Hello John,
Well done on your letter to Ron Reed. I suppose some
credit is due Reed for replying to your letter - he
need not have bothered.
His reply contains (to use a metaphor from a sport he
possibly prefers) a rather juicy half-volley i.e. his
implication that athletes of 30 nations out of 200 are
incapable of providing a contest fiercely enough
contested to provide exploits of excellence and/or
heroism. I've not seen the start lists of any event
Kurt Fearnley has contested recently but
I'd be
interested to see how many of the fields he entered
contained rivals from Equatorial Guinea, Burkina Faso,
Surinam or Kiribati. I'd be more certain, however,
that Fearnley faced the best wheelchair talent
available from only a relatively few countries -
countries with the drive, resources and structures to
nurture his sport at all, and develop it in depth. How
this differs in any way from Nathan Deakes confronting
the best and toughest walkers from the, again,
relatively few nations that have built depth and
strength in their racewalking programs is something
I'd like to see Ron Reed explain. Yes, it is true that
200 nations will enter for track and field in major
Games. It is also true that athletes from over half
those nations will be run out the heats, or finish at
or near the tail of the field, because conditions in
those countries do not yet make for developing T&F
talent to anywhere near world class.
Numbers alone
don't make for fierce competition, Ron.
But let's allow, for argument's sake, that his concern
did lie not in kicking a racewalker yet again but in
seeing that a champion disabled athlete is given just
recognition. Followers of sport generally may not be
well-educated in any specific sporting field or genre
outside their own interest. But, thanks to the
exploits of Louise Sauvage and Fearnley himself, it's
hard to imagine that any serious sport fan - including
those in Reed's readership - would be unaware of what
is required to achieve a sporting accolade like
'disabled athlete of the year.' These athletes have to
battle, not simply the hurdles faced by any sportsman
or woman striving for the top, but also a host of
societal prejudices and attitudes which often conspire
against them taking on sport at all. These include
patronism ('I think you're so brave, having a go.'),
apathy, bureaucratic
obstuctionism and ghoulish
leering ('Hey, check out the freak'.) These are huge
barriers. No sports fan worthy of the name would
consider Fearnley as 'just' the disabled one, any more
than they thought this of Sauvage. Fearnley may have
been a 'shoo-in' for his award, but only insofar as
he has no like-bodied peer in this country. Nor has
Deakes. The achievement of both men lies in what they
have attained against the best the world has to offer.
Both men tower above their sports in Australia. Both
have been justly recognised for so doing.
Stu Cooper
--- John Leydon <
jleydon@kildare.adl.catholic.edu.au>
wrote:
> Dear friends of racewalking
>
> I too sent the following response to this appalling
> article by Ron Reed and include the response that I
> have just received. I find it interesting that the
> response says
nothing about the significance of
> Nathan's World record - rather hard to say this is
> 'soft'. My view is the article is the work of a
> lazy journalist who didn't check his facts and wants
> to use statistics very selectively. For your
> interest the mens 100m field in Osaka had only 72
> starters (compared to 50 plus in the Walks) - well
> short of the 200 countries Ron Reed claims give
> athletics depth.
>
> My email read,
>
> Dear Ron
>
> I often read articles that I disagree with and don't
> bother to voice my opinion. However, not only do I
> disagree with your article, "Kurt's a champion in
> any field" in the Herald Sun (05/12/2007) but there
> are some very loose arguments (one even might say
> errors in fact) which should be pointed out.
>
> The walks fields in the Commonwealth Games were
> thin, as were a number of other
track and field
> events - it is interesting that walking has been put
> on notice for removal from the Commonwealth Games if
> numbers do not improve, yet other events were not
> put on notice in the same way with regard to number
> of entries. Sadly I believe that part of the reason
> for various groups trying to remove the walks from
> the CG had more to do with the dominance of one
> country (Australia). Let's not forget that the
> number of athletes in Olympic swimming events was
> reduced from 3 to 2 at the time of absolute
> dominance of the East Germans (who we now know were
> often drug assisted) - they were mostly winning all
> 3 medals - particularly in the women's events.
>
> For some nations the Commonwealth Games is low down
> on their priority list. To illustrate this for some
> years now British athletes have been told results in
> the European
Championships count for much more than
> the Commonwealth Games and that results from the
> European Champs will count towards selection in
> Olympic Games and World Titles - so smaller fields
> in the Commonwealth Games are understandable.
>
> However, my biggest reaction on reading your article
> is that you use the small fields in the Commonwealth
> Games to somehow imply that Nathan Deakes win in
> Osaka was second rate. This logic is confounding.
> Have you any idea of the number who started the 50
> km walk in Osaka? Was this significantly less than
> the number in the 20km field? I ask this last
> question given the implication is that the 50km walk
> event has small fields (especially over this
> distance). How many champions have we had at the
> World Athletics Championships ever?
>
> The final stain on your argument and all it implies
> is you
strongly suggest that Nathan Deakes
> performances were not all that signficant ("not the
> world's most fiercely contested discipline, as we
> saw with small and undistinguished fields") is how
> does one downgrade a World record on a course in
> Geelong which had many turns and most walkers would
> not call a fast course? I ask you how many World
> record holders have Australia ever had in track and
> field and when was the last time before Nathan
> Deakes that an Australian broke a World record for a
> track and field event? Try and tell the Russians,
> Mexicans and many Europeans who take racewalking
> very seriously and have done so for many years that
> their collective historical efforts don't count,
> otherwise the World Record would be a real
> benchmark.
>
> Yours faithfully
> John Leydon
>
> and the responsse was
>
> Dear
John,
> The point of the column was not to put down either
> Nathan Deakes or race walking _ and that is clearly
> stated in the 10th paragraph _ but to applaud
> Fearnley's achievements and to suggest that he
> should not be restricted in his potential to claim
> any such award.
> Track and field likes to boast _ and rightly so _
> that it is contested by virtually every country, or
> about 200. Fewer than 30 appeared on any of the
> walking start lists in Osaka. I repeat, it is not
> the world's most fiercely contested discipline _
> although, like most sporting arguments, this is
> probably a matter of perspective.
> Finally, I have nothing against walking as a sport
> (and most certainly nothing negative to say about
> Nathan deakes) and have written about it positively
> on a number of occasions. I'll happily continue to
> do that when the rare chances present
themselves.
> Thanks for the feedback. It is always welcome,
> whatever the tone.
> RR
>
> ____________
____________________
>
> ozwalker02@yahoogroups.com on behalf of jim leppik
> Sent: Fri 7/12/2007 12:48 AM
> To: ozwalker02@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: ozwalker02 Ron Reed
>
>
>
> Hi Jane,
>
> I already done it and he's replied. Told him
> everything you just said. I also sent him the IAAF
> link of the event demonstrating the 54 strong field
> in Osaka.
>
> Jim
>
> jane saville <jsaville74@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I usually don't bother writing to journalists who
> write articles with absolutely no research as it
> covers
nearly all of them. But I will be writing a
> note to Mr Reed and just explain a few things. I'm
> not a big one on Statistics but I just did a quick
> 10 minute check and I will be suggesting he do the
> same in regards to race walking depth around the
> world. You only have to look at the World CHamps
> start list and results to see it in black and white;
>
>
> Mens 20km had 42 competitors from at least 25
> countries with the first 3 places from Ecuador,
> Spain and Tunisia, not many events have that spread
> of countries in the medals and with top 10 from 9
> different .
> Mens 50km walk: about 54 competitors from 28
> countries with the top 10 from 8 different
> countries!
> Womens 20km walk: about 42 competitors from 28
> competitors with top 10 from 7 different countries!
> I have only done a rough count but you get the
> idea.
>
>
As for Comm Games we all know that there is no
> depth but we all know we're not the only event to
> struggle with numbers and we're going to work on it.
>
> I just get frustrated at the so called journalists
> who write supposedly "factual" stories that
> unfortunately the public read as true. It's poor
> advertising for our sport that we could do without.
> But it is a trashy tabloid so what do you expect!
>
> Anyway I will explain that to Mr Reed even though I
> know I will be probably banging my head against a
> brick wall but I need to vent my frustration.
>
> Nathan's results in the past year have been
> incredible and deserves many more accolades than he
> has received, but that is the nature of our sport.
> But hopefully with the generation of walkers coming
> through we can spread a positive message about our
> great sport.
>
>
Cheers
> Jane
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> To: ozwalker02@yahoogroups.com
> From: rcgardiner@yahoo.com.au
> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 23:29:46 -0800
> Subject: ozwalker02 Ron Reed
>
>
> Russ, that's about what I would expect from Ron
> Reed, not only are his articles completely deviod of
> facts, he is a moron. Having discovered that some
> years ago, I later found he is also anti walking.
> How unexpected.
> bob Gardiner
>
> ________________________________
>
> Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the
> new Yahoo!7 Mail now
>
<http://au.rd.yahoo.com/mail/taglines/default_all/mail/spankey/*http://au.yahoo.com/worldsbestmail/spankey/>
=== message truncated ===
Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail
Having problems with message search?
Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.
Offline 
Send Email
