Re: Clijsters out of Olympics

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 14:02:21 +0000 (UTC), [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

>Yahoo! is running a story citing a statement on Clijsters' Web site that 
>because the Belgian Olympic Committee won't budge on its requirement that 
>all athletes wear clothing made by its sponsor, Adidas, she won't be 
>playing. Clijsters, as we know, has a contract with Fila.
>
>I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I think Clijsters is 
>right to honor her contractual commitments (I don't really think she has 
>much choice); I *also* thinik the fact that xOCs are signing such 
>immovable sponsorship deals indicates what utter crap the claim is that 
>the Olympics represent some kind of pure, uncontaminated, amateur sporting 
>ideal. In practical terms, it's also just stupid: surely the BOC knows 
>there are sports in which the athletes are often signed to exclusive 
>contracts (though for the vast majority of athletes who represent Belgium 
>in the Olympics I'm sure it's not an issue).
>
>Still, you'd think Clijsters could have negotiated an exemption for the 
>Olympics. Surely it's in all her sponsors' best interests for her to play, 
>no matter what she's wearing.
>
>All quite bizarre. Butis likely to make Navratilova/Raymond even more of a 
>favorite. 

The whole thing obviously calls out for a new standard "Olympics" or
"Clijsters" clause in such contracts-- say, mandating that where team
and individual player sponsor contracts clash, the player wears both.

--
Why isn't The Tennis Channel on Adelphia?


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----