The former ski president reacted with anger and surprise when he read the statements Drut recently made to the French press. There, the IOC member argued that athletes should not be punished because of the stupidity of their political leaders. Drut’s statement comes in the wake of French President Emmanuel Macron recently warning against including athletes from Russia and Belarus in the Olympics again. “What Emmanuel Macron thinks and what Anne Hidalgo (Mayor of Paris) thinks is their problem [ …] France organizes the Olympic Games on behalf of the IOC. It is still the IOC that continues to be the head of the organization and participation,” said the French member of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), Guy Drut, to France Info. Erik Røste, board member of the International Ski and Snowboard Federation (FIS), likes it very badly. “Being so fucking provoked by the French IOC member (excuse the expression). What does the IOC think they are?”, asked Røste in a tweet on Saturday. PARIS OLYMPICS 2024: Guy Drut (second from left) together with, among others, Paris’ mayor Anne Hidalgo in the receipt. Photo: PASCAL LE SEGRETAIN / Afp – Stormannsgalne On Saturday afternoon, Røste was on the plane home from the World Cup in alpine skiing, but to news he explains what he thinks about Drut’s statements. – This provokes me and it is arrogant. The IOC cannot rise above and think that sport lives in its own world. The whole world, at least the western world, is now standing up for Ukraine and the Ukrainian people against the brutal and completely senseless attack. Then the IOC/the sport cannot say that no one other than the sport has a vote. Of course they have, writes Røste in a text message to news. JOURNALIST AND COMMENTATOR: Andreas Selliaas Photo: Håkon Mosvold Larsen / NTB scanpix Røste is supported by Andreas Selliaas, journalist and commentator at idrettspolitikk.no. – I agree. It shows how arrogant the IOC is. I have some reservations about the circulation of the quote, but if they are true, it is a good example of the arrogance of an IOC member, he says to news. Hans Erik Næss, associate professor in sports management at Kristiania University College, agrees: – Drut evidence where bigoted individuals in the IOC have been. When they think that the IOC is more important than ending a war, they have lost touch with reality. It is good that he criticizes the stupidity of the political leaders of the athletes, but to believe that sport and politics can be separated in Russia is incredibly naive, he wrote to news. EXPERT IN SPORTS MANAGEMENT: Hans Erik Næss Photo: Haakon Dueland / Høyskolen Kristiania Nordic and European front against the IOC There has been a lot of writing and great debate recently after the IOC stated that a majority of the athletes wanted Russian and Belarusian athletes back in the Olympic heat . IOC President Thomas Bach has also warned against government interference in sport and has clearly advocated allowing all athletes, regardless of nationality, to participate in the Olympics. In a joint statement on 7 February, the Nordic countries followed the Baltic countries and Poland, and wrote that it is unacceptable for Russian and Belarusian participation in sports as long as the war in Ukraine continues. On Friday, the EU Parliament also adopted the resolution “One year of Russia’s invasion and war of aggression against Ukraine”, in which they directed sharp criticism at the IOC. The EU encourages the member states and the international community to exert pressure on the IOC and wants to reverse the position, which they call “A fool for international sport”. – A closed process Selliaas explains that the French initially want as many as possible for the Olympics on home soil and that IOC representatives have no choice about their position. – They are obliged to speak for the IOC and promote the so-called Olympic values. If you go against – say something else, you will not be popular internally and you will create trouble for yourself, says Selliaas. Formally speaking, it is the IOC and the sport that decide who will be involved and what criteria will apply, and not the politicians. – But it is not forbidden to listen to what politicians say and to consider the seriousness of what is happening in Ukraine, says Seillaas and gives an example: – When it comes to the boycott debate, for example, the Trettebergstuen cannot order Norway to boycott. It is the sport that must make that decision. But the debate shows how serious the situation is when everyone gets involved. Drut’s statements only show that he and the IOC live in a world of their own and it is not the first time we have witnessed this, believes the man behind irdtdspolitikk.no. WANT TO HAVE THE MOST POSSIBLE FOR THE OLYMPICS: Guy Drut (TV) together with IOC President Thomas Bach and Tony Estanguet, head of the Paris 2024 Olympics. Photo: PHILIPPE WOJAZER / Reuters He is also calling for greater openness about the debates internally in the IOC. – We have also not received the right arguments for and against Russian and Belarusian participation in the Olympics, but only the conclusions. What speaks for, what speaks against? Who is for and who is against internally in the IOC? It has been a closed process and they act arrogantly. news has presented the above criticism to the IOC, which has not responded at the time of writing. Double-minded Zohreh Abdollahkhani, doctoral student in sports and gender equality at the University of Southeast Norway and former ice climber, believes the IOC’s openness is lacking. – In what area is the IOC transparent? The IOC always justifies its decisions with political neutrality. So it naturally makes sense that they stick to that explanation now too. The IOC must be much more transparent, not only in this matter, but in general, They should not hide behind this false neutrality, as they always do, says Abdollahkhani to news. She nevertheless agrees with the IOC that the athletes should not be punished: – As a former athlete, I believe that there are no athletes who should be deprived of the opportunity to participate because of headless governments. Abdollahkhani also questions the double standards in the debate. – Have athletes from the USA, Great Britain and other countries involved in the war in Iraq ever suffered any consequences? There are many countries in the world where their powers are guilty of human rights violations outside (such as Russia) or inside (such as Iran) their national borders. I see no advantages in banning athletes from these countries, especially when you ban some countries but not others. Among other things, the IOC has indicated that the UN believes they are violating human rights by excluding Russian and Belarusian athletes. Seillaas, on the other hand, is skeptical about how the IOC should define neutral athletes. – Talking about neutral athletes is just nonsense and is a construction that the IOC has come up with. Which criteria should apply? We have not been told that. And once you release athletes from Russia or Belarus, it will be used politically in Russia. That’s what happened after the Olympics in Beijing, just before the war, he says and adds: – The IOC’s attitudes also show a contempt for Ukrainians who, in theory, could fight against someone they are at war with, if they knew at all stands for competition. Many Ukrainian athletes are fighting as soldiers and not as athletes right now.
ttn-69
– Getting damn provoked – news Sport – Sports news, results and broadcasting schedule
