IAAF Update - Country transfer freeze, Russia ban upheld

Myles Splitz

On the surface majority of these look to be positive steps (though still an awful lot to be done)

https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/transfer-allegiance-council-meeting-russia

Sacksian

Myles Splitz wrote: »

On the surface majority of these look to be positive steps (though still an awful lot to be done)

https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/transfer-allegiance-council-meeting-russia

I think it's a good move to act so decisively. It's a completely different situation to Turkey's (I think it's a 5-year eligibility process), but the US are likely to have at least 4 Kenyan-born athletes in their men's team for worlds xc this year.

RayCun

Sacksian wrote: »

I think it's a good move to act so decisively. It's a completely different situation to Turkey's (I think it's a 5-year eligibility process), but the US are likely to have at least 4 Kenyan-born athletes in their men's team for worlds xc this year.

Five year naturalization process unless they join the army, in which case they are naturalized as soon as they finish basic training.
http://www.runnersworld.com/olympics/army-puts-athletes-on-the-fast-track-to-citizenship-and-the-olympics

If the US can do that, Turkey could do it too...

Sacksian

RayCun wrote: »

Five year naturalization process unless they join the army, in which case they are naturalized as soon as they finish basic training.
http://www.runnersworld.com/olympics/army-puts-athletes-on-the-fast-track-to-citizenship-and-the-olympics

If the US can do that, Turkey could do it too...

Ah, I didn't know that. It's potentially open to abuse, but I think that a lot of those guys in the army were also in college in the US, so they've probably been there 6-7 years or more.

Myles Splitz

RayCun wrote: »

Five year naturalization process unless they join the army, in which case they are naturalized as soon as they finish basic training.
http://www.runnersworld.com/olympics/army-puts-athletes-on-the-fast-track-to-citizenship-and-the-olympics

If the US can do that, Turkey could do it too...

That 5 years does not include the time they spend on a student visa though AFAIK.

Just for clarification on these US athletes

All 4 of these athletes attended college in the US since 2010/2011 before joining the army there, similar enough to the likes of Bernard Lagat and Sally Kipyego.

RayCun

I agree, in the case of those athletes, they've all been in the US for years anyway. But the process can be as fast as
get green card -> join army -> complete basic training -> become citizen and compete for US
which is a matter of months

Oiriallach

I think this change could have significant implications closer to home. My understanding is that any athletes selected to represent Ireland in a major international competition for the first time this year will have to comply with IAAF Rule 5.2(a) (as Rule 5.2(b) has now been revoked). This means any such athlete will have to be "a Citizen of the Country (or territory) by virtue of having been born or by virtue of having a parent or grandparent born in the Country (or territory)". My understanding is also that the country of "Ireland" in the eyes of the IAAF is equivalent to the Republic of Ireland rather than to the island of Ireland.

So it looks like Athletics Ireland will not be able to select previously uncapped athletes from Northern Ireland, or athletes who have moved to Ireland having been born elsewhere and have since acquired Irish citizenship (unless any such athletes have a parent or grandparent who was born in the Republic of Ireland).

These changes may only be temporary as the IAAF are seeking to introduce new rules - they are seeking proposals regarding new rules from a working group by the end of 2017.

robinph

RayCun wrote: »

I agree, in the case of those athletes, they've all been in the US for years anyway. But the process can be as fast as
get green card -> join army -> complete basic training -> become citizen and compete for US
which is a matter of months

That is still more of an association with the host country than any of the Kenyans have with Turkey who probably don't even know where it is on a map.

They have also sold their life to the army at that stage so the host country owns them for the duration.

El Caballo

Oiriallach wrote: »

I think this change could have significant implications closer to home. My understanding is that any athletes selected to represent Ireland in a major international competition for the first time this year will have to comply with IAAF Rule 5.2(a) (as Rule 5.2(b) has now been revoked). This means any such athlete will have to be "a Citizen of the Country (or territory) by virtue of having been born or by virtue of having a parent or grandparent born in the Country (or territory)". My understanding is also that the country of "Ireland" in the eyes of the IAAF is equivalent to the Republic of Ireland rather than to the island of Ireland.

So it looks like Athletics Ireland will not be able to select previously uncapped athletes from Northern Ireland, or athletes who have moved to Ireland having been born elsewhere and have since acquired Irish citizenship (unless any such athletes have a parent or grandparent who was born in the Republic of Ireland).

These changes may only be temporary as the IAAF are seeking to introduce new rules - they are seeking proposals regarding new rules from a working group by the end of 2017.

Any person born in Nothern Ireland is entitled to an Irish citizenship by birthright just as they are to the UK under the good Friday agreement. I think you may be taking the rule born literally instead of citizen by birthright but I could be wrong as the whole process is a bit diluted and not very straightforward. This is not something I see the IAAF challenging tbh as it's messy at the best of times and they usually respect political borders like this.

There will be some sh*tstorm if that's not the case though.

Murph_D

I suppose it depends on how they define "country".

robinph

I can't see them wanting to get involved in the NI/IRL/GB issues. They would only have to do anything about it if there is another similar setup elsewhere and athletes from there kick up an issue about it. The IAAF will just ignore it and not want to attempt to write anything down officially mentioning it.

Oiriallach

Besides the potential issue for athletes from Northern Ireland, I reckon that these rule changes mean that the likes of Mo Farah would not be allowed to represent GBR. It won't impact on Mo himself as he has already represented GBR, but will effect previously uncapped athletes with a similar background. I think there have been a few athletes representing IRL in recent years who would not have been eligible to so so under the new rules. I'm talking about naturalised Irish citizens who have been living in the Republic of Ireland for several years.

RayCun

Oiriallach wrote: »

Besides the potential issue for athletes from Northern Ireland, I reckon that these rule changes mean that the likes of Mo Farah would not be allowed to represent GBR. It won't impact on Mo himself as he has already represented GBR, but will effect previously uncapped athletes with a similar background. I think there have been a few athletes representing IRL in recent years who would not have been eligible to so so under the new rules. I'm talking about naturalised Irish citizens who have been living in the Republic of Ireland for several years.

Why would there be a problem for naturalized citizens with several years of residence? Is there anyone who thinks people like that should not be able to represent the country they now live in?

TFBubendorfer

Oiriallach wrote: »

Besides the potential issue for athletes from Northern Ireland, I reckon that these rule changes mean that the likes of Mo Farah would not be allowed to represent GBR.

Mo's dad was born in London and was a British citizen, so he would not have been affected - that, and the years he had been living in the UK already before representing them in international competitions.

robinph

Wouldn't change anything for Mo Farah with the new rules. GB parent and permanent resident from age 9 so zero issues there.

Might have slowed down the Ofili sisters getting allowed to compete, but they still had GB parent and had dual nationality since birth themselves.

Oiriallach

Sorry - didn't know that Mo's dad was born in the UK.

But the IAAF rules (Rule 5.2(a) in particular) now state (with regard to first-time internationals) that the athlete must be "a Citizen of the Country (or territory) by virtue of having been born or by virtue of having a parent or grandparent born in the Country (or territory)".

There is no provision in Rule 5.2(a) for athletes representing their country of residence if they (and their parents and grandparents) were not born there, even if they have lived in and been a citizen of that new country for several years. Rule 5.2(b) used to allow for this, but this rule has now been revoked.

RayCun

Oiriallach wrote: »

There is no provision in Rule 5.2(a) for athletes representing their country of residence if they (and their parents and grandparents) were not born there, even if they have lived in and been a citizen of that new country for several years. Rule 5.2(b) used to allow for this, but this rule has now been revoked.

Oh, right now there is no way for an athlete to declare for their country of residence, I agree.

I meant that I expect that the revised rules, whatever they are, will allow for transfers of allegiance, and athletes who are naturalised citizens with several years of residence are not a controversial case, so the revised rules will allow them to transfer.

The arguments are likely to be about how many years of residence are necessary (if any), will there be a minimum gap between competing for one country and competing for another, things like that.

robinph

The clauses that have been cancelled are:
5.2(b) covers gaining a citizenship that you didn't have at birth
5.4(d) covers gaining a citizenship that you didn't have at birth
5.4(e) covers being born with dual nationality and you have to wait three years if you chose to switch country after having already competed for the other.

And you are right that 5.2(a) doesn't allow for anyone gaining or switching country. However 5.5 probably gives them the flexibility to allow for changing nationality however the IAAF wish to decide at that time on a case by case basis as it essentially just says "prove to us that you are eligible" and makes no reference to the other clauses.

5.2(a) could also be argued over in terms of it's lack of punctuation as it could be read as "you must have been born there or have a parent born there".
Alternatively it could be read as "you must be a citizen, or have been born there, or have a parent born there".

youngrun

http://www.france24.com/en/20170110-kenya-put-109-athletes-under-doping-scrutiny
Kenya was placed on the IAAF doping watchlist in 2016 after being ruled non-compliant by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) following a string of drug scandals.

"It is in this regard that we have worked on (this) action plan with the IAAF ... in order to confine the actual doping epidemic in the country,"

I wonder who these are ? Kenya still allowed to compete in major champs? ?? Surely if they admit there is a doping epidemic they should be out until its resolved

28064212

youngrun wrote: »

http://www.france24.com/en/20170110-kenya-put-109-athletes-under-doping-scrutiny
Kenya was placed on the IAAF doping watchlist in 2016 after being ruled non-compliant by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) following a string of drug scandals.

"It is in this regard that we have worked on (this) action plan with the IAAF ... in order to confine the actual doping epidemic in the country,"

I wonder who these are ? Kenya still allowed to compete in major champs? ?? Surely if they admit there is a doping epidemic they should be out until its resolved

• Has the Kenyan government been involved in a conspiracy to manipulate the doping testing system and avoid positive results?
• Have Kenyan doping violations of athletes been ordered to "disappear" by the government?
• Has the Kenyan state been shown to be involved in the tampering of official samples?