The Facebook post is reproduced with permission from Jacob Boutera: Then it’s finally over. I was qualified for the Olympics in Paris 2024 through the international qualification criteria of World Athletics and the IOC. After the lists were updated today, July 7, for the last time, I would be number 35 out of 36 in the 3000m hurdles. The reason why I cannot be found on the participant list is that Norway does not want to send me. Norway and the Olympiatoppen chose to make their final draw on Wednesday 3 July. This is despite the fact that it is written in black and white in the athletics association’s selection criteria that the selection will take place on 8 July. The last few days have been a nightmare, and I think it is important that people gain insight into what has actually been going on. I know that telling about this process will not get me to run in the Olympics. I also know that it will make me, if possible, even more unpopular with the Norwegian Athletics Federation and the Olympic summit. Nevertheless, it can hopefully contribute to future athletes being treated in a better way, and allowed to participate in the championships for which they are qualified. If so, it’s worth it for me. I know this is a long post, but it’s impossible to give the right picture of this situation without using a lot of words. I hope as many of you as possible take the time to read. It is also important to me that you read the timeline first, so that you get a correct background and basis for the criticism that follows. There are mainly two conditions that I react to. The first is that I believe I am exposed to completely unreasonable discrimination. There is no consistent use of the top 12 criterion in the selection made on 3 July. Not within athletics, but also not across the various branches which are also, at least on paper, subject to the same criteria that I have been assessed on. There are a number of examples of Norwegian athletes ranked lower than me who have been selected for the Olympics, and they are lucky. They are qualified, and definitely deserve to participate. It is the inconsistent and arbitrary withdrawal practices that I am reacting to. The second thing I react to is the way you as a performer and human being are treated in such a process. I could also write a long post about why I think a criterion of probability for the top 12 should be removed. Fortunately, this debate is raging in earnest in Sweden, where my colleagues also have their Olympic dreams crushed. However, this is a completely separate debate, and I choose to leave it alone for the time being. Having said that, I hope that debate also spreads across the Swedish border as soon as possible. On Monday morning, I contacted sports director Erlend Slokvik at the Norwegian Athletics Federation. Over the weekend I had followed the national championships around the world. Based on the results of my competitors, I had calculated that I was slightly outside the ranking for the Olympics. But due to the fact that several runners ahead of me on the list were not going to be selected for various reasons, I knew that there was a good chance that by the selection deadline of July 8 I would be within the 36 places that qualify for participation in the Olympics . I explained this to Slokvik, and he replied that he was going to nominate me and a few other athletes who also had opportunities to move up the ranking in their respective exercises. On Wednesday morning, I get a message from Slokvik saying that the OLT today, Wednesday 3 July, will make its final selection in athletics, and that they will only select athletes who are in the ranking published yesterday, Tuesday 2 July. This message surprises me, and I am therefore calling Slokvik to clarify what has happened. I would like to point out that the withdrawal date is 8 July, and that the finished lists from World Athletics will not be available until 7 July. He explains that the Olympiatoppen has decided to change this date, and that this led to only those who were in the ranking as of 3 July being taken out. He also explains that the date on the athletics association’s website is wrong, and should have been changed to 3 July. I have received confirmation of this from the administration of the Swedish Athletics Federation that no notification has ever been given. Communications advisor Morten Olsen is the one who updates the websites at friidrett.no on a daily basis and he says he has never heard that it has been discussed to change the date for withdrawal, and the withdrawal date is set for 8 July precisely because it relates to World Athletics its deadline. In the conversation, Slokvik says that there has been a kind of “negotiation” with Olympiatoppen, and that they “had to draw a line somewhere”. Furthermore, I ask him if I would have been taken out if I was also in the ranking as of 3 July. He answers this in the affirmative, and points out that all the athletes who were inside on 3 July have been taken out. This makes me very confused as this is not communicated anywhere as a withdrawal criterion. I decide to send an inquiry to Tore Øvrebø, who is the top sports manager at Olympiatoppen. Fortunately, he answers quickly, but gives a completely different reason for the withdrawal than Slokvik. Øvrebø replies that I do not meet the main criterion for withdrawal, which is “documented probability of being able to achieve a position among the 12 best”. Øvrebø also copies Slokvik, so when I call Slokvik back shortly after receiving the answer, he has also received the reasoning. Slokvik states that he thinks it is a strange answer from Øvrebø, and that it was not the top 12 criterion that was used as justification in their selection meetings. He also agrees that if there was a criterion of “documented probability of top 12” as a basis, the selection would look completely different. I am therefore sending a new inquiry to Øvrebø in which I mainly object that: 1) The reasons he gives do not agree with the reasons I have received from NFIF. 2) If an assessment of the probability of the top 12 has been made, this has been made on an incorrect basis as the final list of participants will not be available until 7 July. How can my chances for the top 12 be assessed before they know which participants I may be running against? 3) In the selection on 3 July, athletes were selected who are ranked lower than what I will be as of 7 July. Why does the requirement of top 12 not apply to all athletes? Since none of my objections are answered by Øvrebø, nor does he give any answers to the media about the matter, I therefore choose to contact Hanne Haugland, who is OLT coach for athletics at the Olympiatoppen. After several missed calls, she finally answers my text message. She replies that the reason is the one I got from Tore. I ask her the same follow-up questions, but get no answer. Later that day, I was contacted by the head of the Top Sports Committee in NFIF, Hanne Lyngstad, and I presented my experience of the case. She should contact Hanne Haugland and encourage her to contact me to give a more thorough explanation. The answer Lyngstad got was that Hanne Haugland did not want to give me any further reasons, or have a dialogue about this. Tore Øvrebø has not said much to the media apart from repeating to the point of boredom that he does not comment on single withdrawals, and that I do not meet the criterion of a documented probability of top 12. I can understand that he does not want to comment on single withdrawals in the media, but that he can’t have a factual discussion with me where he justifies his withdrawal and answers relevant questions, I don’t understand. Øvrebø has nevertheless made a few statements to the media, and these statements I think there are good reasons to address. In his answer to news on 4 July, Øvrebø states, among other things, that “the withdrawals are the result of an extensive dialogue between the Olympiatoppen and the individual special association”. I am very curious as to how extensive that dialogue may have been all the time the Olympic summit and the special association (athletics association) give me two different reasons why I have not been selected, and refer to two different selection dates. It is possible that the dialogue has been extensive, but in any case it has not been good and clear. The two other comments from Øvrebø to news on the same day seem to me to clearly show a fundamental lack of respect for performers and people in general. First, he states that it is about “athletes who are completely borderline to be able to get any benefit from participating in the Olympics, as we understand the Olympics here in Norway”. Tore Øvrebø has no qualifications whatsoever to decide what benefit I would get from participating in the Olympics. From a purely sporting point of view, I would undoubtedly have benefited enormously from taking part in the biggest thing you can take part in as an athlete. There are countless examples of athletes who have greatly benefited from participating in the Olympics without placing in the top 12. Participating in an Olympics will provide experience, learning and, not least, enormous motivation to continue developing so that if four years can hopefully use all of that to achieve a top-12 finish. As far as I know, it has also not been read out and agreed that we in Norway see the Olympics as a competition where we only want athletes who have a documented probability of making the top 12, as Øvrebø claims. Of course, we Norwegians are concerned with medals and good positions, but I am convinced that most Norwegians see the Olympics as something bigger than that. The Olympics is about representing your country with pride. The Olympics are about inspiring a new generation of athletes to chase their dreams. The Olympics is about bringing out different stories that show children and young people that it is possible to get there if you don’t give up. It is about showing that you can become an Olympic athlete even if you do not start your career until you are 20 years old. It is about showing that you cannot be stopped by chronic illness and long injury breaks. It’s about giving your family a hug in the stands and saying “we did it”, even if you were unlucky enough to be number 13 and shame an entire sports nation and Tore Øvrebø. There is also no getting away from the fact that there is a large financial benefit from participating in the Olympics. A dividend in the form of reaching the target you have sold to all your sponsors. It is about getting sponsorship agreements renewed, and being able to continue the investment for four more years in the pursuit of even better performances. There is no doubt that an Olympic participation can be the difference between whether an athlete can continue his sports career or not. The third and last statement to Øvrebø that I believe is important to focus on was also given to news on 4 July. When asked if he thinks some athletes are disappointed by the draw, he answers, among other things, the following: “If they are disappointed because they haven’t achieved the development they wanted, then I have a lot of sympathy for that”. In my eyes, this is an extremely condescending way to talk about athletes who have worked hard, and actually achieved the international criteria for participation on the biggest stage of them all. On Olympiatoppen’s website it is stated that Tore Øvrebø’s area of responsibility is management, and I wonder if the people out there see this statement as an example of good management. I can at least guarantee you, Tore, that I am not disappointed with my own development. On the contrary, I am very proud that I qualified for the Olympics. What I am incredibly disappointed about, however, is that you refuse me to participate. Speaking of disappointment, I am also disappointed that no one in NFIF has wanted to assist me in this process to establish a dialogue with the Olympic Summit. What makes it disappointing is that they themselves have said that they believe I am discriminated against, and that the top 12 requirement is not used consistently in the selection. Several key people in NFIF have contacted me in recent days and shown their support, but there is clearly no will to stand up for their own athletes who experience injustice. Therefore, this became a battle I had to fight against Olympiatoppen alone, and thus it also became a battle I could never win all the time no one from Olympiatoppen wanted to discuss the matter with me. In August, I will be watching thousands of athletes fulfill their Olympic dreams. Very few of them will leave with a top 12 position, but they will still leave Paris with a huge profit. Even if right now it feels pointless to continue, I know that I will find the motivation to keep going. On the other hand, I don’t know if it will be possible to invest in the way required to qualify for the Olympics in 2028. And what is the point of qualifying for the Olympics in 2028 if one is refused by one’s own country to participate? “If they’ve qualified, let them compete. Let them represent their flag with pride. Let them inspire” – Chris Cooper.
ttn-69
– Lack of respect for people – news Sport – Sports news, results and broadcasting schedule
