Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
No thanks. We've got enough convicted crooks walking around free now. "Martin J. Dixon" wrote: > > Charlie ... Too bad he doesn't live in Illinois > Regards, > Martin >
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
Okay, M&M have made a poor PR choice by going to Francis for coaching/guidance/technique/whatever. Perhaps it's a good choice to correct some of their technical mistakes (Marion in particular), but they seem to have ignored that perception is a form reality. And, the perception is that they are now affiliated with a known drug proponent and they technical stuff is out the window. But, how arrogant is it for Lamine Diak to "talk to her like a father". Please So, maybe it is not the most positive thing for the sport. But, have baseball, football and basketball been able to survive and thrive drugs (performance type and recreational type) in their sports by some of their big names? I suspect that track will survive this. If the issue is whether or not M&M are now on drugs, then the IAAF, if they are so worried about the PR issue, should open up their check books and test the two until they are dehydrated pin cushions. In order to satisfy the out-of competition random testing, USATF and IAAF have to know where they are. So, show up unnannounced on their doorstep. Over and over and over and over and over. If it really means that much to the IAAF to keep these two pristine, make sure that they test the hell out them and make the postiive, or negative, results public. If the results are negative. Great. We see that we have two clean athletes at the top of their game and show that you can be at the top and stay clean. If the results are positive. Great. We see that the IAAF really means business and is willing to clean up the sport, regardless of who gets caught and tossed. Either way it's successful. But cut the bullshit. Do what it takes to make sure the sport is clean. This may be one of the best opportunities in a long time to really show that they mean business. Tony Banovich Billings, Montana
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
And of course those "dirty Americans"(not my term) are still plying their trade while the powers that be want to give the death sentence to Charlie when they haven't even done him the courtesy of charging (let alone sentencing) him with anything yet. Too bad he doesn't live in Illinois. Regards, Martin Kurt Bray wrote: > > The existence of dirty Americans doesn't make Charlie any cleaner. > > Kurt Bray > > >The same thing as the rest of the world is concluding about the US because > >of > >the suppressed US positives. > >Regards, > >Martin > > > >Kurt Bray wrote: > > > > > If Charlie has a big history of dope, currently defends > > > dope in interviews, and associates with avowed dopers like the fine > >citizens > > > over at "Testosterone Nation", what are reasonable, well-meaning people > > > likely to conclude? > > > > > _ > Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
Quoting: "And what is your evidence that...", "I only ask that we do it based on evidence rather than rumor or cynical suspicion", "...until some evidence demonstrates otherwise..." All excerpts from some very good earlier posts. But I guess it depends on the evidentiary standards in place and whose particular axe is being ground. Regards, Martin Kurt Bray wrote: > The existence of dirty Americans doesn't make Charlie any cleaner. > > Kurt Bray > > >The same thing as the rest of the world is concluding about the US because > >of > >the suppressed US positives. > >Regards, > >Martin > > > >Kurt Bray wrote: > > > > > If Charlie has a big history of dope, currently defends > > > dope in interviews, and associates with avowed dopers like the fine > >citizens > > > over at "Testosterone Nation", what are reasonable, well-meaning people > > > likely to conclude? > > > > > _ > Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
The existence of dirty Americans doesn't make Charlie any cleaner. Kurt Bray The same thing as the rest of the world is concluding about the US because of the suppressed US positives. Regards, Martin Kurt Bray wrote: > If Charlie has a big history of dope, currently defends > dope in interviews, and associates with avowed dopers like the fine citizens > over at "Testosterone Nation", what are reasonable, well-meaning people > likely to conclude? > _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
RE: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
Well said, Martin. I must say that I've been reluctant to jump into the fray until now, mainly because there is such a stigma surrounding Charlie Francis. But the bottom line is that he has the tools to help athletes of all abilities to the next level, including Tim and Marion. His frank and outspoken nature make him an easy target, especially for the IAAF. Remember, it was his testimony in the Dubin Inquiry that cast a shadow over most performances in the track & field world, and I really don't think the powers-that-be in the IAAF will ever let him live that down; despite the fact that it is this very organization that has protected athletes using drugs for years. What of Christie and Mitchell? I don't see an envoy being sent to their camps; hypocrisy in the IAAF seems to be as strong as ever. But for anyone to say that he is an advocate of drug-use today is absurd. He is a strong believer that athletes at the top are there because of systematic drug usage, but I can vouch that the athletes under his tutelage in the past few years have excelled because of his amazing technical coaching abilities, not because he was pushing a drug program on them. Believe what you will, but unless he is caught red-handed, nobody should be chastising him -> he's served his "time". - Dennis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Martin J. Dixon Sent: January 30, 2003 3:28 PM To: Kurt Bray; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task The same thing as the rest of the world is concluding about the US because of the suppressed US positives. Regards, Martin Kurt Bray wrote: > If Charlie has a big history of dope, currently defends > dope in interviews, and associates with avowed dopers like the fine citizens > over at "Testosterone Nation", what are reasonable, well-meaning people > likely to conclude? > __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
The same thing as the rest of the world is concluding about the US because of the suppressed US positives. Regards, Martin Kurt Bray wrote: > If Charlie has a big history of dope, currently defends > dope in interviews, and associates with avowed dopers like the fine citizens > over at "Testosterone Nation", what are reasonable, well-meaning people > likely to conclude? >
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
> And if his program is so clean, why is he even associating with > dope-drenched publications like "Testosterone Nation" for crying out loud? Last I checked it was a free country. Back to the rule of law. Doesn't prove a thing. You are right - doesn't prove a thing. But it's like the old "Walks like a duck..." thing. If Charlie has a big history of dope, currently defends dope in interviews, and associates with avowed dopers like the fine citizens over at "Testosterone Nation", what are reasonable, well-meaning people likely to conclude? It's a free country all right, and one of the difficulties of a free country is that you are also free to be a fool. And Charlie is apparently taking advantage of all of his freedoms. Kurt Bray _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
Yes, but Mr. Dubin himself said Francis made his work easy by being so open with all the details. Of course Francis didn't share specifics of his doping program before getting caught -- that would have been idiotic -- but he certainly did not hide from them after the fact. If you accept the possibility that Francis was no more guilty than the majority of his peers, then his actions have been the closest thing to noble that the sport has produced. At the other end of the spectrum is the beer and sex arguments you mentioned. A reliable source told me the reason USATF bought the argument and cleared Mitchell is because he threatened to take everyone down with him. Given his role in USATF at the time (athlete's advisory, I believe) and knowledge of the doping situation, that was far from an empty threat. Funny, all the people involved in that situation are free to work as they choose. I guess that's what dishonesty gets you in this day and age. Dan --- Randall Northam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Difference was Francis wasn't being honest because he wanted to get it > all off his chest. The Dubin enquiry was judicial. Had he lied he could > have been done for perjury. No other coaches of athletes other than > those in the Ben Johnson affair have been put in this position so they > can claim sex, beer, naughty people spiking their drinks etc. etc. > Randall Northam > > On Thursday, Jan 30, 2003, at 03:09 Europe/London, Dan Kaplan wrote: > > > Others have been caught and been much less than honest with their > > explanations... Francis' motivations may have been at least partially > > due to book sales (post-Dubin), but he willingly shares enough that > > little is left to the imagination. = http://AccountBiller.com - MyCalendar, D-Man, ReSearch, etc. http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Fantasy T&F @o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] <|\/ <^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) _/ \ \/\ (503)370-9969 phone/fax / / __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
Kurt Bray wrote: > Now you are > telling me that it's only everybody else's athletes who are dirty and not > Charlie's? No. I'm just saying his are because I haven't seen anything to indicate otherwise. The precious rule of law that always gets trotted out right? Are you saying M&M are dirty? >That since this interview he has changed his mind and decided to > coach clean? Why hasn't he publicly said so? Because you won't believe him. > And if his program is so clean, why is he even associating with > dope-drenched publications like "Testosterone Nation" for crying out loud? Last I checked it was a free country. Back to the rule of law. Doesn't prove a thing. Regards, Martin
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
Difference was Francis wasn't being honest because he wanted to get it all off his chest. The Dubin enquiry was judicial. Had he lied he could have been done for perjury. No other coaches of athletes other than those in the Ben Johnson affair have been put in this position so they can claim sex, beer, naughty people spiking their drinks etc. etc. Randall Northam On Thursday, Jan 30, 2003, at 03:09 Europe/London, Dan Kaplan wrote: Others have been caught and been much less than honest with their explanations... Francis' motivations may have been at least partially due to book sales (post-Dubin), but he willingly shares enough that little is left to the imagination. Dan
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
I understand the circular argument people are making about his comments in the past and having to buy into them if you are coached by him but anyone who is familiar with Charlie and his faith in his own abilities, he is talking about everybody else's athletes. Not his own. These statements Charlie made in the past ain't all that far in the past. Consider this from an interview published online in Testosterone Nation on September 22, 2000: " T: We like to joke at T-mag that the scientists administering the drugs to the Olympic athletes need gold medals of their own. Are there any clean athletes left at the Olympic level in sprinting? CF: When I testified at the Dubin Inquiry all those years ago, the information I had was that the number of athletes using performance enhancing drugs, at the Olympic level, was about 80%. The IAAF secretary, John Holt, said that my charges were "wildly exaggerated" and said his research showed it was only 30 to 40%, which he obviously considered to be acceptable. Whether it's 30, 40, 50, or 100% is immaterial. The dividing line is not left and right, with the drug free on one side and the dirty cheats on the other. It's divided horizontally with those above the line on the drugs and those below, perhaps being clean. T: So would it be fair to say that only the losers are clean? CF: If anyone is clean, it's going to be the losers. The irony becomes that in order for an athlete to be an anti-doping advocate he must be, as a general rule, on drugs! How else would he rise to such a level of prominence so that he would have a platform from which to speak?" (end quote) So these past statements aren't from 1988. They aren't from the Dubin testimony. No, as recently as two and half years ago he was saying you must dope to get to the top and only losers (if anyone) are clean. Now you are telling me that it's only everybody else's athletes who are dirty and not Charlie's? That since this interview he has changed his mind and decided to coach clean? Why hasn't he publicly said so? And if his program is so clean, why is he even associating with dope-drenched publications like "Testosterone Nation" for crying out loud? Check them out for yourself - Look in the past issues and you can read Charlie's interview for yourself: http://www.t-mag.com/ This where the clean coach gives interviews? Kurt Bray _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Somebody mentioned his honesty. > Didn't that come only AFTER he got caught? Others have been caught and been much less than honest with their explanations... Francis' motivations may have been at least partially due to book sales (post-Dubin), but he willingly shares enough that little is left to the imagination. Dan = http://AccountBiller.com - MyCalendar, D-Man, ReSearch, etc. http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Fantasy T&F @o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] <|\/ <^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) _/ \ \/\ (503)370-9969 phone/fax / / __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
I think if M&M don't win the PR in this case, they might have to look for real day jobs. I think the IAAF is being reasonable and not caustic nor suicidal about questioning two of its marquee athletes regarding their association with a known drug cheat who has a life-time ban from his own country's NGB. Proactive, pre-emptive, or backed in to a corner, regardless of how or why the IAAF got this far with this issue, I think majority sentiment is going to be on the side of the IAAF. Eventually, the general media will have the general public thinking Ben II, which could force the issue with other sponsors. If M&M remain silent much longer, their next public speaking might be, "Do you want fries with that?" "Martin J. Dixon" wrote: > Maybe it won't win it for them in this case but remaining silent in a PR fight is >often a better tactic > than going vocal if the other side is vitriolic with their criticism. Why fight when >the other side is > committing suicide? > Regards, > Martin > > Mike Prizy wrote: > > > I think the interesting issue will be if some of the GL organizers back their talk >and keep Team J&M > > out. What kind of pressure would this put on U.S. organizers? > > > > For there to be a PR fight, Jones and Montgomery have to return a punch, and I'm >not sure if I've > > seen one yet. Being silent won't win it for them. I think MoJo & Monty would stand >a better chance > > if they deal with this early and get as much distance/time as they can between now >and the big > > outdoor meets. But, then again, it's their decision-making process that is in >question. > > > > Re: Diack, he seems like an honorable man. I think he will offer his condolences, >but he will still > > talk to MJ like a father. > > > > "Martin J. Dixon" wrote: > > > > > I think Francis/Jones/Montgomery are going to win this PR fight. Good > > > for them. > > > > > > "Footnote: When Diack eventually meets with Jones he should also > > > apologise for declaring he will "talk to her like a father". Jones is > > > grieving over the recent murder of her estranged natural father." > > > > > > >http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5909970%255E2771,00.html > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Martin
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
Ok I've got it: I'm not now nor have I ever been a member of the communist party. Oh wait, someone else tried to make people say that. Even if he did say that, no one would believe him anyway-as Randy is pointing out as I type this(thanks-you just made my point)so all you would be left with is testing so why not just do the testing. That's the regime now. People want him to make a statement and then they aren't going to believe him in any event. What would you do if you were in that position? Exactly what he is doing right now. I understand the circular argument people are making about his comments in the past and having to buy into them if you are coached by him but anyone who is familiar with Charlie and his faith in his own abilities, he is talking about everybody else's athletes. Not his own. Regards, Martin Kurt Bray wrote: > > >I'd also like Kurt or > >someone to word the press release that they think he should issue that > >would > >settle everyone down. And I mean that-I'd really be curious to see that. > > It wouldn't take all that much. He wouldn't even have to, as you say, > "prostrate himself". All he have to do is honestly and sincerely disavow > the use of dope in his training of athletes - and then actually stick to it. > > But instead what we get are repeated assertions by Charlie that you can't be > a top athlete without dope, that only losers are clean. And at the same > time Charlie is offering (on his website) to coach athletes to the top, to > make them winners. The only logical conclusion here is that he plans to > coach them to use dope. > > And THAT is why it is so alarming to see top athletes like Jones and > Montgomery take up with him. They might be dirty already (I'm not naive > enough to think that Ben was the only doper), but if they stick with Charlie > it will have the effect of removing all doubt. > > Kurt Bray > > _ > Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
If Charlie refuses to refute his published statement that world records cannot be set without doping, and Jones is seeking him out for his expertise in getting her to the final plane that she's never been able to reach- setting a world record, then it stands to reason that he will advise her of his honest opinion on what is needed (in his opinion) to achieve that objective. In plain English, he will tell her that if she truly wants to set a world record, she won't be able to do it without going on "the stuff". WHAT OTHER CONCLUSION COULD ONE REACH, GIVEN HIS OWN STATEMENTS? All it takes is a believable refutation by Charlie- i.e. "it may indeed be possible to achieve a world record without doping, and I am committed to exploring that possibility", or... just state his commitment to coach through technical means only, and not chemical, world records be damned. Underline the latter. Instead, we get silence. And even if Francis DID issue such a statement, there is still a trust factor. Somebody mentioned his honesty. Didn't that come only AFTER he got caught? What's to make us believe him now, when in the past he hid the facts when it was to his (and his athletes') advantage to keep it hidden? All this subterfuge, sneaking around, avoiding cameras, not returning phone calls, using Hansen as cover, just reinforces the perception that there must be fire underneath all that smoke. RT
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
I'd also like Kurt or someone to word the press release that they think he should issue that would settle everyone down. And I mean that-I'd really be curious to see that. It wouldn't take all that much. He wouldn't even have to, as you say, "prostrate himself". All he have to do is honestly and sincerely disavow the use of dope in his training of athletes - and then actually stick to it. But instead what we get are repeated assertions by Charlie that you can't be a top athlete without dope, that only losers are clean. And at the same time Charlie is offering (on his website) to coach athletes to the top, to make them winners. The only logical conclusion here is that he plans to coach them to use dope. And THAT is why it is so alarming to see top athletes like Jones and Montgomery take up with him. They might be dirty already (I'm not naive enough to think that Ben was the only doper), but if they stick with Charlie it will have the effect of removing all doubt. Kurt Bray _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
--- ghill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unfortunately, we're also back at that same horrid place
> we've been so many times before, with track's governing bodies
> attempting to put out fires by pouring gasoline on them.
I guess I didn't really state it clearly, but that is precisely why I
think this is such a great opportunity to finally get the IAAF to clean up
their act! Between Francis, Jones, and Montgomery -- and Nike probably
has a wee bit of influence in that group -- I just don't see that this one
can be put to bed quietly. There are a lot of very difficult questions on
the table that I'd really like the IAAF make an attempt at answering. If
Marion and Tim stay the course, the IAAF will have little choice but to do
that or take the whole sport down with them... If the latter happens,
something will surely rise up (eventually) to fill the void.
--- Randall Northam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan
> You've confused me here. Not a difficult task I will admit but let me
> see if I've worked out your logic.
> The IAAF are upset at answering questions about drugs whereas if they
> turned a blind eye to it (in other words ignored "the whole sordid
> mess") it would go away. Is that right?
No, that's not quite what I meant. Ignoring it wouldn't make it go away,
although it certainly could have been smoothed out somewhat. What I meant
is that the IAAF created this very situation, and now it has come full
circle and smacked them square between the eyes. There's no reason to
feel sympathetic for their current plight, which is what they're angling
for ("there must be hundreds of good sprint coaches in the US, why
Francis?" Uh, maybe because a "good" coach doesn't quite cut it at the
very top level?).
> If the IAAF said they had no problem with Francis coaching again you
> don't think there'd be an even bigger mess?
I'm not sure. My gut feeling is the current mess would be much less, but
the future mess is anyone's guess.
I'd be curious for a show of hands: How many people on the list feel
Charlie Francis is the only active T&F coach who is a proponent of drug
use? There are two reasons I can think of to single him out:
1) He's a known commodity (i.e. laziness)
2) He's a danger to the sport's management (i.e. fear)
Neither is a very compelling reason in my mind to be the sole target of
the IAAF's attacks... If Francis had his way, we'd have an incredibly
exciting sport to watch, and much of the negativity we always complain
about would fall be the wayside.
I'm reminded of Tim Robbins' classic line from Shawshank Redemption;
paraphrasing: "The ironic thing is I was straight as an arrow on the
outside. I had to go to jail to become a crook." Francis had to cheat
and be busted to be revealed as one of the most honest people within the
sport...
Dan
=
http://AccountBiller.com - MyCalendar, D-Man, ReSearch, etc.
http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Fantasy T&F
@o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<|\/ <^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
_/ \ \/\ (503)370-9969 phone/fax
/ /
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
Maybe it won't win it for them in this case but remaining silent in a PR fight is often a better tactic than going vocal if the other side is vitriolic with their criticism. Why fight when the other side is committing suicide? Regards, Martin Mike Prizy wrote: > I think the interesting issue will be if some of the GL organizers back their talk >and keep Team J&M > out. What kind of pressure would this put on U.S. organizers? > > For there to be a PR fight, Jones and Montgomery have to return a punch, and I'm not >sure if I've > seen one yet. Being silent won't win it for them. I think MoJo & Monty would stand a >better chance > if they deal with this early and get as much distance/time as they can between now >and the big > outdoor meets. But, then again, it's their decision-making process that is in >question. > > Re: Diack, he seems like an honorable man. I think he will offer his condolences, >but he will still > talk to MJ like a father. > > "Martin J. Dixon" wrote: > > > I think Francis/Jones/Montgomery are going to win this PR fight. Good > > for them. > > > > "Footnote: When Diack eventually meets with Jones he should also > > apologise for declaring he will "talk to her like a father". Jones is > > grieving over the recent murder of her estranged natural father." > > > > >http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5909970%255E2771,00.html > > > > Regards, > > > > Martin
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
I think the interesting issue will be if some of the GL organizers back their talk and keep Team J&M out. What kind of pressure would this put on U.S. organizers? For there to be a PR fight, Jones and Montgomery have to return a punch, and I'm not sure if I've seen one yet. Being silent won't win it for them. I think MoJo & Monty would stand a better chance if they deal with this early and get as much distance/time as they can between now and the big outdoor meets. But, then again, it's their decision-making process that is in question. Re: Diack, he seems like an honorable man. I think he will offer his condolences, but he will still talk to MJ like a father. "Martin J. Dixon" wrote: > I think Francis/Jones/Montgomery are going to win this PR fight. Good > for them. > > "Footnote: When Diack eventually meets with Jones he should also > apologise for declaring he will "talk to her like a father". Jones is > grieving over the recent murder of her estranged natural father." > > >http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5909970%255E2771,00.html > > Regards, > > Martin
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
I'm still waiting for the quotes that are so offensive. I'd also like Kurt or someone to word the press release that they think he should issue that would settle everyone down. And I mean that-I'd really be curious to see that. Regards, Martiin Kurt Bray wrote: > You're right - he is back. What I should have said was that he would be > welcomed back, that he wouldn't have to coach in secret. If people weren't > still worried about his current ..uh.. "coaching methods", this whole > Jones/Montgomery thing would be a non-issue. But he apparently has not > convinced anyone that he can/will/does coach clean. > > Kurt Bray > > > > >But he's already "back in the sport," and probably in a bigger fashion than > >ever. He certainly hasn¹t' existed in a vacuum all these years. I have > >absolutely no evidence regarding this, but I'd fall over if it turned out > >that M&M are the first "significant" track people to seek his services > >through the years. They're just the high profile ones. > > > >If he "prostrated himself" he'd probably end up with less business than he > >has now. And that's what it's all about, in the final analysis. > > > >gh > > > > > From: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Reply-To: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 16:32:43 + > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task > > > > > >>> He does tell it like he thinks that it is. Everybody wants him to > > >>> prostrate himself and why should he?<< > > > > > > Why should he? So that he can get himself back into the sport, that's > >why. > > > Until people are convinced he is sincere, that he wouldn't create the > >whole > > > sordid mess all over again if given the chance, he's not going to be > > > welcome. > > > > > > Kurt Bray > > > > > > > > > _ > > > Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* > > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail > > > > > _ > Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
I've received 21 messages in my inbox while I was working out so I'm sure someone has already pointed this out but he's coaching the top 2 sprinters in the world. He'd be surprised to be told that he's "left" the sport. Regards, Martin Kurt Bray wrote: > >>He does tell it like he thinks that it is. Everybody wants him to > >>prostrate himself and why should he?<< > > Why should he? So that he can get himself back into the sport, that's why. > Until people are convinced he is sincere, that he wouldn't create the whole > sordid mess all over again if given the chance, he's not going to be > welcome. > > Kurt Bray > > _ > Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
Dan You've confused me here. Not a difficult task I will admit but let me see if I've worked out your logic. The IAAF are upset at answering questions about drugs whereas if they turned a blind eye to it (in other words ignored "the whole sordid mess") it would go away. Is that right? You don't think the fourth estate would be even more determined to uncover drugs stories? Look at what happened when Jones and Montgomery chose to liaise with Francis. If the IAAF said they had no problem with Francis coaching again you don't think there'd be an even bigger mess? Randall Northam On Wednesday, Jan 29, 2003, at 17:08 Europe/London, Dan Kaplan wrote: Who really sympathizes with the IAAF wringing their hands over fears of having to answer questions about drugs all summer? If anyone created the "whole sordid mess," it's the people in those circles. Let them figure it out. Dan
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
You're right - he is back. What I should have said was that he would be welcomed back, that he wouldn't have to coach in secret. If people weren't still worried about his current ..uh.. "coaching methods", this whole Jones/Montgomery thing would be a non-issue. But he apparently has not convinced anyone that he can/will/does coach clean. Kurt Bray But he's already "back in the sport," and probably in a bigger fashion than ever. He certainly hasn¹t' existed in a vacuum all these years. I have absolutely no evidence regarding this, but I'd fall over if it turned out that M&M are the first "significant" track people to seek his services through the years. They're just the high profile ones. If he "prostrated himself" he'd probably end up with less business than he has now. And that's what it's all about, in the final analysis. gh > From: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 16:32:43 + > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task > >>> He does tell it like he thinks that it is. Everybody wants him to >>> prostrate himself and why should he?<< > > Why should he? So that he can get himself back into the sport, that's why. > Until people are convinced he is sincere, that he wouldn't create the whole > sordid mess all over again if given the chance, he's not going to be > welcome. > > Kurt Bray > > > _ > Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail > _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
> From: Dan Kaplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Dan Kaplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 09:08:17 -0800 (PST) > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task > > Who really sympathizes with the IAAF wringing their hands over fears of > having to answer questions about drugs all summer? If anyone created the > "whole sordid mess," it's the people in those circles. Let them figure it > out.>> Unfortunately, we're also back at that same horrid place we've been so many times before, with track's governing bodies attempting to put out fires by pouring gasoline on them. The IAAF's public intrusion--at the highest of levels no less--into what was a story that would have died eventually, has only stoked the fires of interest. If it's a violation of IAAF rules, fine, act on it. But this was personal choice--albeit an unfathomably stupid one--by M&M. Let them suffer the consequences without dragging the whole damned sport into it again. gh
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
He is totally in the loop. Not trying to get back. "He's in the MIX" In a message dated 1/29/2003 8:57:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >Why should he? So that he can get himself back into the sport, that's >why. >Until people are convinced he is sincere, that he wouldn't create the whole > >sordid mess all over again if given the chance, he's not going to be >welcome. > >Kurt Bray > >
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
--- Kurt Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Until people are convinced he is sincere, that he wouldn't create the > whole sordid mess all over again if given the chance, he's not going to > be welcome. That's assuming, of course, that he actually created the mess. I'm more inclined to think he "merely" played a big part in it and took the fall for a mess created long before his time and continued on long after it. I think it's great that Francis may be re-entering the sport (not that he really ever left it, apparently). Look at the effect just the rumors have had on the IAAF! They're scrambling around, trying to put out fires that aren't even lit yet. As I've said elsewhere, I think Francis' reputation (or is that his shadow?) has grown bigger than even the IAAF over the years. There is so much hiprocricy within the sport with regards to drugs that a wake-up call is exactly what is needed. And who better to provide it then the person who is regarded as the pre-eminent expert on the subject and known to not back away from it? Who really sympathizes with the IAAF wringing their hands over fears of having to answer questions about drugs all summer? If anyone created the "whole sordid mess," it's the people in those circles. Let them figure it out. Dan = http://AccountBiller.com - MyCalendar, D-Man, ReSearch, etc. http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Fantasy T&F @o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] <|\/ <^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) _/ \ \/\ (503)370-9969 phone/fax / / __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
But he's already "back in the sport," and probably in a bigger fashion than ever. He certainly hasn¹t' existed in a vacuum all these years. I have absolutely no evidence regarding this, but I'd fall over if it turned out that M&M are the first "significant" track people to seek his services through the years. They're just the high profile ones. If he "prostrated himself" he'd probably end up with less business than he has now. And that's what it's all about, in the final analysis. gh > From: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 16:32:43 + > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task > >>> He does tell it like he thinks that it is. Everybody wants him to >>> prostrate himself and why should he?<< > > Why should he? So that he can get himself back into the sport, that's why. > Until people are convinced he is sincere, that he wouldn't create the whole > sordid mess all over again if given the chance, he's not going to be > welcome. > > Kurt Bray > > > _ > Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail >
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
you mean he should have gone the Pete Rose route? > From: Dan Kaplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:43:14 -0800 (PST) > To: ghill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task > > That's the beauty of having pretty much nothing left to lose... > > Dan > > --- ghill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> In Francis's "defense," one can at least say that he's honest, unlike an >> obviously high number of his coaching brethren. He took the fall like a >> man and continues to tell it pretty much like it is. >> >>> From: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Reply-To: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 15:41:45 + >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Subject: Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task >>> >>>> From the article linked below: >>> >>>>> "Francis has done his "time" and needs the chance to show he can >> make a >>>>> contribution in athletics. Montgomery and Jones have come to that >>>>> conclusion."<< >>> >>> Sure Charlie has done his "time", but the problem is that he hasn't >> sworn >>> off his "crime". He apparently still cheerfully embraces dope in >> athletics >>> just as much as he ever did. Until he convincingly turns his back on >> dope >>> he won't be welcome in the sport. >>> >>> Kurt Bray >>> >>> >>>> I think Francis/Jones/Montgomery are going to win this PR fight. Good >>>> for them. >>>> >>>> "Footnote: When Diack eventually meets with Jones he should also >>>> apologise for declaring he will "talk to her like a father". Jones is >>>> grieving over the recent murder of her estranged natural father." >>>> >>>> >> > http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5909970%255E27 >>>> 71,00.html >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> >>>> Martin >>> >>> >>> _ >>> The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* >>> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail >>> >> > > > = > http://AccountBiller.com - MyCalendar, D-Man, ReSearch, etc. > http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Fantasy T&F > > @o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <|\/ <^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) > _/ \ \/\ (503)370-9969 phone/fax > / / > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com >
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
He does tell it like he thinks that it is. Everybody wants him to prostrate himself and why should he?<< Why should he? So that he can get himself back into the sport, that's why. Until people are convinced he is sincere, that he wouldn't create the whole sordid mess all over again if given the chance, he's not going to be welcome. Kurt Bray _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
In Francis's "defense," one can at least say that he's honest, unlike an obviously high number of his coaching brethren. He took the fall like a man and continues to tell it pretty much like it is. > From: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 15:41:45 + > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task > >> From the article linked below: > >>> "Francis has done his "time" and needs the chance to show he can make a >>> contribution in athletics. Montgomery and Jones have come to that >>> conclusion."<< > > Sure Charlie has done his "time", but the problem is that he hasn't sworn > off his "crime". He apparently still cheerfully embraces dope in athletics > just as much as he ever did. Until he convincingly turns his back on dope > he won't be welcome in the sport. > > Kurt Bray > > >> I think Francis/Jones/Montgomery are going to win this PR fight. Good >> for them. >> >> "Footnote: When Diack eventually meets with Jones he should also >> apologise for declaring he will "talk to her like a father". Jones is >> grieving over the recent murder of her estranged natural father." >> >> http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5909970%255E27 >> 71,00.html >> >> Regards, >> >> >> Martin > > > _ > The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail >
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
We just went over this on the Can list. Read what he has said. Don't get it second hand. If the big lie is repeated enough, it becomes truth. He does not "cheerfully embrace dope in athletics". He does tell it like he thinks that it is. Everybody wants him to prostrate himself and why should he? Regards, Martin Kurt Bray wrote: > >From the article linked below: > > >>"Francis has done his "time" and needs the chance to show he can make a > >>contribution in athletics. Montgomery and Jones have come to that > >>conclusion."<< > > Sure Charlie has done his "time", but the problem is that he hasn't sworn > off his "crime". He apparently still cheerfully embraces dope in athletics > just as much as he ever did. Until he convincingly turns his back on dope > he won't be welcome in the sport. > > Kurt Bray > > >I think Francis/Jones/Montgomery are going to win this PR fight. Good > >for them. > > > >"Footnote: When Diack eventually meets with Jones he should also > >apologise for declaring he will "talk to her like a father". Jones is > >grieving over the recent murder of her estranged natural father." > > > >>http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5909970%255E2771,00.html > > > >Regards, > > > > > >Martin > > _ > The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: t-and-f: Diack taken to task
From the article linked below: "Francis has done his "time" and needs the chance to show he can make a contribution in athletics. Montgomery and Jones have come to that conclusion."<< Sure Charlie has done his "time", but the problem is that he hasn't sworn off his "crime". He apparently still cheerfully embraces dope in athletics just as much as he ever did. Until he convincingly turns his back on dope he won't be welcome in the sport. Kurt Bray I think Francis/Jones/Montgomery are going to win this PR fight. Good for them. "Footnote: When Diack eventually meets with Jones he should also apologise for declaring he will "talk to her like a father". Jones is grieving over the recent murder of her estranged natural father." http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5909970%255E2771,00.html Regards, Martin _ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
t-and-f: Diack taken to task
I think Francis/Jones/Montgomery are going to win this PR fight. Good for them. "Footnote: When Diack eventually meets with Jones he should also apologise for declaring he will "talk to her like a father". Jones is grieving over the recent murder of her estranged natural father." http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5909970%255E2771,00.html Regards, Martin
