Sir, It would have been nice to be able simply to enjoy Michelle Smith's unprecedented successes at the Atlanta Olympics. However, for those of us Americans who have chosen to make Ireland our home, a great deal of the pleasure has been turned sour by the snide attempts by the Irish media to depict Americans as bad sports.
On the morning after her second gold medal, the headline in The Irish Times read: "Smith overcomes protests..." Through out the day, on RTE and elsewhere, the focus was not on the wonderful victory but on the "ungracious Americans." No mention that the cock up was the fault of the Irish authorities, who couldn't manage to get Smith's application for the 400 metre freestyle in by the deadline.
No mention that, in order for her to race in that event, special treatment had to be claimed. No mention that the protests against that special treatment by the American, German, Dutch, Australian and Costa Rican swimming federations were exactly what would have been expected of the Irish authorities if the situation were reversed.
I feel that natural justice was done in allowing Michelle Smith to compete. I always favour the interests of the athlete. Far too often, in the many Olympics I have watched, I have seen athletes losing out due to the stupidity of administrators. Karl Schranz in the 1972 Winter Olympics is but one example; he also was among the best in the world at the time. But this does not make the protests by the other swimming federations in any way unnatural, sinister or unsporting.
Now, on the allegations of drug abuse: "There were a lot of people wondering how they did it. A remark from an American journalist in Atlanta? No. A remark, rather from The Irish Times guide to the Olympics, purporting to be a direct quotation from Michelle Smith about the Chinese female swimmers at the 1992 Barcelona Olympics. As we all subsequently became aware, the suspicions of drug abuse were justified.
The Irish Times article goes on: "Michelle Smith has not been immune from nodding and winking, particularly given her coach's history." Similar comments could be found in the Irish Sunday papers, as well as in the Monday Irish Times, following her first gold medal in the 400 IM. Apparently, it is all right for Smith to acknowledge that questions, as of that time not yet substantiated, were raised about the Chinese in 1992. And it's all right for Irish journalists to raise the question about Smith. But dare an American raise the same observation?
Actually, what did Janet Evans say? Naturally distraught at failing to even make the final in an event she had won previously, she was asked in a press conference if Michelle Smith's "dramatic improvement" surprised her. She said it did. She was then asked if the same question should now be raised about Smith as about the Chinese in 1992. She replied that, any time someone made a dramatic improvement, the question, was raised but that she didn't know and you can't make false accusations.
It takes a peculiar form of logic to twist that into what The Irish Times termed "an outrageous and unsubstantiated attack on Smith." The same sort of logic denigrates the support of the American public for American athletes as "jingoistic."
Is it not possible just to celebrate Michelle Smith's magnificent victories without finding someone to bad mouth? Perhaps we should begin to speak of Irish sports media logic alongside the Irish bull. - Yours, etc.,
Blackrock,
Co. Dublin.