Greetings, all: If you met him on the street, you'd call Al Sheahen shy. He doesn't get outwardly emotional. He doesn't show off. From his modest apartment in Sherman Oaks, California, he quietly goes about the business of publishing and editing the most important publication in the world of masters track. Although Sheahen no longer owns National Masters News (it was sold to Runner's World publisher Rodale Press several years ago), NMN is still his baby. The official world and USA publication devoted to masters track, long-distance running and racewalking has been a staple of the movement for decades (with its main editorial office in Eugene, Oregon). It has changed hardly a whit in terms of design and organization all those years. But the August 2001 issue of NMN is a breakthrough. I'd even call it historic. Al Sheahen has broken his silence. For the first time, NMN has shown some guts -- sharply criticizing the world governing body of masters track, now called World Masters Athletics. In a long and carefully argued column titled `Which Way, WMA?' Sheahen blasts the conduct of the Brisbane world meet and rips to shreds WMA's (formerly WAVA's) pretense that it has athletes' interest at heart first and foremost. My summary of Sheahen's points: 1. Brisbane, host of the recent world masters championships, made $11 million from visitors to the meet but went on a cost-cutting binge that horrified many athletes and broke promises to WMA. Among these broken promises: no free shuttles between hotels and venues, few signs to guide athletes, pathetic reporting of results at the meet, and a cancellation (in effect) of closing ceremonies. "The promised singing of `Waltzing Matilda' didn't happen," Sheahen notes. Sheahen quotes Gilberto Gonzalez, a leader of the 2003 Puerto Rico masters world meet, as saying that Brisbane's attitude was: "The Games are over, we've got you're money, goodbye. It was awful; we won't do that in Puerto Rico." 2. WMA's biennial convention didn't permit debate on the merits of the three bid candidates for the 2005 world meet. In the end, San Sebastian, Spain (smack in the middle of Basque terrorist country and with the `weakest presentation' of the three cities) was awarded the 2005 meet ahead of Helsinki and Sacramento. Sheahen wrote: "Both Helsinki and Sacramento were treated shabbily. The three bidders were forced to wait all day and then allowed only 20 minutes each to present their cases. These bidders were high-minded, serious people who spent a fortune to prepare and come here. Yet WAVA brushed them aside with an arrogance that seemed to say: `We've got plenty of bids; we don't have to be nice to you or anyone.' Such an attitude may well come back to haunt WMA in the future. The Helsinki representatives reportedly stormed out, saying they would never again submit themselves to such treatment and humiliation." 3. Secrecy has become epidemic in WMA. Reports of the WAVA site-review teams (whose trips the athletes paid for) were never made public. An American delegate was thrown out of three standing committee meetings. WMA still hasn't disclosed details on why the 2003 world meet was yanked from Kuala Lumpur. And "at the Women's Assembly, it was a virtual secret whether a new chairperson would be chosen by the Women's `Assembly' or the Women's `Committee.' Or would Bridget Cushen continue as chair for two more years? Or four more? No one knew."(Eventually a floor vote was forced, with candidates for women's rep forced to compose two-minute speeches on the spur of the moment.) 4. Officiating at the meet was generally fine but showed a dark side. Eight runners -- including three potential gold medalists -- were DQ'd in the heats of the 400. In the relays, 17 teams were DQ'd for minor infractions. Earlier, WAVA had threatened to DQ people who walked in the marathon. Sheahen wrote: "Officials should be told these are not the Olympics, but a friendly gathering of older athletes. Rules should be followed, but fairness and common sense should be paramount." 5. Delegates voted that WMA adopt IAAF anti-doping rules -- but made no effort to consider possible medical exemptions for older athletes who take drugs on banned list that are crucial to their healthy lives. Sheahen wrote: "A motion that masters should be freed from strict controls until more data are available on age-required medication did not even reach the floor for discussion." 6. WMA voted to mandate team uniforms for future world meets, which Sheahen called "a 180-degree turn from the early days when WAVA deliberately tried to stay away from the nationalism that has long permeated open athletics." 7. VIP functions were everywhere -- giving average athletes the clear impression they weren't welcome. Sheahen wrote: "At least one WAVA Council member was rightfully embarrassed by the ostentatious display. The whole thing smacked of elitism -- royalty vs. the rabble and an `us' vs. `them' mentality, exactly opposite of what WAVA is supposed to be about." Sheahen blames some of these problems on the Eurocentric tilt of WMA. But without explicitly saying so, he also indicts its leadership -- WMA President Torsten Carlius of Sweden and Executive Vice President Tom Jordan of the United States. Ex-WAVA Treasurer Sheahen ran for the WMA presidency in 1997 at the world meet in Durban, South Africa -- and lost to Carlius. National Masters News also notes that WMA -- whose two-year budget is now $205,000 -- will soon cease its $300 monthly subsidy of National Masters News (which has traditionally mailed a free copy of each issue to all 130-plus affiliate nations). WMA instead will put that money to use toward improving its weak Web site at http://www.wava.org. Sour grapes from an election loser and a penny-pincher? That would be too easy a conclusion. But I've known Al for five years and had many conversations with him on the masters movement, and he strikes me as someone dedicated to improving the lot of older athletes at the expense of his own `standing' in the upper echelons of masters track. However, I do think that losing the WMA subsidy (a pauper's stipend) has freed Al to speak freely. Sheahen no longer worries about biting the hand that feeds him. I've asked Al to e-mail me a copy of the column for posting on my Web site (since what he has to say deserves a worldwide audience and not just 7,000-plus subscribers mainly in the United States.) I'll let y'all know when it's online. I'll also let Sheahen's courageous conclusion to his `From the Editor' column speak for itself: "The founders of the masters program . . . believed in friendly competition, equality and fairness. They were opposed to nationalism, elitism and secrecy. Much of what they pioneered still remains. But much of what they opposed has crept into the program. "It's not the same anymore. Maybe we should be grateful that any public votes at all are taken in the Assembly. Perhaps we should be content that no one refers to the President as `His Excellency,' as is de rigeur in IOC circles. "Maybe everything is OK with the athletes and even with many voting delegates. After all, many athletes said they had a good time in Brisbane. Maybe no one cares, as long as there's a track, a starter and a timer at a finish line. "Well, we should care. The news WMA should take a good, long look at itself. It should ask itself what it is doing and where it is going. After all, nothing is forever." Ken Stone http://www.masterstrack.com
