Chariots of Litigation

By J.D. Reed

For some, the road to Los Angeles runs through the courts

Instead of a stop watch, it takes a law degree to keep up with would-be Olympians these days. Last week in Los Angeles, two federal judges addressed cases brought by athletes who claimed that they were not being allowed to compete in their specialties because of discrimination both sexual and professional. In each case the court declined to second-guess the various athletic regulatory bodies that establish and, ever so slowly, change the rules. But the two suits have raised fears among Olympic officials that even before the Games begin, never will a host country's courts have been asked to settle so many Olympic problems.

For now, the questions raised have revolved around eligibility, broadly defined: Who can enter what events? In the biggest case, 82 women runners from 21 countries, including U.S. World Record-Holder Mary Decker, were trying to have 5,000-meter and 10,000-meter races for women added to this year's schedule. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, they argued that the International Olympic Committee "operates with a 19th century view of the place of women." Indeed, as late as 1952 there was an unsuccessful I.O.C. proposal to eliminate women's track and field completely. Although three women's track-and-field events have been added for Los Angeles, including a marathon, the total is 17, just over two-thirds of the men's slate. Said A.C.L.U. Attorney Susan McGreivy: "The lack of parity is just outrageous."

Federal Judge David Kenyon acknowledged the frustration for a woman athlete "who, had she been a man, could compete in one or both of these events." But he did not think there was enough evidence that state and federal antidiscrimination laws had been violated. The women plan an immediate appeal, to the consternation of Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee President Peter Ueberroth, who supports the cause but not the tactics. Contending that the races can be added as late as the first week of July and are more likely to be installed via less confrontational channels, he said, "You shouldn't throw something that's working into the hands of the courts." The women, who have been negotiating with authorities for seven years, see time running out.

Time is also the concern for the Chicago Bears' million-dollar wide receiver Willie Gault, who lost the other Los Angeles case. Last summer at the World Championships in Helsinki, Gault helped the U.S. team set a four-man relay record and was an Olympic candidate in the 110-meter hurdles and 100-meter dash, until he signed with the National Football League last fall. The Athletic Congress, which runs track and field in the U.S., has stated that pro football is not of "direct help" to a track competitor and thus does not affect his amateur status in that sport. But the riding world body, the International Amateur Athletic Federation, has disagreed. While the two organizations fiddled, Gault was worried that he would get burned. So he sued, alleging that his track career is being wrecked by "a conspiracy in restraint of interstate trade." World-record-holding Hurdler Renaldo Nehemiah, a wide receiver for the San Francisco 49ers, has also gone to federal court on the issue, making a some-what different technical argument. But last month in New Jersey, he too lost. Both men will continue their legal fight, and intriguingly, both are contending that their Olympic exclusion is costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars they would be earning as amateurs.

That being so, the familiar question of amateur standing arises. The different sports' committees are often hairsplitting in their decisions. In Sarajevo, for in stance, two Canadians who had signed with the National Hockey League were barred, while a Finn and an Austrian (who had played in the World Hockey Association) were not. The reason: a new compromise regulation involved only the N.H.L. Individual federations are charged with deciding status, guided by the I.O.C.'s overall rules. Among other things, athletes may earn money from their sport as long as the funds are in trusts arranged through the federations. The totals can be impressive. Gold Medal Skier Phil Mahre filed an affidavit for Gault stating that he had made more than $1 million, all legally, in the last two years of his amateur career.

The late Olympic overlord Avery Brundage argued that the ancient Games were strictly amateur. But "the Greeks didn't even have a word for amateur," said Classics Professor David C. Young of the University of California at Santa Barbara. Indeed, Greek wrestlers competed as pros, and Olympic champions were awarded the equivalent of an artisan's wages for three years. Amateurism was a snooty Victorian conceit, installed by the modern Games founder, Baron Pierre de Coubertin, to prevent working-class men from competing against the aristocracy.

Even without the pressure of the recent lawsuits, the Games seem slowly headed back to more of the openness of earlier times. Of the 21 sports scheduled in Los Angeles, five--track and field, cycling, soccer, basketball and boxing-- have pending arguments about professional eligibility. But, said Willi Daume, head of the I.O.C.'s eligibility commission, "at this moment, the rules cannot allow an open Games." And Communist-bloc nations, whose athletes are all state-paid, have little reason to vote for a broader admissions policy. To athletes for whom 1988 could be too late, a lawyer may be more important than a coach in helping them to compete.

--ByJ.D. Reed.

Reported by Melissa Ludtke/Los Angeles

With reporting by Melissa Ludtke