I hate the Olympics

[Dr Pie]

According to Jane Cadzow's article in the Age Good Weekend earlier this year D'Arcy was elligible for selection to London not because he had done the time but because his lawyers had a done a deal not to go to court over his previous exclusion. The same article suggests that the court verdict on his original assault was influenced by the suppression of material that showed him in a poor light.

Most of all the D'Arcy bankruptcy was manipulated to avoid paying court ordered compensation to his victim. His main creditor is his wealthy father. D'Arcy's Dad pretends Nick owes him money so Nick avoids paying compensation to the bloke whose life he wrecked. Personally I don't think it is just about the Olympics. D'Arcy Senior who is a surgeon should be struck off for financial malfeasance and D'Arcy junior should be refused reentry to Medical School (which is where he plans to go after the Games) because he is not a fit and proper person to practise medicine.

The actual gun photo is irrelevant. Swimming Australia is only making a fuss because they have been embarrassed by the amount of evidence that has emerged showing that D'Arcy should not have been selected after they had already selected him. Monk is merely collateral damage and would not have been mentioned if D'Arcy had not been part of the picture. Monk is a dill but he has done nothing that would disqualify him from representing Australia.

As for the Olympics themselves, I stated my views in an interview that I gave Sam Lane for an article she published in The Age and SMH last April.

"Despite some cynicism about the inner workings of the International Olympic Committee, Nadel says that when the Olympics are on he cannot help but enjoy them.

"They're funny things, the Olympics," he says.

"Like the [soccer] World Cup we all know there's a level of corruption. We all know that the Games largely favour the people who spend the largest amount of money on them ... they're at least G20 if not G8 countries, or they're countries where the government has had a system that heavily finances sport, like the old Communist countries ... But despite that we all want to watch it because it is the highest level of sport available and it's a great show.

"We might have some doubts about the people who run the show ... there might be all sorts of things about the way the Olympics are organised that we don't like, but it's a great spectacle.

"I suppose you could argue it's like the glitz and glamour about movies. The best movies aren't the ones that win at the Oscars, but everybody watches the Oscars."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/olympics-2012/preoccupied-with-obscure-olympic-games-20120419-1xaaq.html#ixzz1xdf0skOs

[swoop42]

This country is going to the dogs with the media leading the way.

Honestly who cares that a couple of young blokes got a hero shot taken while in a gun shop.

Nothing illegal, nothing immoral was done here and what has happened to them because of it is an absolute disgrace.

[Tannin]

[luvdids]

^ I think he was talking about the gun photo, not the other issues.

[Tannin]

The gun photo was just a reminder. It was never the main issue. It did, however, serve to indicate (just in case the was any possible doubt) that this turkey still glorifies violence and aggression. If it hadn't been for his brutal history, it would have looked bad but been pretty much ignored by officialdom and probably by the press as well.

The other idiot .... well, we already knew he wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer. What else is new?

[pietillidie]

Idiot, creep, beneficiary of corruption, or whatever the facts may end up being, the problem I still have is that without all of the evidence how the heck can I make a good judgement and why would I even want to impose my half-arsed assessment on anyone?

The law may occasionally be an ass (the Chamberlain case), but public opinion is frequently an ass (the Chamberlain case and case after case) and doesn't have to justify itself or answer to anyone (the Chamberlain case at least had how many Commissions?). In the end if legal process has genuinely failed it surely falls on those who do know more to come forward or push for due process, but that still doesn't make my "view" (my vague distant assessment based on fragments of second and third-hand data) useful.

[Tannin]

Or in this case, PTID, both. The law got it right (but the scum weaseled out of it) and the sudden public outcry in his favour is completely stupid.

[stui magpie]

[pietillidie]

^Haha excellent one, Dr. Pie

Just a thought related to your expertise, I get the impression that one thing which is damaging our sporting reputation is our inability to produce quality soccer players. Or at least I get the impression that's the case here in Asia where soccer is such a proxy for sport generally. We certainly don't seem to have the sporting reputation here that we have in say Europe.

Word is Tannin wants more money put into developing soccer

[Tannin]

^ Brrrlffsssp!!

Bugger you, Pietillidie, I just vomited all over last quarter's GST return.

(Best thing to do with it, on reflection.)

[David]

The outcry is against the response to the gun photo, because it is the gun photo he is being punished for. You may feel that it's just deserts for his earlier crimes, but the problem is that the AOC and Swimming Australia have made this about the photo from day one. What has part of their punishment been? They've been banned from using social networks.

This whole incident is about PR from the first moment to the last. Legitimate or otherwise, your moral outrage isn't even on the table for the AOC; they're far more concerned about image than they are about right and wrong, and that's what really gets me. That (particulary nasty) trend is what seems to be dismaying people.

You know, if this hadn't been about the photo, I doubt we would have even had this disagreement. Sure, I would have argued my usual point about separation of sporting organisations and law, but I would have had little issue with Nick getting the sledgehammer approach. The reality is, however, far more problematic, and the AOC have emerged from this looking like hypocrites and mercenaries.

[Tannin]

Sorry mate, that's just nonsense. If it had been (say) Janine Murray or Brad Kahlefeldt or Mitch Larkin who had done the stupid gunshop thing (not that they would - most people have more sense) there would have been barely a ripple. It might even have passed completely without notice.

The public have arced up because Nick Scum has rubbed their noses in the fact that he has completely escaped paying for his crime and continues to glorify aggression in an irresponsible way while we, the public, hand over large buckletloads of our money for his expenses.

The administrators have arced up because he has (stupidly) rubbed their noses in the fact that they made a monumental error when they selected him for the team - not just an error of judgment, but a moral failure: they were weak and failed to discharge their responsibilities properly. Now Nick Scumhead makes their failure massively obvious and public. Of course they do what they can to prevent any further bad PR, and to go a tiny, tiny way towards righting the wrong decision that they made.

Remember Al Capone? The cops couldn't get him for murder, extortion, gun-running and all the rest of it, so they got him for tax evasion. It should have been murder, but that belated tax evasion prosecution was at least a bit better than nothing at all.

You think the AOC look like hypocrites and mercenaries? Well, you won't get any arguments from me on that score.

How sad it is that all decent, honest Australians will be barracking hard for the Americans to win the 200m butterfly. Seeing that scum win a medal would be like seeing St Vomit win a premiership.

[bucksisgod]

Will watch some events.

I try to live my life in accordance with the Olympic Weightlifting creed.

"If you can't get on the snatch, go the clean and jerk"

[David]

[Tannin]

^ Only ... oh ... let me guess this one ... er ... maybe ... er ... once every three - no make that once every four years?