Darren Rovell writes about sports business on CNBC. Here is what he had to say about Meb Keflezighi, First American winner of the NYC Marathon in 25 years:
Why is he a reinger? He was born in Eritrea, a small African Country. Now nevermind that he moved here when he was 12, to escape famine and civil war. Nevermind that he trained in the USA. Nevermind that he is a citizen and he flies the American flag and even proudly wears USA on his chest. Nope he is not American enough to count. Unlike Alberto Salazar, the last American to win…born in Cuba…
Of course the commenters gave him hell, as they should, and he “apologized”…very weakly, basically saying that geez, he didn’t actually research his article and if he had known Meb was trained in the US then he wouldn’t have called him a ringer. Nice journalism. He of course doesn’t admit what he said, instead says it isn’t what he “meant” even though it clear as day that he qualifies who is and isn’t American.
I agree with him. It’s kinda like when people thought Freddie Adu was gonna be the next big soccer phenom. At the Beijing Olympics, we had 33 foreign-born athletes, including 4 Chinese-born table tennis players. Why? Probably because Americans generally don’t play table tennis. They may have done all their training here, but, in all likelihood, he still grew up in a household that did not share American indifference to soccer, table tennis, or distance running.
The fact is the US has a long history of unfairly taking all the credit for foreign-born athletes winning under our flag. Nobody is claiming that they aren’t American, just that it’s worth noting their background because people who actually grow up here, and embrace our value system don’t tend to gravitate towards those things.
I suspect the reporter was trying to make a joke, so I don’t come down on him too hard. The reality is that this wouldn’t be story except that they can play up the angle that American distance running mediocrity is coming to an end, and that attitudes that have lead to that mediocrity are waning. But the reality is that it’s not.
I wasn’t aware that freedom and democracy and equality of opportunity (things often touted as part of the American Value System[sup]TM[/sup]) were in any way connected to a love of running. I guess my afternoon runs through my neighborhood must mean i’m un-American or something.
Anyway, you’re completely ignoring the different types of immigration among different types of athletes. Meb Keflezighi came here as a 12-year-old, via Italy, after fleeing the violence of his native country. It’s not like he was some athletic star who was brought over by US athletic officials to boost American distance-running performances. He went to school in the US (right here in San Diego), he went to college here, and has lived here for all his adult life.
There are other cases where the issue is more problematic, where the athlete becomes a star and then becomes a US citizen in order to compete for America. I’m not really sure what to do about that. On the one hand, athletes, like any other person, should be able (within the law) to live where they want, and be a citizen of whatever country they want. On the other hand, it sometimes seems a bit unfair to the other countries when their athletes do all their initial training at home, and then make off for the US.
I also have some problem with cases like this, where Australia is actually considering making alterations to its immigration law in order to accommodate recent immigrants who want to compete for Australia without having satisfied normal residency requirements for Australian citizenship. Immigration is a tough enough issue, in both Australia and the US, without giving special treatment to someone just because she’s a fast skater.
The writer described in the OP is a tool. If Keflezighi had come to the US a couple of years ago, after winning a whole bunch of medals for Eritrea, and had taken US citizenship in the last few months just so he could call himself American for the purpose of competition, there might be some argument to make about him being a “ringer”; but he didn’t, and Rovell is a douche.
What the fuck does freedom and democracy have to do with anything? The reality is that people here generally don’t give a shit about distance running, as evidenced by the fact that we generally suck at it. Americans (by and large) do not value distance running, hence, it’s not highly regarded in our value system.
Why? What’s the cutoff? Are you “more American” for having lived here for a longer period of time?
What’s the difference? He’d still be an American, right?
I mentioned freedom and democracy with my tongue somewhat in cheek (see the [sup]TM[/sup] that i used?), because there is no relationship between the American “value system” (whatever its main components happen to be) and distance running. The fact that you equate them makes you an idiot.
While there might be no legal difference, the fact is that cultural development makes some difference. I’ve been in America for almost a decade, but even if i became an American citizen tomorrow, and would be legally American, i would still feel Australian in many ways, because that’s where i spent my formative years, including virtually all of my childhood, and much of my earlier adult life. Had i come here as a 12-year-old, i’d probably feel more American in terms of my cultural identity and attachments.
Also, the “point” the journalist described in the OP was making related specifically to the issue of where the training happens, and Keflezighi came to the US at an age which meant that his development as an athlete was a completely American process. You yourself bought into this argument when you talked about America taking credit for foreign-born athletes, but you completely failed to make any distinction between those who come here before they become athletes, and those who come here after.
Yes, he would. But at least, if he had come recently, the point about America taking credit for the performance of foreign-born athletes might have a little bit of merit. In such a case, he would have taken an active decision as an adult athlete to change his allegiance from Eritrea to America, with the attendant implications for which country he represents in international competition. But he didn’t; he came as a 12-year-old, and did not make the switch specifically for athletic purposes; he probably had no choice in where his family went. If you don’t understand these distinctions, you’re thick as two short planks.
Once again, people who are born here generally don’t become professional distance runners, table tennis players, or elite soccer players. Why? Because we have different values. There is nothing special about Kenyans, Chinese, or Brazilians that makes them great at those sports, except that their society values people who excel in those areas; we don’t. I’ll be the first to admit the article is kinda tactless, but I think the point he made was valid. The headline was misleading and bogus. It’s just our attempt to associate America with someone else’s success and hard work. IMO, his Eritrean heritage had far more to do with his win, and his desire to be a runner than his American upbringing did.
It’s the same with first-generation Asian and Indian kids in our education system. Of course they are Americans, but their academic success is largely due to their cultural heritage, not America. It’s kinda disingenuous to claim America is solely responsible for their success since they were educated here since they probably wouldn’t have had the same determination and inclination if their heritage were different.
Six of the top ten men at the marathon were American. It’s not a very popular sport, but based on that, it looks like the US program has become a good one. What the hell that has to do with this one guy, I don’t know, but I’m sure you’ll figure it out.
If he’d moved over here a few years ago, the journalist (and you) might have a point. But he’s lived in the U.S. for 20 years, so he’s not a ringer.
Of course there is. Why do you think we suck so bad at things we don’t value? Do you think there is something special about groups and races of people that makes them great at specific sports and activities other than values? Funny how I’m the idiot, but you can’t understand a basic, fairly uncontroversial concept like this.
Ok, so let’s say you win the NYC marathon next year. Should the difference between how they describe you rest upon whether you finished your citizenship process?
Is that an Aussie expression? They are distinctions without a meaning so long as you raise the objections people here seem to be. You can’t say the length of his time here makes him sufficiently American (as opposed to someone who came over recently) while denying that there are varying degrees of “Americanization”.
I’ll give you another example. The school where I grew up had an influx of first-generation Indian and Asian students when I was in high school. As our test scores rose (due largely to their presence), the board of education tried to claim it was because the school was doing a better job of educating students, and that that was being reflected in the test scores. The reality was that most of these kid’s parents were highly educated, and demanded their children adhere to the cultural standards they were brought up with. Yes, the kids (and most of the parents) were Americans, they were educated here, and they shared many of our cultural values, but the proximate cause for their academic success was not our education system, but rather their heritage.
You may be right on that account, but most of the stuff I’ve read in my admittedly cursory search does not seem to indicate that that is the case. I could be wrong on that though.
The notion of him being a ringer is not quite accurate, but I can forgive that since it seems he was trying to make a joke.
The fact that we might not be as interested in distance running, as a whole, does not mean that people who do like distance running are people who don’t “embrace our value system.”
Your use of the term “value system” here is so far removed from any reasonable general use of the term as to be completely meaningless. Furthermore, even if indifference to distance running were, in some retarded universe, one of the facets of “our value system,” to imply that being a distance runner somehow reflects a rejection or dismissal of the value system as a whole is ridiculous.
Every post you make in this thread decreases your credibility.
I think you just need to substitute some other phrase for “value system.” You aren’t really talking about “values” in the way most people talk about them. You’re talking about cultural sports preferences, which doesn’t really have anything to do with a “value system” except under a second tier definition of “values.”
Six out of the top ten isn’t bad. That’s all I have to go on.
Look, I’ll level with you here: I don’t think anyone in this thread knows a lot about the U.S. running program. I don’t. I don’t care about marathons at all, actually. And when I saw Keflezighi was winning, I wondered if he’d emigrated from East Africa because the popular story/joke with these marathons is that the winners are almost always men from Kenya.* So I wasn’t surprised to find out he’s from Eritrea. If he’d come here last year or a couple of years ago, even if he was a legitimate citizen, it might be fair to call him a ringer from an athletics standpoint. That kind of thing happens fairly often in international competition. It didn’t happen with this guy, and if the author had have done even a modicum of research before spouting off, he would have known that. This could have been avoided by a freaking Google search.
What I don’t understand is why folks don’t think Met’s story is an ideal American story. How he came as a boy, embraced despite his cultural differences, trained here and succeeded. Why wouldn’t that be worthy of greater celebration, why would anyone make it seem less so?