PDA

View Full Version : World Swimming Association?



thewookiee
September 3rd, 2010, 11:39 AM
From the ASCA conference going on this week. This is copied from swimnews. Does anyone believe that there will be a new world swimming governing body?


http://www.swimnews.com/News/view/8049

TRYM_Swimmer
September 3rd, 2010, 11:52 AM
What's the ultimate goal? Olympic Gold. Who controls that? IOC. Who does the insular IOC recognize and is not about to recognize any other body? The now more insular FINA.

This happened in tennis a long time ago and took a long time to resolve. I think the elite swimmers would go with FINA, because the big money is Olympic Gold.

Nice idea, but I don't have much hope for it.

thewookiee
September 3rd, 2010, 12:00 PM
The propoents of a new governing body, said they would host an all world swimming event at the same time as the Olympics. I just don't see elite athletes wanting to go to some other event at the same time as the Olympics are being held.

knelson
September 3rd, 2010, 12:13 PM
I agree a new governing body would be a tough sell and I also agree that what FINA has done (if reported accurately in the article) is complete BS.

gdanner
September 3rd, 2010, 12:39 PM
Looks like some heavy hitting politics going on.


Who does the insular IOC recognize and is not about to recognize any other body? The now more insular FINA.

What makes you say that the IOC would not recognize a new org? I realize that there are significant political forces behind all of this, but if you can shed any light...



I just don't see elite athletes wanting to go to some other event at the same time as the Olympics are being held.

So the swimmers who get 3rd and 4th in their events at Trials are not elite? I'm going to assume you didn't mean that. If swimmers that missed the Olympics are funded, they would go to an international meet. You'd definitely get top talent. The only problem is that many countries don't have our depth.

thewookiee
September 3rd, 2010, 01:07 PM
Looks like some heavy hitting politics going on.



What makes you say that the IOC would not recognize a new org? I realize that there are significant political forces behind all of this, but if you can shed any light...



So the swimmers who get 3rd and 4th in their events at Trials are not elite? I'm going to assume you didn't mean that. If swimmers that missed the Olympics are funded, they would go to an international meet. You'd definitely get top talent. The only problem is that many countries don't have our depth.

No, I did not mean that the 3rd and 4th place finishers are not elite. I should have been more phrased that more carefully.

I don't know what the IOC would do. That's like trying to figure out what any ruling body would do.

knelson
September 3rd, 2010, 01:14 PM
So the swimmers who get 3rd and 4th in their events at Trials are not elite? I'm going to assume you didn't mean that. If swimmers that missed the Olympics are funded, they would go to an international meet. You'd definitely get top talent. The only problem is that many countries don't have our depth.

I think the assumption is swimmers would need to pick their allegiance. If they want to swim at Olympic Trials they are likely going to need to be members of USA Swimming who--almost certainly--will be aligned with FINA. I guess it's possible the third and fourth place swimmers at Trials could jump ship after Trials, but it seems like the new WSA would also need to have some kind of qualifying requirements for their international meet.

TRYM_Swimmer
September 3rd, 2010, 01:37 PM
Looks like some heavy hitting politics going on.

What makes you say that the IOC would not recognize a new org? I realize that there are significant political forces behind all of this, but if you can shed any light...



What light needs to be shed? These are organizations that have a history of moving slowly. I'm not 100% sure that's what would happen, but lets look at tennis.

When the whole tennis split took place, players had to choose between the majors and making money. When it became clear that more players chose money, the majors finally caved in. But it was money driving everything.

What would the new organization have to offer the swimmers, other than a lifetime ban from FINA events, which would probably include the Olympics and World Champs. And that is where the money is. If it's sponsors driving FINA, they are unlikely to switch, when the new setup will give them all the power (oh, and, by the way, money) they want. The only possibility would be for the new group to start with some pretty powerful sponsors, and that, in my opinion, is pretty iffy.

And what about the open water and synchro swimmers and divers, who get zero pub outside the Olympics and WCs?

Don't get me wrong; I think FINA is a crap bunch as now configured and would welcome a new way of doing things. I just think they are too entrenched after all this time.

Swimosaur
September 3rd, 2010, 01:59 PM
This happened in tennis a long time ago and took a long time to resolve ... Nice idea, but I don't have much hope for it.

I don't even think it's a nice idea. Rival world governing bodies are a traditional method for taking a screwed up situation and making it even more screwed up. Consider boxing, or the sad history of the Professional Chess Association:


By FIDE regulation, the bids for the World Championship final should have been decided by three parties ... FIDE president Florencio Campomanes broke these rules ... In response to this, Kasparov and Short formed the PCA ... They played their world championship match under its auspices ... FIDE stripped Kasparov of the FIDE World Championship title, and instead held a rival match between Anatoly Karpov and Jan Timman ... For the first time in chess history there were two world champions, the FIDE world champion Karpov and the PCA world champion Kasparov.

To have any credibility as a world governing body, a rival swimming organization would obviously have to set up a rival world championships. Would anyone respect it? Probably yes, if the likes of Michael Phelps or Ryan Lochte participated. Maybe they'd have different rules, maybe they wouldn't. What if Ryan Lochte set a world record in the 200 IM wearing an ever-so-slightly different suit? Would FINA recognize it?

Oh, yes! Let's sign up for that! Let's have multiple world champions in every event, multiple sets of rules, and multiple world records. That would be so great for the sport. NOT!

If FINA is, liike FIDE was, is in need of some changes, the right way to do it is from within, as Bessel Kok tried to do in 2006 by running for President of FIDE. Kok sincerely had the interests of chess in mind, and campaigned vigorously for the office. Though he lost the election to the incumbent, relations were sufficiently improved within a few months that Kok and Ilyumzhinov collaborated to form the Global Chess Company (http://www.fide.com/component/content/article/3-news/1898-389-fide-president-and-bessel-kok-form-global-chess-company). After more than a dozen years of chaos, the rival world championship titles were unified the following year.

Woofus B. Loofus
September 3rd, 2010, 02:08 PM
I agree with Swimosaur: setting up an alternative body is peremptory and takes you off the main stage. Dueling meets will harm everyone. Stay inside FINA and fight. 2009 was an enormous leap forward, and shows that members and member organizations can challenge and topple the exec.
ASCA's frustration is understandable. It just needs to be channeled in a way that effects lasting, productive change.
FINA's vague disciplinary language about bringing disrepute on the sport has been used as a gag order and should be openly defied. Nothing like a lot of free, unfettered speech to blow a fresh wind through FINA.

gdanner
September 3rd, 2010, 03:26 PM
What light needs to be shed? These are organizations that have a history of moving slowly. I'm not 100% sure that's what would happen, but lets look at tennis.

But it was money driving everything.

What would the new organization have to offer the swimmers, other than a lifetime ban from FINA events

Specifically what you said about the IOC only recognizing FINA. Yes, they both move slow, but unlike tennis, it's not a matter of unseating the power player (FINA), all they have to do is convince the IOC to replace them. That's a big difference.

You're also assuming that FINA would ban swimmers or not allow them to compete in both. While that's certainly possible, I'm not so sure it's any more likely than them allowing swimmers to compete in both.

In any event, it will be interesting to see how this turns out.

knelson
September 3rd, 2010, 03:54 PM
You're also assuming that FINA would ban swimmers or not allow them to compete in both. While that's certainly possible, I'm not so sure it's any more likely than them allowing swimmers to compete in both.

It certainly seems like a very petty move, but so does their "no soup for you" move wrt to rules change proposals after not getting their way with the tech suits last year.

KeithM
September 3rd, 2010, 06:00 PM
I think they're trying to apply pressure on FINA. Ultimately it seems they want to reshuffle the leadership more than anything. I don't think even they expect the new WSA to usurp FINA on the world stage.

LindsayNB
September 3rd, 2010, 06:32 PM
You're also assuming that FINA would ban swimmers or not allow them to compete in both. While that's certainly possible, I'm not so sure it's any more likely than them allowing swimmers to compete in both.

Given the FINA reaction to WAMO I think it is a safe assumption that they will ban anyone who joins a rival organization.

Check out General Rule 4:
http://www.fina.org/H2O/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=258:gr-4-unauthorised-relations&catid=80:general-rules&Itemid=184

If I wanted to bring about change I would go through the FINA constitution and bylaws to check out the provisions for the members amending these documents. It would be very surprising if there weren't options for the members to override the exec committee.

orca1946
September 4th, 2010, 12:30 AM
The IO C will just laugh all the way to the bank :bliss:

Steven Munatones
September 4th, 2010, 11:25 AM
As a member of the FINA Technical Open Water Swimming Committee, I know that the future of open water swimmers is bright no matter what ultimately happens between WSCA and ACSA and FINA.

The sport is growing too fast, including the addition of dozens of new professional swims on every continent and a tremendous amount of local and regional press coverage and corporate support (generally outside of the United States). The top athletes are treated well and the vast number of new races - amateur, pro, charity, solo and relays - simply cannot keep up with the demand. The sport is enjoying a Renaissance Period not seen since the 1920s - at every level for swimmers of every age, ability and background.

It is a grass root sport that is not dependent upon the decisions of WSCA, ACSA or FINA with the obvious exception of its inclusion in the world championships and Olympics.

For FINA's long-time support of open water swimming since 1991 and its support of a 10K marathon swim in the 2008, 2012 and 2016 Olympics, the elite athletes are extraordinarily grateful. The exposure generated from the 2008 Olympics will be multiplied many times over in 2012 in Hyde Park in London and in 2016 at Copacabana Beach in Rio. These spectacular events will have a very positive spill-over effect on the sport for generations to come.

Unless I am missing something (a possibility), I cannot imagine the new World Swimming Association is going to want to do much with open water swimming. It will most likely be a pool-focused endeavor and organization. Fortunately, the discipline of open water swimming has the momentum, the raw participant numbers, the natural beauty and the allure to a vast number of corporate benefactors that are often not seen by those coaches and administrators who occupy pool decks around the world.

Woofus B. Loofus
September 5th, 2010, 12:41 PM
ASCA unanimously approved a resolution objecting to FINA's improv rulemaking around the zipper/open water screwup among other things. Here's a news link:

http://www.swimnews.com/News/view/8052

Interesting how the FINA open water committee person commenting above expressed how extremely grateful he is to FINA.

orca1946
September 5th, 2010, 05:23 PM
What a kiss A$$ of course he is beholding to them, they write his paycheck!

LindsayNB
September 5th, 2010, 11:28 PM
What a kiss A$$ of course he is beholding to them, they write his paycheck!

Careful about assumptions there, I would bet :2cents: that he's an unpaid volunteer.

Allen Stark
September 6th, 2010, 06:19 PM
I don't think it has a chance,but maybe it will get enough attention that this power play by the executive committee can be thwarted.
It seems like Fina's position is-we made a mistake,it was brought to our attention and we corrected it.To avoid this happening in the future we will not allow things to be brought to our attention.

LindsayNB
September 6th, 2010, 06:35 PM
If the continental organizations are all behind the proposals then surely they can find one member of the bureau that's willing to submit them. Wouldn't that be a lot more straight forward?

Ahelee Sue Osborn
September 6th, 2010, 10:43 PM
Only a DOOFUS could criticize Steve Munatones for anything he has said or done related to open water swimming.

Steve is one of the small collection of individuals who have given selflessly to forward the sport of open water swimming.

Thank you Steve.
I appreciate that you take the time to keep up with masters swimming. A lot of us love the open water and regularly read your most amazing open water news website.

http://www.dailynewsofopenwaterswimming.com/

LOVE your always fresh enthusiasm for your sport!

P.S. WHY OPEN WATER SWIMMING ROCKS
http://www.dailynewsofopenwaterswimming.com/2010/09/why-open-water-swimming-rocks.html

pwb
September 6th, 2010, 11:33 PM
Only a DOOFUS could criticize Steve Munatones for anything he has said or done related to open water swimming.

Steve is one of the small collection of individuals who have given selflessly to forward the sport of open water swimming.

Thank you Steve.
I appreciate that you take the time to keep up with masters swimming. A lot of us love the open water and regularly read your most amazing open water news website.

http://www.dailynewsofopenwaterswimming.com/

LOVE your always fresh enthusiasm for your sport!

P.S. WHY OPEN WATER SWIMMING ROCKS
http://www.dailynewsofopenwaterswimming.com/2010/09/why-open-water-swimming-rocks.htmlABSOLUTELY 100% AGREE. Well said, Ahelee.

thewookiee
September 7th, 2010, 07:52 AM
Only a DOOFUS could criticize Steve Munatones for anything he has said or done related to open water swimming.

Steve is one of the small collection of individuals who have given selflessly to forward the sport of open water swimming.



Check your glasses. He wasn't commenting on Steve's contributions to open water swimming. He said he found it interesting that someone on the FINA techincal committee would be so openly grateful to FINA.

Ahelee Sue Osborn
September 7th, 2010, 07:18 PM
Check your glasses. He wasn't commenting on Steve's contributions to open water swimming. He said he found it interesting that someone on the FINA technical committee would be so openly grateful to FINA.

Actually, "the elite athletes are extraordinarily grateful." was the only use of the word but then I use drugstore readers.

Steve just painted a picture of a beautiful grassroots sport which is thriving.

Big time.

And hopefully Masters Swimming continues to adapt the little glitches so we can be a part of a great membership feeder for our little organization -without corruption or interruptions at least for now.

See the thread about growing masters swimming.

thewookiee
September 8th, 2010, 07:28 AM
Actually, "the elite athletes are extraordinarily grateful." was the only use of the word but then I use drugstore readers.

Steve just painted a picture of a beautiful grassroots sport which is thriving.

Big time.

And hopefully Masters Swimming continues to adapt the little glitches so we can be a part of a great membership feeder for our little organization -without corruption or interruptions at least for now.

See the thread about growing masters swimming.

I've seen the thread. Thanks for reading recommendation. No one made any comments about the work steve has done for the open water community.

The comment was made linking him to his position on the fina techincal committee and how grateful he is to fina. Check woofus comment on this thread again.

You've turned someone's comment on his position within fina to a non-related rant about his contributions to open water.

Ahelee Sue Osborn
September 8th, 2010, 04:34 PM
Check woofus comment on this thread again.
You've turned someone's comment on his position within fina to a non-related rant about his contributions to open water.

Ha ha - good try...

Ahelee Sue Osborn
September 11th, 2010, 03:49 PM
More discussion and perhaps a clearer picture:

http://tv.swimmingworldmagazine.com/shows/split-time/split-time-episodes/6616


Thanks Swimming world and Garrett McCaffrey!

Steven Munatones
September 13th, 2010, 01:22 PM
ASCA unanimously approved a resolution objecting to FINA's improv rulemaking around the zipper/open water screwup among other things. Here's a news link:

http://www.swimnews.com/News/view/8052

Interesting how the FINA open water committee person commenting above expressed how extremely grateful he is to FINA.

I have always been grateful to all governing bodies, race directors and local organizations that have sponsored and supported open water swimming. I have volunteered for decades in a variety of capacities, both domestically and internationally, and know that the support of FINA, race directors and local organizations is vital to the health and growth of our sport.

In particular, I am very grateful for FINA's support of the 10K Marathon Swimming World Cup circuit, the Open Water Swimming Grand Prix circuit, the 5K, 5K Team Pursuit, 10K and 25 races at the World Swimming Championships, and especially, the Olympic 10K Marathon Swim. Without the executives and volunteers pushing for open water swimming at these levels, I believe that our sport - at least at the elite end of the open water swimming spectrum - would be less global or lower profiled.

If you are interested, I can explain to you off-line how a person (like me) is selected to become a volunteer of FINA and given the opportunity to spend hundreds of hours trying to help our sport become better. I can be emailed at headcoach@10Kswim.com and we can take it from there at your convenience.

Before I was selected to be a member of FINA's Technical Open Water Swimming Committee, I had no idea of the structure within FINA or procedures that are used, so I am happy to share the information that I now know with others who are interested.

There is nothing to hide and, while others may not agree, there are a lot of volunteers out there working with FINA trying to help organize open water swims that are safe, competitive and memorable for all involved.

Steven Munatones
September 13th, 2010, 01:45 PM
Check your glasses. He wasn't commenting on Steve's contributions to open water swimming. He said he found it interesting that someone on the FINA techincal committee would be so openly grateful to FINA.

There are 14 members from 14 different countries on the FINA Technical Open Water Swimming Committee. Each of these individuals has his or her own opinions and visions on how open water swimming at the FINA level should operate. As with anything with 14 different individuals who have different native languages and come from different cultures, we do not agree on everything. But we do carefully discuss these issues and take votes on the issues. It is a democratic process that I think every American is brought up to believe in.

In the same way that I support FINA's efforts and role in the sport, I support USMS and USA Swimming's efforts and role in the sport. Like many (most?) others who get involved in open water swimming, we did not lobby for these volunteer positions, but we were asked to play a role.

We do not earn any money, although our economy-fare airline tickets and hotel rooms (which are the same that the athletes stay in) are paid for. Like the athletes, our meals are also paid for during the competitions.

Does this mean that any individual's vote, opinions or positions on specific issues are the same as FINA or the other member of the committee? No. Individuals have their differences.

Each of the technical committees (for water polo, synchronized swimming, diving, swimming and open water swimming) provides its recommendations to the FINA Bureau. These technical committees are comprised of volunteers who know the sport well and are passionate about its success and positive growth. These recommendations are then presented to the FINA Bureau by a FINA Liaison (an individual who also sits on each committee) for a vote. After a formal vote, the matter is then decided.

The Americans who preceded me on this committee - Sid Cassidy and Dale Petranech - did wonderful things for the sport and all of their colleagues, from Penny Dean to Rick Walker and many others, have left huge shoes to fill. It is my hope that I am carrying on their tradition and I look forward to the next group of volunteers who will carry on the tradition.

Woofus B. Loofus
September 13th, 2010, 03:43 PM
Steve,
I'm not the one suggesting your opinions are being bought and paid for by FINA or sponsors or whoever. And I think it's perfectly just that your plane fare, hotel bill and meals tab should get picked up for an entirely volunteer position.
What I did question was why you would have such a warm-and-fuzzy for FINA after they made an absolute (and absolutely avoidable) mess of your open water championships this summer in Europe. These were no small snafus: arguably the greatest open water swimmer ever is at the center of the complaints, and nothing but a bunch of asterisks in the record books can begin to correct the damage FINA did.
You've written two fairly lengthy posts in a row on this thread, but I don't see any direct reference to these controversies. Now I'm more curious than ever: what do you think of what happened? How should it have been handled? There are two separate issues: the zipper business, and new suits popping up on the approved list shortly before major events, to the surprise of (among others) the reigning open water swimmer of our era.
Then there is the larger issue of whether too much is happening behind closed FINA doors. There should be no reason you cannot tell us on this thread (not in private emails) what you really think about these controversies, and how they can be avoided in the future. As you say, you have put in countless volunteer hours for a sport you love. Certainly you love it enough to defend it from procedural irregularities that undermine the sport's credibility?

Ahelee Sue Osborn
September 13th, 2010, 05:20 PM
Then there is the larger issue of whether too much is happening behind closed FINA doors. There should be no reason you cannot tell us on this thread (not in private emails) what you really think about these controversies, and how they can be avoided in the future. As you say, you have put in countless volunteer hours for a sport you love. Certainly you love it enough to defend it from procedural irregularities that undermine the sport's credibility?

Oh right... gotta love this calling out from someone who doesn't use their real name to post on a public forum.

And imagine - a small select group conducting fishy happenings behind closed doors?
Now that is unimaginable!

Woofus B. Loofus
September 13th, 2010, 06:58 PM
Steve entered a discussion about ASCA being so PO'd, they're considering bolting from FINA.

Steve writes three posts, all of which say laudatory things about FINA, but don't comment on ASCA's complaints, or this summer's open water fiascos.

Other posters have a natural curiosity what he thinks about those issues. He's on the open water tech committee, FCOL.