"We can continue this on email if you wish, but I'm not going to do so here," she said... here.
Regarding the video itself, the lack of audio (I did play it on mute, but assuming the video is so from earlier in this post) leaves a certain degree of ambiguity that is made worse by conflicting context clues. Having watched the video, I would not condemn the father as being violent or a menace, though perhaps heavy-handed -- and even that is something I am not entirely willing to hold against him not knowing the proper context. It seems like people were too quick to judge that either this is just some immature teenager or a poor victim of her father's insanity. Thanks to TBH, we get a slightly better picture of what's going on. The Geelong Advertiser link freezes up my browser, but at the end of the article, she says something along the lines of "I disobeyed him and he got angry." This implies to me that the context is a bit more than just controlling a teenager's tantrum. Based on this allegation, the father's heavy-handed approach may thus be more than a means of control and instead it may be best to review the tape with deference to the camp that views him as a menace to the teenager. Though it is key to note that the video still does not offer clear evidence of any striking. If anything, it may suggest an unfit parent, but let us be clear that the individual is 18 years of age* (*based on previous comments and not fact-checked) and, to my understanding, capable of exerting her own legal force. While there are psychological deprivation aspects to this conversation that may make her unfit to make such assertions (psychological damage from constant manipulative efforts on the part of the parent), there is no evidence (i.e. knowledge of similar prior events) to warrant it being a factor. The ABC article mentions the lawyer's argument that it is a private matter and not a swimming matter, which to a degree suggests the FINA has no business involving itself. Regardless of what basis rooted the altercation, it involved a coach and a swimmer that are both members of (and indirectly represent) FINA. If the body has any reason to believe that it gives membership to a menace, it is within its right to revoke membership. Somebody mentioned that they likely have more evidence than we do, which is likely correct, but is negated by the pressures they face from the publicity of the incident, with people likely calling for heads as evidenced earlier in the comments. Whether they are correct in their judgment is something they will hopefully reconsider with careful deliberation, though I personally think a lifetime ban for this offense (ambiguous video, first offense) is too much. Regardless, the coach must be aware that it was a public altercation, presumably in grounds being managed (rented/in agreement with) by FINA. Lastly, the issue of damage control is probably something key here. The swimmer has likely long shared a close history with the father and that is a psychological factor to consider. Even victims of kidnapping usually tend to eventually accept their captor's behaviors and identify with them. Following such theory, it is not unreasonable to consider that she may be minimizing the actual damage and that the coach may be a bigger menace than the current evidence suggests. However, that is mere speculation. Ultimately, we get back to where we started: too much interpretation, not enough concrete evidence. But an interesting topic regardless. That said: wow, I woke up too early today.
Thanks indeed for the followup links. Their testimony, unfortunately, doesn't lend much more context to make a meaningful judgement than the video does. The situation could be pretty much what they describe or she could be a typical victim of abuse, covering for her abuser. (If the latter is the case, I'll bet this guy she won't stop seeing is a real winner.) The fact that she's 18, and as many here have pointed out an adult who should be treated as such, does raise the question of whether her father should be taking such an active role in choosing whom she dates. But it's not hard for me to imagine a legitimate reason for that, too. What I still stand by is the disappointment that people seem really quick to make assumptions to excuse questionable behavior outright. I'm not saying he should be presumed a terrible person (I still think he shoved her on the video, but that doesn't rise to the standard of terrible person.) but many of the people who say it's wrong to assume his guilt turn around and immediately make assumptions about the young woman to say society should stay out of it and/or the dad was perfectly justified.
The fact that she's 18, and as many here have pointed out an adult who should be treated as such, does raise the question of whether her father should be taking such an active role in choosing whom she dates. Excellent point. Several posts have discussed her being 18, and an adult, yet this is definitely falls in father/daughter territory. You can't have it both ways. I have my opinions about him as a father, but there's too much I don't know to feel confident about them. I do think the fact that they're both getting into this topic on the day of a swim meet at that swim meet gives me enough confidence to say he shouldn't be her coach.
