Stevens Will NOT Swim the 400m

Brissie said:

Just announced his decision on "The Decision..."

Moron turned away $100k to do the same thing for $60k

There might be more money involved in other, unspoken
advertising deals. Or, he might have just decided he didn't
want the extra attention it would have focused on him. It
would distract him from the Big One. The 400 is for wusses.
Real men swim the 15.

martin

Brissie said:

Just announced his decision on "The Decision..."

Moron turned away $100k to do the same thing for $60k

Do you have an URL or something of this announce, please?

--
Nuoto e me ne frego!

"Drogo Sackville-Baggins, ramo marcio della Contea"

Quoted message said:

Brissie said:

Just announced his decision on "The Decision..."

Moron turned away $100k to do the same thing for $60k

Do you have an URL or something of this announce, please?

abc.net.aus1095111.htmOpen ↗

martin

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 11:11:28 +0200, "Drogo Sackville-Baggins, ramo

marcio della Contea said:

Brissie said:

Just announced his decision on "The Decision..."

Moron turned away $100k to do the same thing for $60k

Do you have an URL or something of this announce, please?

Here's the full interview

todaytonight.com.au911409.htmlOpen ↗

It's not up there now, but a video of the interview could go
up in the next 24 hours sometime.

Tomorrow night is Ian Thorpes and some other swimmers
reaction exclusivly

Brissie said:

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 11:11:28 +0200, "Drogo Sackville-
Baggins, ramo marcio della Contea" <el_simeon@x-

planet.org said:

Brissie said:

Just announced his decision on "The Decision..."

Moron turned away $100k to do the same thing for $60k

Do you have an URL or something of this announce, please?

Here's the full interview

todaytonight.com.au911409.htmlOpen ↗

It's not up there now, but a video of the interview could
go up in the next 24 hours sometime.

Tomorrow night is Ian Thorpes and some other swimmers
reaction exclusivly

Cheaters! They should all be thrown out for shameless
professionalism. Remember the other Thorpe! Now *there* was
an athlete.

martin

"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cheaters! They should all be thrown out for shameless
professionalism. Remember the other Thorpe! Now *there*
was an athlete.

Please explain who has cheated?

David

"Brissie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just announced his decision on "The Decision..."

Moron turned away $100k to do the same thing for $60k

The Age reports that the amount was $130,000, but in another
article said "variously reported to be $130,000 and
$60,000." So, no one's quite sure.

David

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cheaters! They should all be thrown out for shameless
professionalism. Remember the other Thorpe! Now *there*
was an athlete.

Please explain who has cheated?

David

I think he is referring to letting Thornton having a chance
that Thornton did not qualify for as being cheating. ( I
hope I got the names right--I have only been mildly
following all of this.)

Pat in TX

David White said:

"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cheaters! They should all be thrown out for shameless
professionalism. Remember the other Thorpe! Now *there*
was an athlete.

Please explain who has cheated?

All of them, because they all get money for swimming. Rules
are rules, and they can never be changed. Therefore, we must
return to the days of Jim Thorpe.

martin

"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

David White said:

"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cheaters! They should all be thrown out for shameless
professionalism. Remember the other Thorpe! Now *there*
was an athlete.

Please explain who has cheated?

All of them, because they all get money for swimming.
Rules are rules, and they can never be changed.

They can be changed whenever the rulemakers want to change
them. In any case, you still haven't explained how getting
money for swimming is "cheating".

David

Mike Edey said:

Martin W. Smith said:

David White said:

"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
>
> Cheaters! They should all be thrown out for shameless
> professionalism. Remember the other Thorpe! Now *there*
> was an athlete.

Please explain who has cheated?

All of them, because they all get money for swimming.
Rules are rules, and they can never be changed.
Therefore, we must return to the days of Jim Thorpe.

martin

The days when the vast majority of Olympians were military,
royalty or otherwise supported?

Throw those cheating [censored] out.

Quoted message said:

There is no such thing as a true amatuer, and never was.

Of course there is. I am a true amatuer swimmer.

Quoted message said:

The value of sport & recreation may be great, but have
never had enough intrinsic value in the short run to pay
for themselves. A thorpe 400fr puts no more food on the
table then a Monet. We can, then, have either sport that
never achieves more then the (admittedly important)
weekend warrior or we can embrace sport as leadership,
entertainment & profession.

I don't know what that means.

Quoted message said:

Personally I don't think there's much of a choice. We can't
put the genie back in the bottle and there aren't many
persuasive arguments for doing so.

I wasn't actually arguing to put the genie back in the
bottle. I was trying to emphasize how much the rules have
changed over the years, so standing pat on the rules now and
claiming they shouldn't be changed because they are sacred
is silly, whether the changes are for preventing fiascos
like the Thorpe one or for preventing the wasting of
millions of dollars on drug testing and enforcement that
could be spent on children in swimming.

martin

David White said:

"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

David White said:

"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
>
> Cheaters! They should all be thrown out for shameless
> professionalism. Remember the other Thorpe! Now
> *there* was an athlete.

Please explain who has cheated?

All of them, because they all get money for swimming.
Rules are rules, and they can never be changed.

They can be changed whenever the rulemakers want to change
them. In any case, you still haven't explained how getting
money for swimming is "cheating".

It isn't, because it is no longer against the rules. It used
to be cheating because it was against the rules. Using drugs
is still cheating because it is still against the rules.

martin

Surely this is the right result. Thorpe, the best in the
world at this event, swims, and Stevens concentrates on
events that he is good enough at to make his mark and maybe
medal, ie the 4 x 200 relay or 1500 metre. Quite different
to when Allen displaced Perkins for the 1500. Perkins was
beaten at the trials and wasn't swimming at all well
anywhere that year. Thorpe hasn't been beaten over this
distance and is swimming well.

In any case, the objective for any country is to use its
trials to produce the best team and best swimmers for the
Olympics. Winning the trials or diqualifying someon at the
trials is not the point. Its' in Australia interests to put
the best team into the pool. That is has now done.

And. More importantly, as spectators and interested
observers don't we want the world's best swimmers to race
each other at the Olympics. Stevens was not that calibre of
swimmer in the 400. Thorpe is.

"mckinnon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Surely this is the right result. Thorpe, the best in the
world at this event, swims, and Stevens concentrates on
events that he is good enough at to make his mark and
maybe medal, ie the 4 x 200 relay or 1500 metre. Quite
different to when Allen displaced Perkins for the 1500.
Perkins was beaten at the trials and wasn't swimming at
all well anywhere that year. Thorpe hasn't been beaten
over this distance and is swimming well.

In any case, the objective for any country is to use its
trials to produce the best team and best swimmers for the
Olympics. Winning the trials or diqualifying someon at the
trials is not the point. Its' in Australia interests to
put the best team into the pool. That is has now done.

And. More importantly, as spectators and interested
observers don't we want the world's best swimmers to race
each other at the Olympics. Stevens was not that calibre
of swimmer in the 400. Thorpe is.

I agree with all this. I said from the beginning that we
shot ourselves in the foot by disqualifying Thorpe for a
reason that had nothing to do with his chances in the
Olympic 400m. I would not have begrudged Stevens at all if
he'd decided to swim the event. After all, he won his place
fair and square under the rules and it was his right to swim
the event. However, I think that such strict breaking rules
are not appropriate for Olympic trials, so I'm glad that
after all this the world's best 400m swimmer will swim the
event in Athens.

David

David White <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I agree with all this. I said from the beginning that we
shot ourselves in the foot by disqualifying Thorpe for a
reason that had nothing to do with his chances in the
Olympic 400m.

Swimmers who false-start once can do it again.

"jtaylor" <[email hidden]> wrote in
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

David White <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I agree with all this. I said from the beginning that we
shot ourselves in the foot by disqualifying Thorpe for a
reason that had nothing to do with his chances in the
Olympic 400m.

Swimmers who false-start once can do it again.

sure...and if he does it in the olympics, he'll get
disqualifed. and even if he doesn't, he's not guaranteed to
win. but what do either of those things have to do with
having an olympics that pits the absolute best in the world
against one another? are you suggesting that Thorpe's
position as the top 400m swimmer on the planet is somehow in
jeopardy due to a single false start?

--

Mark Vaughan

Brissie said:

Just announced his decision on "The Decision..."

Moron turned away $100k to do the same thing for $60k

FFS!

Make up your mind you clown!!

"jtaylor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

David White <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I agree with all this. I said from the beginning that we
shot ourselves

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the foot by disqualifying Thorpe for a reason that had
nothing to do

with

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

his chances in the Olympic 400m.

Swimmers who false-start once can do it again.

And swimmers who have never false-started can false-start
for the first time, which was the case with Thorpe in the
trials. Any swimmer can false-start any time if, for
example, he hears, or thinks he hears, a sound and takes off
before realizing it wasn't the starter. The point is, is
Thorpe _more_ likely to false-start at the Olympics than
Stevens or any other swimmer? After one false start in his
whole career, you could not come to that conclusion.

David