then all the others, but the others earnt the right by abiding by the rules.

what sort of bollocks is this??

The best team WAS chosen - and obviously Thorpe (as the best swimmer) had to be a part of it.

You are just spouting gibberish now.

 

[feher]

Originally posted by otaku
show me a rule where it says the selectors cant chose who they want if a qualifier steps down

http://www.swimming.org.au/content/meets_and_results/community/uploads/P_0094d00.pdf

haven't read the full thing yet, but read it also.

 

[feher]

If you have a look at Annexure A: 400m freestyle men: time = 3:52:01

KROGH, Joshua: 3:51.77 in the final to finish 3rd.

Please also see replacement policy, i don't see a valid reason for stevens to have done so. If i understand it correctly Krogh should be going, but it does seem the ASI do have a get out of jail card now that is beu... you know what.

please note this thing was approved march 2003, plenty of time to change it!

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by feher
http://www.swimming.org.au/content/meets_and_results/community/uploads/P_0094d00.pdf

haven't read the full thing yet, but read it also.

"This criteria may be amended by the Board of ASI at its discretion".

Did Krogh withdraw from the placement as well? has he been asked?

Ultimately, it doesnt matter, as the Board can pick who they want to represent australia.

 

[feher]

Originally posted by otaku
"This criteria may be amended by the Board of ASI at its discretion".

Did Krogh withdraw from the placement as well? has he been asked?

Ultimately, it doesnt matter, as the Board can pick who they want to represent australia.

and you said they were narrow minded didn't you?

i don't know about krogh, but if i understand it correctly he has every right to go!

 

[TheBloods]

Originally posted by Bee
Yes I do get it, it's you or doesn't get it. Whether it's a trial or a final the rules still remain the same.

There is no reason why the rules have to be the same. What benefit does it gain for such ridiculous false start rules except a win for pedantic bureaucracy!

By your reckoning, if the reigning champion in an event has a bad day and finishes out of a place then he should still be picked because we all know he is the best. Even though he never really qualified.

Not at all - I've said nothing even remotely like this. What I've said is that a stupid rule, which has no bearing on picking the best swimmer, is the problem.

There is no difference with the rules though. That's my point. Why do you take notice of the same rule in a final and not in a trial?

I would have thought that is fairly obvious. One is a competition to see who is the champion swimmer in that event. The other is a trial to see who from Australia gets to represent Australia in that event. The first one has awards and prizes associated with it, the second one is merely a step toward the first one. Given that Australia wants its best team competing, we should make sure we get our best swimmerd qualifying.

I don't care if trials are to pick the best or not. "The best" broke the rules. Tough luck, but that's the way it goes.
And until they change the rules then it will always remain the same.

They don't need to abide by that rule though. In trials they can abide by any rules they choose. If you don't pick the best, then there is no point in the trials.

But that's the whole point, isn't it? he wasn't allowed to race because he was automatically disqualified. Which means he has no right to race at all.
You may think the rule is stupid, and it probably is, but you can't waive the rules for one person.

Yay, another fantastic win for bureaucracy over common sense!! Attitudes like this make life unnecessarily difficult!!

 

[Bee]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
There is no reason why the rules have to be the same. What benefit does it gain for such ridiculous false start rules except a win for pedantic bureaucracy!


Not at all - I've said nothing even remotely like this. What I've said is that a stupid rule, which has no bearing on picking the best swimmer, is the problem.



I would have thought that is fairly obvious. One is a competition to see who is the champion swimmer in that event. The other is a trial to see who from Australia gets to represent Australia in that event. The first one has awards and prizes associated with it, the second one is merely a step toward the first one. Given that Australia wants its best team competing, we should make sure we get our best swimmerd qualifying.



They don't need to abide by that rule though. In trials they can abide by any rules they choose. If you don't pick the best, then there is no point in the trials.



Yay, another fantastic win for bureaucracy over common sense!! Attitudes like this make life unnecessarily difficult!!

If you feel so strongly about it why don't you do something about getting the stupid rule changed! You can sit there all you want and say the rule is stupid, but that doesn't change it.

I never said the rule was right.
All I am saying is it is there for everyone! You can't expect to be exempt from rules simply because you are a national hero.
Best bloody team or not!
Thorpe slipped off the block. The rule states if you slip and fall you are out! The rule does not say unless you are a champion then you get another chance!
And until they change the rule that's the way it should be for everyone.

You think he should still be able to swim, I don't. And you won't change my mind on it. Ethically, patriotically or any other way.
Let's agree to disagree.

 

[Katthawk]

I wonder what everyone will say if Thorpe doesn't win.

It is just as much a possibility as the unfortunate luck of him falling in in the first place.

Whose fault will that be?

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by Bee

Thorpe slipped off the block. The rule states if you slip and fall you are out! The rule does not say unless you are a champion then you get another chance!
And until they change the rule that's the way it should be for everyone.

actually the rules state a false start...and a start is defined by a dive, not a fall

 

[jim boy]

A better analogy with footy would be the AFL draft. A top ranked junior might have done everythig right in the TAC and be ranked number 1, but then come draft camp he does slips in the beep test and ends up not completing it, thus bringing his rating right down.

You can bet recruitment managers feher and Bee will be saying "rules are rules", he might be the best but he did poorly in the beep test, we will instead select the hack who will try valiantly, but will ultimately fail because he sucks.

 

[feher]

Originally posted by Jim Boy
A better analogy with footy would be the AFL draft. A top ranked junior might have done everythig right in the TAC and be ranked number 1, but then come draft camp he does slips in the beep test and ends up not completing it, thus bringing his rating right down.

You can bet recruitment managers feher and Bee will be saying "rules are rules", he might be the best but he did poorly in the beep test, we will instead select the hack who will try valiantly, but will ultimately fail because he sucks.

Not a bad analogy. If that was the clubs recruitment policy then why would i argue with that? how do you know your getting a dud after the top rated bloke, maybe the top rated bloke will be the dud especially if he can't finish a beep test. The criteria to make the olympics where set, you can read it in the pdf, you can argue it as much as you want you got what you wanted! to some of the people on here it wouldn't matter had thorpe false started 100 times and came 7th they would still demand him to go. I also want to add i never said i agree with the rules, but they have being made, either live with them and change it for next time, or don't bother making any rules at all.

Stevens sold out, thorpe had no balls or loyality to his mate, and asi are **** weak.

 

[Squeak]

Originally posted by Bee


I never said the rule was right.
All I am saying is it is there for everyone! You can't expect to be exempt from rules simply because you are a national hero.

Why not? Rules are rules, but the point of the meet was to choose the best team. A petty technicality undermines the purpose of the whole meet.

Say it was Chris Fydler in a 100m trial before the 1996 Olympics instead of Ian Thorpe in a 400m trial before the 2004 Olympics.

Fydler was the best 100m swimmer Australia had at the time, but he was by no means a medal certainty, so it would not have meant the team was any worse off by not picking him.

Thorpe, different story. He is almost guaranteed to win gold. Having him miss is a waste.

 

[myee8]

Originally posted by otaku
pffft...of course he should be....

the guy whose place he is taking gave it to Thorpe - because he knows thorpe is a better swimmer!!

what is so hard to understand?

It shows that Stevens is a weak c*nt who bowed to the pressure to relinquish his position just for Thorpe and for the monetary incentive. ASA had that rule to amend the rules at its discretion was to cover its arse for f*ckups by medal chances.

 

[Bee]

Originally posted by Jim Boy
A better analogy with footy would be the AFL draft. A top ranked junior might have done everythig right in the TAC and be ranked number 1, but then come draft camp he does slips in the beep test and ends up not completing it, thus bringing his rating right down.

You can bet recruitment managers feher and Bee will be saying "rules are rules", he might be the best but he did poorly in the beep test, we will instead select the hack who will try valiantly, but will ultimately fail because he sucks.

That analogy is completely different to this case.

What would you say if a 'hack' slipped off the blocks during the trials? Would you say "tough luck, but you wouldn't have won, anyhow" or do you think he deserves another chance, even though he has no chance of qualifying? Do we break the rules for everyone, or just some?

I don't know about you, but I don't think anyone deserves to be treated better than anyone else. In life, in sport or whatever.

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by Bee
That analogy is completely different to this case.

What would you say if a 'hack' slipped off the blocks during the trials? Would you say "tough luck, but you wouldn't have won, anyhow" or do you think he deserves another chance, even though he has no chance of qualifying? Do we break the rules for everyone, or just some?

I don't know about you, but I don't think anyone deserves to be treated better than anyone else. In life, in sport or whatever.

if someone obviously overbalances, rather than making a false start (ie, diving off ) then yes, they should be allowed back onto the block.

some people are always going to be treated better than others, because they are better at what they do.

 

[monopoly19]

Ian Thorpe was disqualified.

Craig Stevens qualified. It is debatable whether he would make it into the final at Athens.

Thorpe, if he manages to dive in at the correct time, is as close to being guaranteed a medal as you can be. He is the best in the world.

Stevens is competing in two other events, both of which he has a good chance of winning a medal. He is not giving up a place in the Olympic squad.

They are friends.

Stevens steps down and gets paid $60 k. He still races at Athens. There is a heap less pressure on him.

Thorpie races his pet event.

What's the big deal? Win win, as far as I can tell.

 

[jim boy]

Originally posted by Bee
That analogy is completely different to this case.

What would you say if a 'hack' slipped off the blocks during the trials? Would you say "tough luck, but you wouldn't have won, anyhow" or do you think he deserves another chance, even though he has no chance of qualifying? Do we break the rules for everyone, or just some?

I don't know about you, but I don't think anyone deserves to be treated better than anyone else. In life, in sport or whatever.

No it's not. It's exactly the same. The selection was made on the total body of evidence. This includes past performances. If a hack falls off, then the total body of evidence available would suggest he would have not gone on to glory. With Thorpe, the total body of evidence suggested he would go on to glory, despite not starting in the selection trial. Of course if Thorpe had raced, the selectors could be more certain, that's why these races are held, as well as giving no-names the chance to shine.

 

[Thrawn]

Otaku and feher - your debate is going around in circles:

Otaku: Thorpe should swim.

Feher: No he shouldn't.

Otaku: Yes he should.

Feher: NO he shouldn't.

Otaku: YES he should.

Feher: NO HE SHOULDN'T!

Otaku: YES HE SHOULD!

... ad infintium.

Can everyone please read this post from Bee, about sums it up:

I never said the rule was right.
All I am saying is it is there for everyone! You can't expect to be exempt from rules simply because you are a national hero.
Best bloody team or not!
Thorpe slipped off the block. The rule states if you slip and fall you are out! The rule does not say unless you are a champion then you get another chance!
And until they change the rule that's the way it should be for everyone.

Exact bloody ally.

 

[jim boy]

Originally posted by Thrawn
Otaku and feher - your debate is going around in circles:

Otaku: Thorpe should swim.

Feher: No he shouldn't.

Otaku: Yes he should.

Feher: NO he shouldn't.

Otaku: YES he should.

Feher: NO HE SHOULDN'T!

Otaku: YES HE SHOULD!

... ad infintium.

Can everyone please read this post from Bee, about sums it up:


-----

blah, blah, blah....

-----

Exact bloody ally.

Hypocritical post of the day.

 

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Jim Boy
Hypocritical post of the day.

Theirs lasted for a many posts, going around in circles. I agreed with Bee, and only required one post to say that I am on THAT side of the debate.

And I really don't need to explain why because it's already been said. Certainly not in circles either!

Bee's post - sums it up IMO. If ya don't like it, too bad... why bother chasing our own tails so to speak?

 

[jim boy]

Originally posted by Thrawn
Theirs lasted for a many posts, going around in circles. I agreed with Bee, and only required one post to say that I am on THAT side of the debate.

And I really don't need to explain why because it's already been said. Certainly not in circles either!

Bee's post - sums it up IMO. If ya don't like it, too bad... why bother chasing our own tails so to speak?

Actually that was your third post on this topic, you'd already stated your position.

And just to remind you, this was your first post in it's entireity

Originally posted by Thrawn
??

No he didn't.

Big contribution that.

 

[feher]

Originally posted by Thrawn
Otaku and feher - your debate is going around in circles:

Otaku: Thorpe should swim.

Feher: No he shouldn't.

Otaku: Yes he should.

Feher: NO he shouldn't.

Otaku: YES he should.

Feher: NO HE SHOULDN'T!

Otaku: YES HE SHOULD!

... ad infintium.

well i think our debate is over though

at the end of the day otaku wins cos thorpe is going to swim the 400m, and i get nothing