Craig Stevens: I'll step aside

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by aggels
Does anybody remember if the person who came third swum under the qualifying time? Because if he didn't then these arguments that he should swim in place of Stevens just aren't valid.
Click to expand...
Josh Krogh.

Apparently Australian swimming sought legal advice last week to see if the spot would become his if Stevens stepped down. Obviously they got the all clear to give it to Thorpe.

When Krogh was asked himself by the media, he said he wasn't picked in the team and won't be going to the Olympics. Simple as that.
 
Originally posted by aggels
Does anybody remember if the person who came third swum under the qualifying time? Because if he didn't then these arguments that he should swim in place of Stevens just aren't valid.
Click to expand...

if this is the rule then how the hell could thorpe be even considered? so you may want to rethink that argument

here is the top 5 (99% sure this is it)

1 HACKETT, Grant 3:46.09
2 STEVENS, Craig 3:50.44
3 ROSOLINO, Massimiliano (ITA) 3:52.33
4 MACGILLIVARY, Kurtis (CAN) 3:52.71
5 HURST, Ky 3:53.08

If i have the right info. and i presume the 3 and 4 place guys can't swim for aus, then the 2nd spot automatically goto Ky Hurst, seems more logical then just picking thorpe.

If you are going to select the best team don't waste people's time holding these worthless events, or at least re-name these and give out prizes and make it known that results of these events mean next to nothing in getting to the olympics.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Originally posted by feher
http://www.swimming.org.au/meets_an...tID=1234&RaceDay=1&RaceID=6138&FeaturedMeet=0

i think this is the event, well its got thorpe as dq, so i think its Ky Hurst or is their another rule that makes swimming more and more harder to understand the logic of picking teams?
Click to expand...
That says heats. (Did Thorpe get DQ-ed in the heats? I didn't really follow it that closely.)

This looks like the right one: http://www.swimming.org.au/meets_and_results/results_details.cfm?fromwhere=profile&RaceID=6139
 
Originally posted by otaku
stupid comments.

Stevens should give up $60K, massive media exposure for being a good guy and a job with channel 7 for what?

a chance at a medal? One that he obviously knew he would not win?

He made the right decision. The one that was best for him.
Click to expand...

Well i am just saying that if i was him i would dig in and swim the bloody race myself. Like i said, Thorpe was disqualified within the rules.
 
I love Ian Thorpe. I think he is a superb athlete, but he should not be swimming in this race. He broke the rules and was disqualified. He shouldn't be given a second chance.

If he does the same thing in Athens, he sure as hell won't get a second chance.

As much as I love and respect Thorpey, he should not be in this race.
 
Originally posted by Bee
I love Ian Thorpe. I think he is a superb athlete, but he should not be swimming in this race. He broke the rules and was disqualified. He shouldn't be given a second chance.

If he does the same thing in Athens, he sure as hell won't get a second chance.

As much as I love and respect Thorpey, he should not be in this race.
Click to expand...


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?
 
As soft as brie on a hot summers day, should have swam he deserved it Thorpe is a gay ****ie **** he just thinks he can get whatever he wants:mad: Just goes to show what people will do for a buck,Craig has given up his Olympic dream to help fill Thorpe's coffers:mad:
 
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?
Click to expand...


What is so hard to understand about disqualification?

It means you have been deprived of any right to compete in a game or a sport because you broke the rules.
Or correct me, if I am wrong!

It's a bit like someone not being eligible for the Brownlow, because they were suspended through the year. Do you think it's right for the winner to hand the medal to the other person because they are in reality a better player?
 
Originally posted by Bee
What is so hard to understand about disqualification?

It means you have been deprived of any right to compete in a game or a sport because you broke the rules.
Or correct me, if I am wrong!

It's a bit like someone not being eligible for the Brownlow, because they were suspended through the year. Do you think it's right for the winner to hand the medal to the other person because they are in reality a better player?
Click to expand...

Do you think Stevens should give up $60K, a job when he finishes swimming and the approval of the general public to swim a race that he has no chance of winning, just because you think he should?


The idea of the meet was to choose the BEST team to send to Athens. Stevens is still going, and he will compete in his best event. He has also allowed the world champion to defend his pet event.

What is so wrong with this?

Look upon it as a protest of a rules that doesnt add anything to the sport. Thorpe wasnt disqualifed becuase he smacked someone in the head - he simply fell over. That rules needs to be changed, and this example simply highlighted it.
 
Originally posted by otaku
Do you think Stevens should give up $60K, a job when he finishes swimming and the approval of the general public to swim a race that he has no chance of winning, just because you think he should?


The idea of the meet was to choose the BEST team to send to Athens. Stevens is still going, and he will compete in his best event. He has also allowed the world champion to defend his pet event.

What is so wrong with this?

Look upon it as a protest of a rules that doesnt add anything to the sport. Thorpe wasnt disqualifed becuase he smacked someone in the head - he simply fell over. That rules needs to be changed, and this example simply highlighted it.
Click to expand...

The rules may need to be changed, but at that moment they state if you break before the start you are automatically disqualified. Tough, but that's the way it goes.
If it was anyone else but Thorpey, nobody would give a stuff.

And I find it a bit un-ethical that Stevens was given money, and a job to announce his decision.
 
Originally posted by Bee
I love Ian Thorpe. I think he is a superb athlete, but he should not be swimming in this race. He broke the rules and was disqualified. He shouldn't be given a second chance.

If he does the same thing in Athens, he sure as hell won't get a second chance.

As much as I love and respect Thorpey, he should not be in this race.
Click to expand...

If he broke in Athens then of course he would not win. However, it wasn't Athens or the actual Olympics, it was at a qualifying event, the point of which is to find out the best swimmer to compete in the real events.
What is so hard to understand about disqualification?

It means you have been deprived of any right to compete in a game or a sport because you broke the rules.
Or correct me, if I am wrong!

It's a bit like someone not being eligible for the Brownlow, because they were suspended through the year. Do you think it's right for the winner to hand the medal to the other person because they are in reality a better player?
Click to expand...

It's not the same thing at all. Do you think that someone who is reported during a practice match should also not be eligible for the Brownlow?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Originally posted by NMWBloods
If he broke in Athens then of course he would not win. However, it wasn't Athens or the actual Olympics, it was at a qualifying event, the point of which is to find out the best swimmer to compete in the real events.


It's not the same thing at all. Do you think that someone who is reported during a practice match should also not be eligible for the Brownlow?
Click to expand...


Do you think that the rules should be broken for champions, but not for any lesser mortal?

If Thorpe does the same thing in Athens the rules remain the same. He doesn't get a second chance. He should not have a second chance here.
 
Originally posted by Bee
The rules may need to be changed, but at that moment they state if you break before the start you are automatically disqualified. Tough, but that's the way it goes.
If it was anyone else but Thorpey, nobody would give a stuff.

And I find it a bit un-ethical that Stevens was given money, and a job to announce his decision.
Click to expand...

and you are still missing the point of the trials.

They are to chose the BEST team. It is that simple.

And a simple minded, rigid application of the rules never works out best for anyone. Each case should be on its own merit. It is like saying that all public servants are lazy. It may describe 90% of em, but there are some out there that deserve to be judged on their own merit.

If i was stevens, i would have held out for as much as i could, but i would still have given the position to thorpe. Good on him for getting some dosh out of this.
 
Originally posted by otaku
and you are still missing the point of the trials.

They are to chose the BEST team. It is that simple.

And a simple minded, rigid application of the rules never works out best for anyone. Each case should be on its own merit. It is like saying that all public servants are lazy. It may describe 90% of em, but there are some out there that deserve to be judged on their own merit.

If i was stevens, i would have held out for as much as i could, but i would still have given the position to thorpe. Good on him for getting some dosh out of this.
Click to expand...

Okay then, let me ask you this. If Stevens had not qualified for any other event at Athens, do you still think he should have stepped aside for Thorpe and given up any chance at all of going to Athens, simply because Thorpe is a better swimmer?
 
Originally posted by Bee
Okay then, let me ask you this. If Stevens had not qualified for any other event at Athens, do you still think he should have stepped aside for Thorpe and given up any chance at all of going to Athens, simply because Thorpe is a better swimmer?
Click to expand...

If he recieved what HE thought was adequate compensation for it, then yes.

That could be simply in the knowledge that he helped Australia get their best swimmer into his pet event.

Hypotheticals like this are meaningless anyway - that didnt happen - lets work with what did hapen.
 
Originally posted by otaku
If he recieved what HE thought was adequate compensation for it, then yes.

That could be simply in the knowledge that he helped Australia get their best swimmer into his pet event.

Hypotheticals like this are meaningless anyway - that didnt happen - lets work with what did hapen.
Click to expand...

When money comes into the equation ethics fly out the window.
That's almost the same as accepting money to throw a match.

This debate is pointless anyway. The public will always be divided on whether or not Stevens should have pulled out or not. You think he should have, I think he shouldn't have. And we are never going to agree.
Thorpe is a champion, he is simply superb, but it will never sit comfortable with me that he is competing in this race in Athens. He just didn't earn it.
 
Originally posted by otaku
and you are still missing the point of the trials.

They are to chose the BEST team. It is that simple.
Click to expand...

then why have pointless events such as the one we had? how did thorpe falling into the pool prove he was the best 400m swimmer during that event? he didn't even get past the heat stage!

I will also say that the bodies to be in aus. swimming must have thought about the rules and possible consequences, they made the rule, stick by them and don't send thorpe to athens to swim the 400m ... not that it is going happen.
 
Originally posted by Bee
When money comes into the equation ethics fly out the window.
That's almost the same as accepting money to throw a match.
Click to expand...

no, it is totally different! it is a shame you cant see the difference.

Thorpe is a champion, he is simply superb, but it will never sit comfortable with me that he is competing in this race in Athens. He just didn't earn it.
Click to expand...

Thats complete bullsh*t. Of course he earnt it. You dont get to be world champion by luck. And you shouldnt be penalised for bad luck either.
 
Originally posted by feher
then why have pointless events such as the one we had? how did thorpe falling into the pool prove he was the best 400m swimmer during that event? he didn't even get past the heat stage!
Click to expand...

who says it was pointless? you? and you are the almighty? pffft.

I will also say that the bodies to be in aus. swimming must have thought about the rules and possible consequences, they made the rule, stick by them and don't send thorpe to athens to swim the 400m ... not that it is going happen.
Click to expand...

again - why shouldnt he go? he is the best.

To say that he didnt prove himself is an insult to Thorpe of the largest magnitude. His standing as world champion should prove his right to compete
 
Originally posted by otaku
who says it was pointless? you? and you are the almighty? pffft.
Click to expand...

if it was so worth while, why is the rules being bent to suit stevens and thorpe? either come out and have these events, and say the following events are going to be race but won't have effect on the athens racers and the following will, they could have done that they didn't. Next time they have this event; i wonder how many swimmers will really think it will be worth their time to swim it? it probably will be due to being bribed if you qualify!

Originally posted by otaku
again - why shouldnt he go? he is the best.

To say that he didnt prove himself is an insult to Thorpe of the largest magnitude. His standing as world champion should prove his right to compete
Click to expand...

so? a lot of the best athletes never win the major prize e.g. Barry Bonds in Baseball, he is probably the current best player he hasn't won a world series, should we just give him a world series ring? He shouldn't go cos he didn't even finish the race! is that good enough?

Tell me how thorpe proved himself during the meet?
 
Originally posted by otaku
Thats complete bullsh*t. Of course he earnt it. You dont get to be world champion by luck. And you shouldnt be penalised for bad luck either.
Click to expand...

your kidding right? people get penalized all the time for bad luck, will the race be re-run if a person by bad luck falls into the pool to early during the athens game?
 
Originally posted by feher
if it was so worth while, why is the rules being bent to suit stevens and thorpe? either come out and have these events, and say the following events are going to be race but won't have effect on the athens racers and the following will, they could have done that they didn't. Next time they have this event; i wonder how many swimmers will really think it will be worth their time to swim it? it probably will be due to being bribed if you qualify!
Click to expand...

please think before you post. A little clarity goes a long way.

so? a lot of the best athletes never win the major prize e.g. Barry Bonds in Baseball, he is probably the current best player he hasn't won a world series, should we just give him a world series ring? He shouldn't go cos he didn't even finish the race! is that good enough?

Tell me how thorpe proved himself during the meet?
Click to expand...

What has barry got to do with the argument? Totally different argument and scenario. Try following a line of logic, rather than just splurting out inane comments.

We are simply putting our best against the best from the rest of the world. We are not giving Thorpe a gold medal, simply giving him the chance to compete for one.

Could Sevens win the gold? Highly unlikely. Could Thorpe? A very good chance he will.

Whats the problem?
 
Originally posted by otaku
please think before you post. A little clarity goes a long way.
Click to expand...

i'll re-do it:
your comment
who says it was pointless? you? and you are the almighty? pffft.
Click to expand...

If you are going to hold the event to determine who should goto the olympics via a qualifing event, and you carn't argue that is what was done, as stevens HAD the right to go, but you change the rules around to suit your own selfish needs; does that make the event worthwhile? swimming in this country is mickeymouse now imo.

With the disgraceful way this has being done, i wonder what is the point of the next swimmer going up against thorpe to qualify for the next olympics, it probably will be due to stevens selfish actions, but for individuals you must question the point of going to these events.

Originally posted by otaku
What has barry got to do with the argument? Totally different argument and scenario. Try following a line of logic, rather than just splurting out inane comments.
Click to expand...

nothing just trying to make a comparision and a fair one imo, if i knew more about swimming and these type of events i would have gave you a better one.

Originally posted by otaku
We are simply putting our best against the best from the rest of the world. We are not giving Thorpe a gold medal, simply giving him the chance to compete for one.
Click to expand...

but the way it has being done is disgraceful, and makes the event imo completely worthless. What you have done is taken away stevens chance to win gold in the 400m! if he wasn't serious about going to athens to compete in the 400m don't swim!

Originally posted by otaku
Could Sevens win the gold? Highly unlikely. Could Thorpe? A very good chance he will.

Whats the problem?
Click to expand...

my problem is thorpe is going to swim the 400m without qualifying
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Craig Stevens: I'll step aside

Similar threads

Chief
Stephen King's dumbest trope
Replies
11
Views
628
Brad Goodman
Brad Goodman

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top