Re: Clijsters out of Olympics

Steve Jaros wrote:

> > "H Holbrook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Steve Jaros wrote:
>
>
> > If
> > countries choose not to compete they would suffer immeasurably.  (See
> > Moscow 1984 and Los Angeles 1988, et al.)
>
>
> Earth to Holbrook: Moscow was in 1980, Los Angeles was 1984. 1988 was Seoul.
> And no country suffered 'immeasurably' by not competing. The USA got along
> fine skipping the 1980 games, etc.

The games missed by the countries mentioned were as you say.  The 
effects were felt in the next games.  Or would you choose, once again, 
to evade the evidence that runs smack in the face of your toothless 
allegation?

> > > And Kim
> > > doesn't need 'sponsorship' to go to Athens. She can do that herself.
> >
> > Nope, she cannot.
>
>
> Don't be stupid. The 'sponsorship' referenced was obviously money needed to
> travel and participate, not the endorsement of her olympic federation to
> officially rep. the country.
>
> Kim doesn't need the financial support of the BOIC to compete at the games.

She cannot compete in the games without the consent of her country's 
olympic committee.  Am I going too fast for you?
> > > Perhaps a good rule of thumb is that only athletes who need a subsidy by
> > > their olympic federation must wear the clothes? In that case, the player
>
> is
>
> > > getting something for their 'endorsement'. Kim isn't.
> >
> > How naive.
>
>
> I bet Holbrook can't explain that.

To which level of naivete do I address the explanation?  Stupid.  Dumb. 
 Or dumber?


> > The sponsors sponsor the team.  There is no "i" in team, whether the
> > team is made up of pro or amateur athletes.
>
>
> LOL - there's no 'we' either. Kim seems willing to participate, as long as
> she doesn't have to be economically exploited by an organization that she
> has no desire to see benefit from her participation. A very reasonable
> stance to take.

She certainly has the choice not to participate. But the structure of 
the "team concept" in nationalistic olympic participation has outlived 
and endured all individualists to date.  I suspect it will survive KC, too.



> > The tradeoff is play for your country and honor your country's
> > sponsorship deals, or don't play for your country.
>
>
> That's the trade-off established by the BOIC. But Kim is under no obligation
> to accept it. So why all the whining...?

Who's whining?  Besides you.