Skip to main content

The Poor Response to an Olympic Tragedy

While watching the opening ceremony of the Olympics last night, I couldn't help but feel that the event was marred by the death of Nodar Kumaritashvili, the 21-year-old from the former Soviet Republic of Georgia.

Many have come out to say that they felt the Olympics committee should have post-poned the ceremony out of respect for the athlete and his family.

I disagree, but that might be the theater in me talking. The show does have to go on, and as far as being respectful, I think dedicating the opening ceremonies to Kumaritashvili was a nice way of handling it.

Now that the opening ceremonies are over, however, the response to the young man's death seems to be anything but respectful.

It started yesterday afternoon at a press conference, when a reporter asked about the safety of the track.

The President of the International Olympic Committee, Jacques Rogge, responded by saying, "I'm sorry, this is a time of sorrow. It's not the time to ask for reasons."

What exactly is a press conference for if not for asking questions? Are they planning on having another press conference where reporters will be able to inquire as to why after numerous athletes complained about the track, nothing was done to make it safer?

It seemed like Rogge was using the solemnity of the occasion to dodge the issue at hand--did this athlete really have to die?

Today, the IOC has gone one step further by saying Kumaritashvili's death was the result of "human error."

The committee is claiming that had Kumaritashvili is to blame for his own death due to how he handled the track.

Could there be anything more insulting to his memory and his family than laying the blame for all this on him? Strange coming from a committee whose President was quick to shoot down questions about safety out of respect only yesterday.

"Human error" is a common occurence in sports. Athletes make mistakes all the time. They misjudge something or let their nerves get to them. That's why every precaution must be taken to assure that the circumstances around them are as safe as possible.

The IOC can say that the track had nothing to do with it, but they've made a change to the track, which in my opinion, is the same as admitting fault. Unfortunately, they haven't made enough changes to make the track as secure as it could be. One of the athetes compared it to being treated like a crash-test dummy.

Whether the response is simply an avoidance of action due to the delay or costs it would incur, or the arrogance of the IOC in thinking that athletes should be able to handle anything that's thrown at them, it is taking a tragic situation and creating the ominous feeling that another tragedy could be possible before these games are over.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A List of People Who Can Go to Hell Now That I Can't Have Elizabeth Warren

So today was a rough day for everybody who isn't a @#$%-ing #$%hole. Let's just start there. If that upsets you, by all means, go straight to hell. This entire rant is going to be exactly what it sounds like. I am mad and I am going to exercise my right to BLOG ABOUT IT LIKE IT'S 1995, SO BUCKLE UP, BUTTERCUP. I really don't even know where to start, so let's just jump right in with the first person who comes to mind. Bloomberg, go to hell.  You really didn't have anything specific to do with today, but you can just go to hell for spending an ungodly amount of money on literally nothing.  I mean, you could have lit millions of dollars on fire and at least warmed the hands of the homeless, but instead, you made tv stations across the country that are already owned by Conservatives rich, so kudos to you and go to hell. Amy Klobuchar, I STUCK UP FOR YOU AMY.  I got into FIGHTS on SOCIAL MEDIA while DEFENDING your sorry, self-interested ass.  You know

Theater and the Outbreak

After last week's interview, a representative from a theater that recently experienced the results of opening too soon reached out to speak with me. I want to thank this person for coming forward in the hopes that it'll change some minds about what's safe and what isn't when it comes to the performing arts. Here's the interview: ME:  So this wasn't a full production or-- THEM:  No. It was us trying to do a little something for friends and donors. ME:  Who is 'us?' THEM:  The board of _____. ME:  And how long have you been on the board? THEM:  Three years. ME:  What was this going to be? THEM:  There's a, uh, beautiful park here in town, and we wanted to do an outdoor performance of a Shakespeare as a benefit, because, as you know, theaters are having a hard time right now paying the bills. We checked with the local government and the health department for the state to make sure we were doing everything the way we needed to in order to keep everyone s

People You Know Are More Important Than People You Don't Know

This post is in response to arguing with people--straight and gay alike--about a certain celebrity, whether or not she's an ally, if she's pandering, if pandering matters, and whether or not I'm an asshole. The last part is probably an enthusiastic "Yes" but let's reflect on this for a bit anyway without actually giving more time to an argument about a person none of us know, which is a crucial part of what I want to talk about. People you know are more important than people you don't know. I realize it's tricky in an age where we've never been closer or more engaged to our celebrities to keep in mind that we do not know them, they are not our friends, and while we may love them and stan and feel like we're attacked when they're attacked-- That is not true. That is not real. They are in no tangible way connected to us. Now, as someone who is obsessed with pop culture, I get that it's a little hypocritical for me to be making