Failure to Communicate: The 2008 USATF Annual Meeting and the Need for Reform

December 3, 2008

The U.S.A. Track and Field (USATF) annual meeting officially begins tonight in Reno, Nevada. The meeting takes place at the close of an especially tumultuous year for the organization. In January of 2008, the beginning of an all-important Olympic year, CEO Craig Masback resigned to take a position with Nike.

Masback had overseen an impressive organizational turnaround in his tenure with USATF, dating back to the late-90s when the organization was struggling to stay afloat financially and competitively. At the 2007 World Championships in Osaka, Japan, the U.S. track team's 26 medals equaled the highest ever for a world championship. All signs pointed to the team's continued success in Beijing the following summer. Masback's departure seemed to come just before the perfect stage to showcase his organizational turnaround.

The U.S. team performed well in Beijing, by almost any standard except their own. Jamaica's emergence in the sprints, combined with embarrassing relay disqualifications in the Men's and Women's 4x100m hurt the team's public image. Injuries hampered medal-favorites Bernard Lagat and Tyson Gay.

Now USATF is an organization in flux. The organization chose former Major League Soccer Commissioner Doug Logan to replace Masback. High Performance Department Chair Brooks Johnson resigned after the Beijing Olympics. Privately, many felt the reason was Logan's announcement of a High Performance Audit panel after the highly publicized failure of the relays. Johnson, who coaches several athletes who compete for other countries, has said publicly it was out of a conflict of interest. At this year's annual meeting, members will hold an election for a new USATF President.

Logan has also called for considerable organizational restructuring. His High Performance Audit panel plans to evaluate virtually the entire High Performance Division, which oversees National Team preparation and performance and the development of elite athletes. Also on the docket are ambitious proposals to amend USATF's Board of Directors which will, in Logan's words, "[Restructure] how we govern ourselves and how we do business." Among the proposals is one that will reduce the Board's size by over half its membership, from 32 to 15.

This week's Annual meeting will go a long way to determining the future the sport of track and field in this country, and certainly its governing body. According to Adam Jacobs, Editor-in-Chief of Thefinalsprint.com*, change is desperately needed. Jacobs has released a seven-part series titled "Dysfunction Run Amuck: USA Track & Field and the Need for Change." Jacobs conducted extensive interviews with members of USATF and the running community before releasing his findings that chronicle a history of infighting, financial mismanagement, race-baiting and bureaucratic intractability--all originating from the Board of Directors.

One of the central figures in Jacobs' series is John Chaplin. Chaplin is the longtime chair of the Men's Track and Field Committee in the High Performance Division. Chaplin was recently in the news for his role in the controversy surrounding athlete entries in the 2008 Olympic Trials this past summer.

In his excellent piece for Running Times, Scott Douglas chronicled the story of several provisionally qualified athletes who appealed for a spot on the starting line in the respective events. Each had a strong case, whether it was the fact that slower athletes were added to the field already, or that other athletes had announced their intentions to withdraw. Across the board they were denied entry. Several snubbed runners threatened legal action, but dropped their case, fearing reprisal from their sport's governing body.

At the center of this controversy was John Chaplin. Chaplin, in his position as Chairman served as last word for most of these controversial decisions. Speaking with Douglas, who presumably identified himself as a reporter, Chaplin made no apologies.

"The Olympic trials are not a goddamn All-Comers meet," going on to say, "Those clowns in the bottom half of the 10,000 have no chance in god's green earth of making the Olympic team."

Douglas's piece also made it clear that there had been several similar controversies at previous Olympic Trials, each over the arbitrary appeals process with Chaplin at the center of the storm.

Chaplin has a long history with the sport. He was a successful cross country and track and field coach at Washington State University from 1968 to1994. In his time there, his teams won the 1977 NCAA Indoor Track and Field title, as well as four runner-up titles. He was also the Men's 2000 Olympic Team head coach. He coached multiple All-Americans and Olympians, but his most accomplished athlete was the enigmatic Henry Rono.

Rono had a meteoric career. In the summer of 1978, he set world records at four different distances (3,000m, steeplechase, 5,000m and 10,000m). He was the best runner in the world--some say the best ever--but his career was derailed by Olympic boycotts (1976 and 1980) and alcoholism. He won several NCAA titles for Chaplin, but in his autobiography, Rono paints a complicated picture of their relationship.

Rono had trouble adjusting to life in the United States. According to his autobiography, he turned to drinking in part to deal with the difficult transition and pressure that came with his sudden success. He was ill-equipped to handle his financial affairs and burgeoning career, and accused Chaplin of being extremely manipulative. He feels Chaplin took advantage of him, working with meet promoters and Kenyan Athletic reps without Rono's knowledge. Rono goes so far as to say Chaplin encouraged his drinking, handing him money after workouts and telling him to "Go have fun for a while before you go to bed."

Despite this relationship, Rono never transfered away from WSU (though he threatened to) and remained at WSU with Chaplin after graduating. This certainly mutes Rono's criticisms, but his description of Chaplin remains consistent, in that he was manipulative and selfish in his dealings with Rono and his otherworldly talent.

The sport of track and field has made considerable strides in recent years. There was a time when having the Olympic B-standard in an event such as the 5,000m (13:28) would almost guarantee you a spot on the Olympic team. Now it wouldn't even put you among the Top-15 in the U.S (2007-8). Across nearly all events, in both genders, our athletes are getting more competitive. This is certainly reflected in the performance lists, if not the medal-count. They're taking advantage of post-collegiate opportunities that weren't available before. The coaching is better. The training theory is smarter.

Chaplin has had a long and distinguished career. His record at Washington State and as a sought-after meet referee and official speaks for itself. However, USATF needs to carefully consider the message it wants to send these athletes and their supporters at the beginning of this new Olympic cycle. Whether in terms of participation, performance, national attention or finances, the sport has undergone tremendous growth. All signs point to that growth continuing, but given the state of the sport's governing body, the question becomes: will it be with the support of USATF or in spite of it?

It begs the question whether John Chaplin and his decidedly authoritarian tendencies serve the best interests of the sport.

The trials give athletes an incredible experience and opportunity. They serve as a showcase for top athletes but also as preparation for young talent with potential to improve. Countless athletes have extended their careers in the face of financial difficulties, injuries, and a host of other factors. They do it for that chance to compete for a spot on the Olympic team.

Entry into the trials is no small issue, nor is it the only issue with Chaplin, as many have pointed out. He has been abrasive and dismissive. His rulings have been rash and inconsistent. Perhaps, then, when USATF convenes to discuss and evaluate its organizational structure, it should give special consideration to Chaplin's seat. And if it's true that Chaplin has "no patience for distance runners anymore," as he told Scott Douglas, why, then, should we track athletes and supporters have any more patience with him?

Post a Comment

#19	Anonymous Coward December 7, 2008 at 4:58pm check this out by Bauhs. http://www.flotrack.org/blogs/blogger/xcrun04/3038-john-chaplin reply
#18	Danny Mackey December 6, 2008 at 10:27pm Good article, I'd be interested on your opinion/follow up after the recent votes. keep it up! reply
#17	Anonymous Coward December 4, 2008 at 6:20pm Just because he was calling a person who is/was top 40 in the nation doesn't mean he was referring to them all clowns, that's a gross over-statement. The US Trials are the most democratic in the entire world, run a certain time, you in, run into top 3 you go to the Olympics no questions asked. Other countries only take top 2 and select the 3rd. The people who complain, also couldn't purpose a better qualifying system for American athletes. The experience can come from other races if they wish go to Europe. There's no problem with those runners protesting/appealing, but once they go to protest/appeals, it's in a committee hands, people talk as if Chaplin is a dictator, he is a leader. This single-out of Chaplin is out of line and frankly coming from the peanut gallery. Arm-chair QB's is all I've heard complain about the system. Ask athletes like AJ Acosta, Kyle King, and other athletes who advanced at the trials if Chaplin is/was a bad ambassador to the sport? Let's let the dust settle (USATF convention) ad we'll see what happens. They USATF is doing a great job in recognizing threats and evaluating, things can only improve. reply
#16	Anonymous Coward December 4, 2008 at 2:09pm Ben, thanks for the feedback. Please send us an update after the new structure is finalized. Looking forward to your take on things. reply
#15	Tristan Willey December 4, 2008 at 12:54pm What about beefing up American running as a whole? What about placing that young runner in there, the young runner who will eventually be the successful older and experienced runner, and letting him gain this experience? I fail to see how it hurts the top runners by having these guys who will eventually be top runners in the race. It's not like they are poor runners, out of the group who were kept out of the 10k there were multiple all-americans, and they were all out by fractions of seconds. As for a bold leader... I think he should be attempting to inspire the main body of american running rather than coddling the top few. I fail to see how you can not aid your top runners and invest in your future with the runners coming up behind them, at the same time. Calling runners in the top 40 of our country "clowns" seems an ineffective method of boosting American running. reply
#14	Anonymous Coward December 4, 2008 at 12:42pm The trials are about sending the best possible team to the Olympics, and putting those runners in danger (distance running) by letting D-2 and provisional D-1 runners into the race just because they missed it by so close is just asking for trouble. The trials get their glory and prestige by the athletes that are allowed to participate, when you water it down and let people who just missed it and make a fuss in, then it takes away from the "A" standard participants. Just because someone qualifies and decides not to run (similar to Galen Rupp) in an event (5k finals) doesn't mean they can automatically replace them with the next best performer. If I recall correctly Rupp ran the 5k, qualified for finals and didn't run it. He's not replaced, he did not withdraw from the race, he simply just no-showed. So if you want beef, go after Rupp for bumping someone out of finals when he has no intention of running the 5k. It takes a serious leader, and what Chaplin said is unusually to hear from a high-placing individual, but it's the truth. reply
#13	Anonymous Coward December 4, 2008 at 11:22am I think that everybody DOES understand that if you want to get into the trials, that you have to run the AUTO. However, for USA T&F;to succeed, there has to be some opportunities given to the younger guys, and to those who are very really close to getting in but just missed it by hundredths or whatever. I mean, the argument is always "Well, we should give it to those guys (like goucher) because they've been there before and have a better shot." While the guys that don't get in just sit on the sideline and lose that experience they could have gained by running. I also think that Chaplin's quote is pure BS. "The Olympic trials are not a goddamn All-Comers meet," going on to say, "Those clowns in the bottom half of the 10,000 have no chance in god's green earth of making the Olympic team." REALLY? Does he really think that people with the provisional standard reduce the meet to an All-Comers Status? I wonder if he knows that Christian Smith was the LAST person to get into the 800m at the Trials, and that he only had the provisional mark up until the end of the 800m Final. reply
#12	Anonymous Coward December 3, 2008 at 8:35pm I think people need to understand what provisional qualifying standards, simply provisional, not automatic. You want to be in the Trials or big time meets, get the auto time, throw, jump and it won't be a debate, no matter whom makes final decision. 18 months for a qualifying window is the longest of any known qualifying tme for track & field. Would you like the provisional guys getting into the way of Rupp, Abe, and others in the 10k only to get lapped twice? I'm sure if you look at the trials this year you'll notice the amount of athletes who were advanced in rounds due to protest/appeals (AJ Acosta, Kyle King, and half of the women 800m runners). IAAF would of just said "tough luck, that's track" but Chaplin and associates allowed runners to move on. As far as Goucher, he had a legit medical injury that prevented him from qualifying for the 10k automatically and was a legit contender in the 10k 3rd spot so the complaining about from the D-2 guys about not getting in needs to silence because Goucher has a resume few can match. The trials are not a participants dream, it's a stepping stone, too many second tier athletes believe it's their dream, well go play poke in the Main Event if you want to rub elbows with the Gouchers, Rupps, and Lagats, because in Track & Field you got to earn it. I think it's pathetic that ths columnist brought the Rono arguement into the story because it has nothing to do with the structure of the USATF and Chaplin's credibility speaks for itself, the peanut gallery can stay on the blogs, because you'll never think of a better system or find a better leader. reply
#11	Ben Raphelson December 3, 2008 at 5:43pm Purpose- Thanks for the comment. My intent was to focus on one aspect of these larger organizational problems in order to hopefully create awareness and add a dimension to the discussion. For the big picture, I recommend the series at http://www.thefinalsprint.com. they've devoted considerable time and effort, conducting their own interviews and research. The meeting agenda and proposed reforms are also available on http://www.usatf.org. reply
#10	Anonymous Coward December 3, 2008 at 4:06pm Scroll down to bottom and contact Flosupport directly. Alll your problems will be solved! reply
#9	Anonymous Coward December 3, 2008 at 4:03pm Was your purpose to focus on the total reorganization or to zero in on one person you want out of his seat? It seems like your article could have been a bit loftier and maybe even more interesting if you had refrained from so much attention to one person and your focused gripes---even though they be understandable gripes---with that one person from the governing body of USATF. reply
#8	Anonymous Coward December 3, 2008 at 1:10pm the same thing is happening to me - the pics on main page stopping on the second one reply
#7	Cara Hawkins December 3, 2008 at 12:40pm Very interesting article, I really hope USATF can sort everything out.. reply
#6	Jones Abraham December 3, 2008 at 12:34pm i remember this controversy from the trials (can't see the video but audio is there). kyle king at zap fitness found out last minute that he got into a race. its crazy that this can happen to the athletes. it would be interesting to know more of how this system works Kyle King at the Olympic Trials - http://www.flotrack.org/videos/coverage/view_video/234031/68978-kyle-king reply
#5	Anonymous Coward December 3, 2008 at 12:17pm good stuff, very insightful. i hope usatf can get things straightened out reply
#4	Tristan Willey December 3, 2008 at 12:12pm Great article. After dealing with a lot of the above mentioned instances, it was extremely apparent that it was the whim of one person, Chaplin, controlling the entire process. How are the young runners supposed to progress if they are never given a chance to run in highly competitive meets? If they can make the marks, they should be there. I can't believe we allow Chaplin to retain any significance in USATF decision making. reply
#3	Max Group December 3, 2008 at 11:59am Very interesting article. I wonder how much truth there is to what Rono said about Chaplin. reply
#2	Ryan From Flotrack December 3, 2008 at 11:30am not sure what you mean? if you are talking about the pics on the front page, they are scrolling thru all for me reply
#1	Anonymous Coward December 3, 2008 at 11:14am Why is the Flash Pictures messed up.. It never gets past the 2nd photo and it just gets stuck there.. I can never see the rest of the photos. reply