Sydney: The Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) have defended against mounting criticism over the way they selected the team for the Sydney Games starting next month.
With just weeks to go before the opening ceremony on September 15, the AOC found themselves in the embarrassing position of being unable to finalise their 620-strong squad because of a series of drawn out legal battles.
The International Olympic Committee's (IOC) deadline for countries to submit their national teams is on Friday, even though a number of sports do not require countries to provide their final entry lists until just before the opening ceremony.
AOC spokesman Mike Tancred said Australia would not be ready by Friday and would have to nominate an expanded team, including the names of athletes who had appealed against their omission.
They would then trim the team down as each of the appeals is decided. "We will have to ask the IOC to let us do that but it's happened many times before," Mike Tancred said. "We're going to nominate everyone who has already been selected as well as everyone who has appealed. It's the only fair way."
The IOC's man in charge of the Sydney Games, Belgian Jacques Rogge, has criticised Australia's failure to sort out their team by now and refused to say whether they would be allowed to pick a bigger team. Australian newspapers have described the selection process as "chaotic" and in "turmoil".
But Australia's top Olympic official, IOC vice-president Kevan Gosper, has defended the system and said he believes the IOC will permit the late changes. "The IOC has always made allowances for exceptional circumstances to allow athletes who qualify very late to compete," Gosper said.
On the eve of the deadline, 13 Australians from eight sports were still waiting to learn whether their appeals to be included in the Olympic team had been successful. In the last six months, a total of 48 appeals, involving 18 of the 28 Olympic sports, have been lodged. So far, only one case has been successful.
Competition to make the Australian team has been unusually intense. In the more extreme examples, two rival cyclists were involved in a punch-up while two middle-distance runners almost came to blows at last weekend's athletic trials.
While unhappy at the record level of appeals and the manner in which many of them have been drawn out, the AOC say it not only supports the existing system but has also actively encouraged athletes to appeal if they were unhappy at missing out.
"Everyone wants to compete at their home Olympics and it's only fair that anyone who felt aggrieved at missing out should be given the chance to appeal," Tancred said. "They've got to be given a fair go, that's the Australian way, and we've encouraged them to appeal if they believed they didn't get a fair go."
The AOC system provides athletes with three avenues of appeal. The first is a review by the individual sport. If that fails, they can take their case to an independent appeals panel before finally appealing to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) which has the final say.
The system has already been backed by a Sydney court after one disgruntled athlete went to the NSW Appeals Court to challenge the authority of the CAS only to be told the court had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
(c) Reuters Limited. Click here for Restrictions
With just weeks to go before the opening ceremony on September 15, the AOC found themselves in the embarrassing position of being unable to finalise their 620-strong squad because of a series of drawn out legal battles.
The International Olympic Committee's (IOC) deadline for countries to submit their national teams is on Friday, even though a number of sports do not require countries to provide their final entry lists until just before the opening ceremony.
AOC spokesman Mike Tancred said Australia would not be ready by Friday and would have to nominate an expanded team, including the names of athletes who had appealed against their omission.
They would then trim the team down as each of the appeals is decided. "We will have to ask the IOC to let us do that but it's happened many times before," Mike Tancred said. "We're going to nominate everyone who has already been selected as well as everyone who has appealed. It's the only fair way."
The IOC's man in charge of the Sydney Games, Belgian Jacques Rogge, has criticised Australia's failure to sort out their team by now and refused to say whether they would be allowed to pick a bigger team. Australian newspapers have described the selection process as "chaotic" and in "turmoil".
But Australia's top Olympic official, IOC vice-president Kevan Gosper, has defended the system and said he believes the IOC will permit the late changes. "The IOC has always made allowances for exceptional circumstances to allow athletes who qualify very late to compete," Gosper said.
On the eve of the deadline, 13 Australians from eight sports were still waiting to learn whether their appeals to be included in the Olympic team had been successful. In the last six months, a total of 48 appeals, involving 18 of the 28 Olympic sports, have been lodged. So far, only one case has been successful.
Competition to make the Australian team has been unusually intense. In the more extreme examples, two rival cyclists were involved in a punch-up while two middle-distance runners almost came to blows at last weekend's athletic trials.
While unhappy at the record level of appeals and the manner in which many of them have been drawn out, the AOC say it not only supports the existing system but has also actively encouraged athletes to appeal if they were unhappy at missing out.
"Everyone wants to compete at their home Olympics and it's only fair that anyone who felt aggrieved at missing out should be given the chance to appeal," Tancred said. "They've got to be given a fair go, that's the Australian way, and we've encouraged them to appeal if they believed they didn't get a fair go."
The AOC system provides athletes with three avenues of appeal. The first is a review by the individual sport. If that fails, they can take their case to an independent appeals panel before finally appealing to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) which has the final say.
The system has already been backed by a Sydney court after one disgruntled athlete went to the NSW Appeals Court to challenge the authority of the CAS only to be told the court had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
(c) Reuters Limited. Click here for Restrictions
Oneindia Login