Addendum to the Discussion of New Teams at the Utah Olympic Oval
Disclaimer: The views expressed here do not reflect those of the High 5 Speedskating Team administration. They are my own personal views as a skater and as an observer of speedskating politics.
One point that I failed to bring up the last time I talked about the conflict between the High 5 Speedskating Team and the Utah Olympic Oval is the existence of the Oval's FAST program as a subsidized entity. The question that comes up is whether it is appropriate, or even legal, for the Utah Athletic Foundation to subsidize FAST, while there exists a competing, licensed business that also offers high performance speedskating training. The FAST program has been at the Oval since 2001. Has the situation changed now that High 5 exists and is licensed in the state of Utah? Is it still, or has it ever been, the prerogative of the UAF to provide and subsidize its own high performance speedskating team, to the exclusion of supporting any other teams?
Another question that comes up is whether this is really the best way to promote the sport of speedskating in Salt Lake City. It would seem to me that encouraging more teams and more options might lead to speedskating being more self-supporting in the future. Maybe a better solution would be to fund ice and facility fees for all licensed, registered teams, rather than subsidizing salaries for one or two coaches.
One particular instance of discrimination that occurred within the FAST program last year really bothers me. Two speedskaters, one male and one female, applied for membership in FAST and were both rejected before the program had been filled. The reason why these two athletes were not allowed to join the FAST program is that one skater, who will remain unnamed (but who was very valuable to the team), convinced the Oval coaches and administration not to accept these particular athletes because he did not like them and refused to train with them.
The fact that this particular athlete had enough "pull" with his coach to make this decision go through does not make it right. Is the UAF in a position to subsidize a program that practices discrimination against individuals in this manner? The skater who made his coach reject two specific athletes is not in a position to dictate whom the UAF's subsidized program can accept or reject! If this person wants to have this kind of say in the membership of his team, then HE BETTER GO OUT AND FIND HIS OWN SPONSORS AND START HIS OWN PROFESSIONAL TEAM. Otherwise, he is way out of line.
Because no other teams existed at the Oval besides FAST and the various US Speedskating groups, the two skaters rejected by FAST were left with very limited options. The female skater went with her only USS option, where she was lumped in with skaters far below her own level. The male skater ended up hiring a coach who lived out of town, didn't show up for months at a time, and failed to attend any of the major competitions.
This year, with the formation of the High 5 team, at least there is another option besides FAST and USS. However, as the situation currently stands, if someone is rejected by FAST and goes with High 5, then they must pay twice as much money for coaching and facility fees. How is this right?
Disclaimer: The views expressed here do not reflect those of the High 5 Speedskating Team administration. They are my own personal views as a skater and as an observer of speedskating politics.
One point that I failed to bring up the last time I talked about the conflict between the High 5 Speedskating Team and the Utah Olympic Oval is the existence of the Oval's FAST program as a subsidized entity. The question that comes up is whether it is appropriate, or even legal, for the Utah Athletic Foundation to subsidize FAST, while there exists a competing, licensed business that also offers high performance speedskating training. The FAST program has been at the Oval since 2001. Has the situation changed now that High 5 exists and is licensed in the state of Utah? Is it still, or has it ever been, the prerogative of the UAF to provide and subsidize its own high performance speedskating team, to the exclusion of supporting any other teams?
Another question that comes up is whether this is really the best way to promote the sport of speedskating in Salt Lake City. It would seem to me that encouraging more teams and more options might lead to speedskating being more self-supporting in the future. Maybe a better solution would be to fund ice and facility fees for all licensed, registered teams, rather than subsidizing salaries for one or two coaches.
One particular instance of discrimination that occurred within the FAST program last year really bothers me. Two speedskaters, one male and one female, applied for membership in FAST and were both rejected before the program had been filled. The reason why these two athletes were not allowed to join the FAST program is that one skater, who will remain unnamed (but who was very valuable to the team), convinced the Oval coaches and administration not to accept these particular athletes because he did not like them and refused to train with them.
The fact that this particular athlete had enough "pull" with his coach to make this decision go through does not make it right. Is the UAF in a position to subsidize a program that practices discrimination against individuals in this manner? The skater who made his coach reject two specific athletes is not in a position to dictate whom the UAF's subsidized program can accept or reject! If this person wants to have this kind of say in the membership of his team, then HE BETTER GO OUT AND FIND HIS OWN SPONSORS AND START HIS OWN PROFESSIONAL TEAM. Otherwise, he is way out of line.
Because no other teams existed at the Oval besides FAST and the various US Speedskating groups, the two skaters rejected by FAST were left with very limited options. The female skater went with her only USS option, where she was lumped in with skaters far below her own level. The male skater ended up hiring a coach who lived out of town, didn't show up for months at a time, and failed to attend any of the major competitions.
This year, with the formation of the High 5 team, at least there is another option besides FAST and USS. However, as the situation currently stands, if someone is rejected by FAST and goes with High 5, then they must pay twice as much money for coaching and facility fees. How is this right?
posted by Eva at 6:31 PM
<< Home