The ruling released today by an independent body stating that Athletics Australia has no case to answer against John Steffensen’s claims of racial vilification and discrimination poses more questions than it answers.
Steffensen’s claims stemmed from what he believed was AA giving preferential treatment to up and coming 400m runner Steve Solomon by selecting him for the discretionary individual berth for the London Olympics.
This came about because none of the members of the 4×400 team, which also included Ben Offereins, Brendon Cole, Steffensen and Solomon, had posted qualifying times by the deadline for London selection.
Steffensen never once claimed that he should have been selected for the individual berth ahead of Solomon, or any of the other team members, rather that the selection made a mockery of setting selection criteria in the first place if AA were not going to follow its own rules.
In regards to the racial vilification comments, Steffensen was referring to an incident that occurred at the Beijing Olympics.
Here, he alleges that an Australian team official called him a racial name when telling him to move out of the room that he shared with pole vaulter Steve Hooker, before dumping his belongings into the corridor.
Hooker backed up Steffensen claims, in the lead up to London, saying that, he was present when the incident took place in Beijing.
The findings of the ruling saying that AA have no case to answer in regards to the racial vilification, in essence, is questioning or inferring that both Steffensen’s and Hooker’s joint recollection of the Beijing incident is untrue or that it simply did not occur.
Therefore, has AA genuinely found there was no case to answer? Or, are the peak body trying to sweep the incident under the carpet and hope it goes away?
nickoldschool
Roar Guru
I think everyone agrees that the AA official who made this abusive comments should be banned and / or fined. Thing is Steffensen has a poor sportsmanship history and claiming on national TV that the he hadnt been selected for the games due to his race didn't help his cause especially as the newbie had fantastic games. As we say, what goes around comes around and it's fair to say most of the Aussie public has had enough with his tantrums.
Jack Russell
Roar Guru
Fair enough - but like I said it's hard to pass comment without knowing the full story, or even part of the story. All i've heard is an allegation from Steffensen. And i'm not about to get outraged just on that basis. Even your article just suggests that Hooker has merely confirmed he was there. What was said on both sides? Perhaps Steffensen unleashed a few unpleasant remarks of his own. Not that I have any idea, however these things are not always clear cut. I can understand why you can't really elaborate. But when it involves a known big mouth, you're going to need a little more substance if you want public support.
Jocelyn McLennan
Roar Guru
Yes I can but I just have...I cannot say much more without revealing sources and names and thus getting myself into a law suit....Johdn belongings were turfed out of the room he and Steve Hooker shared and dumped into the corridor the name calling took place.....NO one has ever given John credit for never bringing this up until he felt AGAIN he was being discriminated against in London.....AA are now saying the incident and name calling in Beijing never took place....so there for both Stave Hooker and John must be lying...I cannot believe NO_ONE has taken AA to task on this.....all the blame in now on Steff and looks like he may suffer another 6 month ban because of it...just for telling the truth.....If AA had any brains they would not pursue John any further ....lves in some legal trouble as well...
Jack Russell
Roar Guru
Well that's pretty much what discretionary means. If there were fixed rules, then it wouldn't be discretionary. But I think the debate about AA's selection policy is a completely different one to the debate about Steffensen's petulant comments. I am certainly of the opinion that their selection policies, even the discretionary ones, are far too rigid. B qualifiers should be acceptable where the athlete is already going to the event as part of a relay team or already qualified in another event (eg. 200m A qualifier but a 100m B qualifier), as well as where there is the clear potential for improvement in the future. But that doesn't excuse Steffensen acting like a twat. At the very least, he should have kept his opinions on this matter in house.
sittingbison
Guest
hehe good one jameswm %))
john
Guest
Discretionary?so why have selection criteria at all?what about josh ross?he was already at the games,the best aussie sprinter on form,but he couldn't get a run.Discretionary?give me a break,don't you mean,subjective,arbitrary or ad hoc?
jameswm
Guest
Solomon's individual selection was a discretionary one. Does anyone understand what discretionary means? Do they go for: - the 30yo guy who won the national trials, but since got injured and has shown no form in the past 3 months; or - the 19yo who was injured for the trials, but has since run faster than the 30yo and is showing top recent form, including an individual medal at world juniors in June Pretty easy to see why they went for Steve and honestly, Steve's performance made Steff look like, well, a goose. Shows Steve's class and determination that he performed when needed and didn't hold a grudge.
jameswm
Guest
I hear a rumour that he was to take on Quade! The AA officials would be cheering for Quade, and ARU ones for Steff!
john
Guest
I must be missing something - didn't the Australian team captain back up that he was racially abused.didn't AA act contrary to their own selection criteria.seems like there might be a little scope for AA to lift their own game!!.
Australian Rules
Guest
Jocelyn, I think most agreed that AA's selection needed tweaking...mostly the timing of it...which was rightly adjusted pre-London to let promising juniors (who had world class times) compete...Solomon and LaCaze. Solomon justified AA's decision with a brilliant 8th in the Mens 400m Final. More than that, he was a gracious competitor. Both the above juniors will go ont to Rio. As a result of solomon's discretionary selection, Steffenson threatened to boycott to relay team - Olympic spirit indeed. It was merely the latest petulant outburst from an indulged athlete who had already boycotted the 2010 Comm Games. Steffenson may think he's rock'n'roll but really, he just comes across as crass. Immediately sprining to mind is his comments about his "teammates" after winning the trials: "It was like a murder scene out there, the way I murdered their little boys". Classy stuff. Yeah, I get that it's all for the cameras, but he should let his legs do the talking. And clearly, they're not quick enough. I'm unsure why you keep pushing the barrow for this guy.
peeeko
Roar Guru
yes, yes it does
Atawhai Drive
Guest
A deadly combination of huge ego and an intellect that rarely troubles the scorers. There are reports this morning that Steffensen's contemplating a boxing career. Says it all really.
Ken
Guest
This clown needs to learn to shut up and actually run a bit faster.
B.A Sports
Doesn't the act of "racial vilifcation" mean you are enciting others to hate someone based on race, nationality etc..? This incident is alledged to have happened in 2008 and we all know John likes to make noise when ever he feels hard done by, so if he genuinlly thought he was discrimnated against, surely he would have amped up his campaign in 2008... or 20009... or 2010..?