11/21/24
April 18, 2003
The under-reported scandal?: We all remember Ben Johnson's victory and subsequent drug scandal -- a moment that brought shame to all of Canada. Now, we get reports showing that Carl Lewis, the man to claim Johnson's gold medal, was part of a long "pattern" of US drug-related cover-ups. Where's the shame now? Or is it too long ago and too easily forgotten? What should be done? How deep does the US Olympic Committee corruption go? A lot of questions, yes, but they're questions that are not being asked by the major media outlets.
I just want to say that I'm shocked that American athletes were cheating in the Olympics. I would never have suspected anything was wrong. It's been a well known fact that all the other nations on Earth cheat at the Olympics, but the Americans beat them all with just their skill, determination, and God-given abilities. /sarcasm
posted by grum@work at 07:33 AM on April 18, 2003
The USOC has about as much credibility as Enron. Their organization is absolutely rotten from top to bottom. The only surprise for me is that it has taken this long for drug allegations to come forth. They need to name a president with impeccable credentials and unquestionable integrity to reform the whole outfit. That means drug testing, site selction process, and settling the amateur vs. pro debate once and for all. Is the Olympics in this country for amateurs? Or is it not? I don't care what other countries are doing, we should be fielding amateurs. If in basketball for instance other countries want to field pros, then fine. We should go back to college kids regardless. I'd like to see the USOC be out ahead of something for once, and I don't give a damn if the medal count suffers for it. Thanks mkn, nice digging.
posted by vito90 at 08:07 AM on April 18, 2003
all those ben johnson jokes i've endured living in the states are finally gonna be flying the other way. ha. on the plus side, at least US female athletes retained some feminity, unlike the E.German counterparts.
posted by garfield at 10:39 AM on April 18, 2003
And Mike Weir lives in Utah. HA! (See Garfield, we always have jokes to fall back on) Anyway... I hope we can all agree now that the Olympics don't matter at all. They're entertainment and they're enjoyable, but as far as measures of national skill or even individual skill, we can all see them for the farce that they are. I'll still watch, especially the team sports, but viewing the Olympics as anything other than entertainment would be a big mistake. In other news headlines: "NFL Juiced Up", "Hockey Juiced Up and Drunk", "Baseball Juiced Up and Still Boring", "Basketball Stoned and Unapologetic".
posted by 86 at 10:53 AM on April 18, 2003
Utah is a joke.
posted by garfield at 11:01 AM on April 18, 2003
True, but it's not as funny as Newfoundland.
posted by Samsonov14 at 12:49 PM on April 18, 2003
we all have a pariah or two
posted by garfield at 01:08 PM on April 18, 2003
Pariah Carey? I feel absolutely no pride in watching any U.S. team compete in the Olympics any more. When we hockey in 1980 ... my God, I'm not very nationalistic and I still get chills. Now, it's a bunch of whiny bastards who only go for endorsements. Screw 'em and go back to the kids.
posted by wfrazerjr at 01:24 PM on April 18, 2003
err, won hockey. Me fail English? That's unpossible!
posted by wfrazerjr at 01:24 PM on April 18, 2003
I remember a track clinic back about 1990 where one of the coaches was showing how to identify athletes who might be using banned substances (from the steroid family in particular). The presenter showed slides of two women - one presumably not on drugs, one on. After pointing out the telltale muscularity, facial features etc in the athlete who had taken drugs, one coach stood up, somewhat annoyed, and said that while he appreciated the presentation it was hardly valid to compare two different women when genetics and training regimens might account for many of the differences. The presenter smiled and explained that both pictures were of the same woman: Florence Griffith Joyner. The first picture was from her collegiate days at UCLA (ca. 1982), the second from the 1988 Olympics. The changes were so dramatic the woman in the two pictures could barely be recognized as the same person. Perhaps the larger point is that everyone in the room accepted at face value that FloJo had been using drugs. It was widely accepted, even then, that USATrack & Field and the USOC were turning a blind eye to what certain high profile athletes were doing. The rumor at the time was the USOC had agreed not to reveal any test results in exchange for FloJo's 'retirement'. 86: I disagree that the Olympics, don't matter at all clearly they do or there would be no uproar over drug use or the USOC corruption. Are they the purest form of athletic participation? No. And of course they're entertainment - was that ever in question? They are certainly an excellent measure of ability and skill in a very specific venue. But winning has become an imperative that we'll use any means to achieve: blood doping, drugs, professional athletes, crow bars. Because remember, it's not entertaining if we don't win.
posted by kloeprich at 01:44 PM on April 18, 2003
Kloeprich, I wasn't very clear, but you sort of made my point for me. The overall, longstanding Olympic ideal is that it they are the purest form of athletics. They're supposed to be untainted amateurs (or at least untainted athletes) facing off in the ultimate tests of speed, strength and skill. The only thing that separated the Olympics from any other track and field meet, swimming competition or curling tournament was that ideal. When they fail to be pure, they lose their luster (for me, at least) and become strictly entertainment, or just another sports event. Sure, they’re special, they happen once every four years and they do bring together the best from around the globe, but they are no longer the Olympics we think about. They matter, they just don’t matter all that much because they lack the key elements that made them truly special.
posted by 86 at 02:31 PM on April 18, 2003
The only thing that separated the Olympics from any other track and field meet ... was that ideal [untainted amateurs] Well said, 86. Take that away and what's left is not the Olympics.
posted by vito90 at 03:36 PM on April 18, 2003
Someone should explain to me this concept of amateur. Because how many athletes could afford to stay in, say, track and field or soccer and train up to world class levels without some financial support given because they're athletes? If you say that other countries, like the Soviet block nations before the fall, did it, then I'd say bullhockey (or something less euphemistic) because their teams were all composed of soldiers and academics with the sole responsibility of bringing home medals. This is the 21st century and we live in a capitalist society. The notion of purity 86 is pushing is a leftover Victorian ideal that never matched anything in the real world, so puh-leeze.
posted by billsaysthis at 05:42 PM on April 18, 2003
I like what you two are saying, 86 and Vito, but the whole "amateur" thing doesn't figure for me. I suppose it's a good idea to let the non-stars shine, but I'd much rather watch the Best In The World fight it out. The top athletes on the planet are much more entertaining for me than the top "people that just didn't make it". Whether it be the Olympics or something else, I want to see a forum where the best of the best face off.
posted by Samsonov14 at 05:48 PM on April 18, 2003
Interestingly the stated the stated Olympic Ideal is: to promote international understanding among the youth of the world through sport and culture I don't know about you guys, but I'm not paying for NBC's extended coverage of that. And I've often chuckled at the Olympic propaganda about bringing the world's best athlete's to one stage when in fact many are left home because only a limited number of athletes from each county gets to go. Damn, proved 86's point again. I guess we just sit back and watch - and pray that we're not subjected to too many Dick Enberg moments.
posted by kloeprich at 06:04 PM on April 18, 2003
Errrrr, country gets to go, that is. And strike that extra the stated in the first line too. Got to ease off the home brew...
posted by kloeprich at 07:45 PM on April 18, 2003
Without wanting to make any apologies for Lewis, USA Track and Field does not make it easy to know what substances are banned. I have tried on several occasions (out of curiosity, obviously,-- if I won a race, checking my urine wouldn't be necessary-- you'd know something was up from my radioactive glow) to search its site to see if a medication or substance is banned. There doesn't seem to be any way to do it, short of calling their hotline-- and I'm note so sure I'd feel good about doing that if I were an elite athlete with a question. USATF does not impress me as an organization that is out to be particularly helpful-- the most law abiding person in the world might hesitate before asking a cop if a twenty dollar bill is counterfeit, you know? Why would you call USATF to ask about Sunafed? "Hello, can I take this over the counter cold medication I bought in the airport drugstore?" "Who is this? Did you take any yet? Hold on, we'll be right over." It is possible to be the cop and the counselor, I suppose, but USATF seems mostly to be about suspending athletes, not helping them, and that seems almost as wrong as the offense they are policing. I love track-- I think it is the purest sport there is, and I wish it was the cleanest. USATF's priorities seem somewhat different.
posted by outside counsel at 10:25 AM on April 22, 2003
It's been an open secret -- at least, it's been discussed in Britain -- that USATF through the 80s and 90s (and perhaps even now) was better at protecting its stars from scrutiny when it came to random testing than it was at enforcing the IAAF's regulations. Several orders of magnitude below the notorious tactics of the Warsaw Pact nations during the same period, but still worthy of criticism.
posted by etagloh at 02:08 AM on April 25, 2003
Also found this old article -- which is interesting. I'm all for an "anything goes" type of no-banned-substance Olympics.