![]() |
|
|
|||
Regardless, the point is the NGB is a designation given by the national Olympic committee. They designate the sport association that they want to be the official body for that sport within that country. In the USA, that authority is delegated to the USOC by the Congress. For softball, the USOC has designated ASA. It's not like little Harry Reid or pompous Nancy Pelosi need to actually be involved, although if they thought there was a vote in it, I'm sure they would be.
__________________
Tom |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
![]()
__________________
Tom |
|
|||
Quote:
![]()
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
|||
Not YOUR in particular, but your (generic) argument in general as I've already seen this discussed by folk who believe the Olympics are the Olympics and if you are not on the venue, you are not an Olympic Sport.
Quote:
What facts am I ignoring? What does the Act mean by "any sport which is included on the program of the Olympic Games"? Is softball still an Olympic sport even though it's not in the Games? Where can one gain this knowledge?[/quote] ...but the answer is the same. A sport is an Olympic sport as long as the USOC says it is so and as long as the ISF is supporting the sport internationally, I don't believe it is going to be dropped as there are too many membership countries. Or the USOC, Don P. and Ron R. are just lying to us. To be honest, I don't know if it is even worth the issue any longer. The Olympics has just been nothing, but a political volleyball for the past three decades or so and, IMO, has lost some of their luster. Then again, I am a cynic. ![]()
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|