The official word is that IAAF made an agreement with TAC before the Trials
allowing him to compete, whereas this did not happen in the German champs.
It still appears inconsistent, though.
Mind you, it was nearly nine years ago and a lot has changed in the sport in
that time. Obviously the IAAF feel the need to remind everyone who's boss
with all the legal action and threats of legal action of late.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed & Dana Parrot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 't-and-f@darkwing. uoregon. edu' (E-mail) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 4:19 PM
Subject: Re: t-and-f: Re: T&F IAAF Statement on Baumann
> From: peter stuart:
>
>
> > Did they use this rule against all of the athletes that competed in ALL
of
> > the meets that Butch Reynolds was in while under the SAME circumstances
?
> > If not, it would be tough to use it now. It would look like some
countries
> > and athletes were getting preferential treatment.
>
> I remember the Reynolds situation as follows:
>
> With Butch Reynolds, the IAAF never used the rule, only threatened to use
> it. Leading up to the trials, there was a standoff between TAC and the
IAAF
> because Reynolds had gotten an injunction to compete from a U.S. court.
The
> IAAF said that anyone who competed in the 400m trials, semis, or finals
> against Butch would be declared ineligible. TAC had no choice but to let
> him compete. For several days, the athletes were on edge, not knowing if
> competing in the trials would make them ineligible for the Olympics. But
> they didn't have much choice, either, if they wanted to make the Olympic
> team. One or two non-marquee names may have pulled out.
>
> Ultimately, the IAAF backed down a few hours before the first round of the
> 400m, and didn't enforce the rule. I have no idea if negotiations between
> TAC and the IAAF accomplished this or if the IAAF just backed down. If I
> recall correctly, at one point in the process, they even threatened to
make
> anyone who competed in the meet ineligible, not just the 400m runners.
> Reynolds, of course, was in no kind of shape after his ordeal and didn't
> make the final.
>
> It is amazing how many similarities there are between the two situations
in
> terms of the actions of the national federation, the courts, and the IAAF.
> One important difference is that in the Reynolds situation, the IAAF would
> have been disqualifying 8 of the top 10 400 meter runners in the world,
and
> turned the Olympic 400m into a joke. In the Baumann case, the runners to
be
> disqualified are a lot more "expendable" from an IAAF standpoint, although
I
> honestly don't know if this has anything to do with their decision.
>
> IMO, the reason for the difference is simple -they can get away with what
> they are doing now and not do any real damage to the IAAF. The
> ramifications of their actions with Reynolds might have been as great as
> either an American track boycott of the Olympics (probably not, but there
> was talk), even more legal problems in the U.S., which ultimately could
have
> resulted in courts seizing IAAF funds that pass through the U.S., or most
> frightening to them, having their authority overridden by the IOC in the
> best interests of the Games.
>
> - Ed Parrot
>
