3 ms·

It's interesting to me that playing any sport for tiny amounts of money would disqualify you (well after any petition was required to be filed) from competing i

by kurthr 4y ago

It's interesting to me that playing any sport for tiny amounts of money would disqualify you (well after any petition was required to be filed) from competing in any Olympic sport. The way the rule was enforced by Sullivan does seem to raise issues of fairness, but even the rule it self seemed to be designed to reject honest people of lower classes. By those strict rules playing a game of darts or pool for a quarter even after you finished competing should result in the removal of medals. https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2021/07/20/why-did-the-olympics-ditch-their-amateur-athlete-requirement https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2021/07/20/...

elliekelly 4y ago
Is this all that different from the way the NCAA rules about payment have been (and perhaps, still are) unevenly interpreted and applied?
- kurthr 4y ago
  NCAA doesn't say that playing darts when you're 67 disqualifies you from college bowl wins at 20. That is, however, how the Olympic rules were read. Collecting any money from any competitive sport at any time disqualified all earlier or later achievements. Oh, actually, it would also be all player's who's coaches were paid (because that also wasn't allowed) so I guess every NCAA player would be disqualified?
acomjean 4y ago
It used to disqualify US college athletes too. They can't make money on their College fame (that is changing..). But its weird. I was at UMass (University of Massachusetts) when they had a NCAA tournament class team. For UMass the transgressions of their star player cost the school their victories and revenue... "However, NCAA sanctions stripped the Minutemen of their 1996 NCAA Tournament victories. The sanctions, based on star Marcus Camby admitting he took money, clothes, and jewelry from an agent during the season, removed the Final Four from the record books. Additionally, 45% of tournament revenue had to be returned to the NCAA. Camby reimbursed the school for the $151,617 in lost revenue." [1] Basketball (or football) vs other non-revenue sports are a weird thing at a state school that had revenue shortfalls. The most highly paid state employees are often these coaches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMass_Minutemen_basketball#John_Calipari_era_1988–1996 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMass_Minutemen_basketball#Joh...
- dghlsakjg 4y ago
  WTF! He had to pay the school for their lost revenue? I never realized just how accurate the Cartman as slave owner episode was.
  - hooloovoo_zoo 4y ago
    I don't think he was forced to; he signed an $8M contract that same year. Here's some more detail https://vault.si.com/vault/1997/09/15/tangled-web-marcus-camby-was-both-victim-and-villain-in-his-illicit-dealings-with-agents-while-at-umass#:~:text=To%20his%20credit%20Camby%20has%20repaid%20that%20money%20to%20the%20school.%20%22I%20felt%0AI%20owed%20them%20that%20much%2C%22%20he%20says https://vault.si.com/vault/1997/09/15/tangled-web-marcus-cam....
    - dghlsakjg 4y ago
      A young person from a disadvantaged background pays back an institution worth billions for “lost revenue”. How many times did the school sell out the arena with his name on the top of the player list? Umass lost nothing for having recruited him. He paid that money back because of media and social pressure, not an overriding sense of right and wrong. I don’t know many 20 year olds, of any background, that would turn down $100k of under the table benefits. If the NCAA thinks it’s wrong, they should go after the corrupting influences, not the poor kid.
      - acomjean 4y ago
        To be fair it was a pretty broke state university. Although it did build a new basketball/hockey arena at the time. Also basketball games for students were free (and about half of the seats were reserved for them). Amherst were the university is is quite far from any cities. I imagine it helped the university financially but it's a weird system UMass has. I photographed the team back then for the college paper..(I have signed photograph of him dunking I took) After the basketball program catered. As an alumni I think it's for the best. University sports are great till they turn into money making afairs. but the article makes clear he was making a huge amount in the NBA and was trying to be fair.
samatman 4y ago
The spirit of amateur athleticism was a noble one, which I mean both as praise and critique. There was a real distinction, no different in spirit than that between junior sports and adult sports. Class privilege was a real thing, sure, and the Jim Thorpe story in fact shows that, by custom, a poor boy could earn some extra money playing in the minors under an assumed name, which Thorpe just didn't know due to his background. Today, being an amateur tennis player means you've had thousands of hours of professional coaching, there aren't really exceptions, although there's enough charity that exceptionally talented players do get that coaching sometimes. Back then, it meant you played tennis. This is already long so I'll refrain from talking about the wacky and fake rules around NCAA amateur status; I'll content myself with saying that more change is needed.

by kurthr 4y ago

elliekelly 4y ago

Is this all that different from the way the NCAA rules about payment have been (and perhaps, still are) unevenly interpreted and applied?

kurthr 4y ago
NCAA doesn't say that playing darts when you're 67 disqualifies you from college bowl wins at 20. That is, however, how the Olympic rules were read. Collecting any money from any competitive sport at any time disqualified all earlier or later achievements. Oh, actually, it would also be all player's who's coaches were paid (because that also wasn't allowed) so I guess every NCAA player would be disqualified?

acomjean 4y ago

It used to disqualify US college athletes too. They can't make money on their College fame (that is changing..). But its weird. I was at UMass (University of Massachusetts) when they had a NCAA tournament class team. For UMass the transgressions of their star player cost the school their victories and revenue... "However, NCAA sanctions stripped the Minutemen of their 1996 NCAA Tournament victories. The sanctions, based on star Marcus Camby admitting he took money, clothes, and jewelry from an agent during the season, removed the Final Four from the record books. Additionally, 45% of tournament revenue had to be returned to the NCAA. Camby reimbursed the school for the $151,617 in lost revenue." [1] Basketball (or football) vs other non-revenue sports are a weird thing at a state school that had revenue shortfalls. The most highly paid state employees are often these coaches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMass_Minutemen_basketball#John_Calipari_era_1988–1996 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMass_Minutemen_basketball#Joh...

dghlsakjg 4y ago
WTF! He had to pay the school for their lost revenue? I never realized just how accurate the Cartman as slave owner episode was.
- hooloovoo_zoo 4y ago
  I don't think he was forced to; he signed an $8M contract that same year. Here's some more detail https://vault.si.com/vault/1997/09/15/tangled-web-marcus-camby-was-both-victim-and-villain-in-his-illicit-dealings-with-agents-while-at-umass#:~:text=To%20his%20credit%20Camby%20has%20repaid%20that%20money%20to%20the%20school.%20%22I%20felt%0AI%20owed%20them%20that%20much%2C%22%20he%20says https://vault.si.com/vault/1997/09/15/tangled-web-marcus-cam....
  - dghlsakjg 4y ago
    A young person from a disadvantaged background pays back an institution worth billions for “lost revenue”. How many times did the school sell out the arena with his name on the top of the player list? Umass lost nothing for having recruited him. He paid that money back because of media and social pressure, not an overriding sense of right and wrong. I don’t know many 20 year olds, of any background, that would turn down $100k of under the table benefits. If the NCAA thinks it’s wrong, they should go after the corrupting influences, not the poor kid.
    - acomjean 4y ago
      To be fair it was a pretty broke state university. Although it did build a new basketball/hockey arena at the time. Also basketball games for students were free (and about half of the seats were reserved for them). Amherst were the university is is quite far from any cities. I imagine it helped the university financially but it's a weird system UMass has. I photographed the team back then for the college paper..(I have signed photograph of him dunking I took) After the basketball program catered. As an alumni I think it's for the best. University sports are great till they turn into money making afairs. but the article makes clear he was making a huge amount in the NBA and was trying to be fair.

samatman 4y ago

The spirit of amateur athleticism was a noble one, which I mean both as praise and critique. There was a real distinction, no different in spirit than that between junior sports and adult sports. Class privilege was a real thing, sure, and the Jim Thorpe story in fact shows that, by custom, a poor boy could earn some extra money playing in the minors under an assumed name, which Thorpe just didn't know due to his background. Today, being an amateur tennis player means you've had thousands of hours of professional coaching, there aren't really exceptions, although there's enough charity that exceptionally talented players do get that coaching sometimes. Back then, it meant you played tennis. This is already long so I'll refrain from talking about the wacky and fake rules around NCAA amateur status; I'll content myself with saying that more change is needed.