Sunday, December 19, 2010

Armstrong remains on Team Canada after disciplinary review

Here is the CCA's CEO Greg Stremlaw's statement concerning the review of Team Canada skip Jim Armstrong's actions for which he is expected to be sentenced in Seattle Federal Court on January 28th.

"As I think you are aware, a formal, comprehensive review of the situation was undertaken by a designated review committee including interviews with appropriate parties, consultation with stakeholders and a review and assessment of all pertinent and available documentation. As a result of this, the review committee did recommend a course of disciplinary action to the CCA which was approved and implemented. We feel that the disciplinary actions taken are fair and appropriate to the situation given the facts and information available to the review committee at this time. The disciplinary actions do include specific conditions, therefore, should any new facts or information become available which are relevant to this situation either before, during or after the January 28th court date, this matter can be revisited and further action taken if and as required.

"At this time, the athlete is still a part of the National Team program and will continue to train and compete as such."

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

First of all, I am not a wheelchair curler but have several friends who are able bodied and wheelchair curlers. I think it is a very sad and disappointing day twhen the Canadian Curling Association continues to support Jim Armstrong, even though he has pleaded quilty to criminal charges and waiting his sentence. I think that we have many honest, law abiding wheelchair curlers across Canada who could be as good or better given his opportunities, training and monies.

Anonymous said...

We still come back to waiting to hear what happens post-January. I am sure the CCA heard more story than presently available, and have adopted a wait and see position.

Anonymous said...

What were the disciplinary actions taken by the CCA? Nothing has been reported todate. Eric, can you help?

Eric Eales said...

Quoting Greg Stremlaw, "the athlete has definitely had disciplinary actions taken and specific conditions imposed."

Stremlaw vehemently rejected the suggestion that non-public actions that do not affect playing or funding might be seen as evidence the matter was not being taken seriously.

"I think that the CCA has taken this more than seriously with a considerable amount of time and effort spent on the comprehensive review, the consultation with multiple stakeholders and funding agents, the analysis of public and non-public documents, etc.

"We have as much information on this situation as likely anyone now," he said.

"There is no preferential treatment whatsoever, nor should there be. But a due process was owed and such an analysis, within the context of our policy set and those of our partners, was taken. It was and is being played by the book."

All I know about this matter is what is in the public record - an admission of guilt to a serious felony.

Quite why program funders would have input into whether Jim's behaviour transgressed the National Team Programs guidelines, athlete agreements, and codes of conduct. is unclear to me.

Well, actually it's not.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps they like Jim more than you?

Anonymous said...

Doesn't the CCA and Natioal Team Programs have codes of conduct on committing and admitting to a serious felony??
Persons involved should not matter; he broke the law.
And, Eric, only the old boys at CCA and his teammates who want to win like him more than you.

Anonymous said...

It is simpler. Jim threatened to take the Scotland coaching job.

CCA sees that as a problem.

Anonymous said...

Who should have input into a hearing, if the stakeholders shouldn't? Just trying to get an understanding of how this could or should work.

Anonymous said...

It actually sounds like he has the benefit of the doubt until January. That is all.

Anonymous said...

I tink Program funders would rely on the governing body decisions, since the CCA is the ultimate responsible entity.

Eric Eales said...

Some commenters object to Jim being treated as guilty before he has "had his say." I can understand people not wanting to believe that his statements in the plea agreement are true. But unless they are withdrawn, there is no "doubt" for which to give benefit.

I specifically asked Stremlaw if the CCA's position would change if the judge sentenced Jim as outlined in the plea agreement.

He replied: "The disciplinary actions that have been taken by the CCA are specific to what we know and related to the NTP guidelines.

"A conviction of the lesser charge which has already been plead does not really constitute new information per se."

He went on to say further action "will depend on whether the information (at sentencing) is contrary to what we have learned, which would appear to be unlikely – but is possible, or if the information impedes the athlete’s ability to fulfil his athlete obligations."

Presumably that means inability to travel.

The CCA does not view the offences as rising to the level of even limited suspension from the program.

Should funders have had a say in the decision? While they were involved in the review process, it's not clear that they did. But their interests, and the podium prospects for the team, would not be served by suspending Jim.

In my opinion the CCA does not help Jim or the program by treating this as a purely internal matter, when its effects are very public.

(Also "Jim threatened to coach Scotland" is an obvious troll. Ignore.)

Anonymous said...

The CCA's obligstions to stakeholders, including Sport Canada are much larger than Jim. If Sport Canada has accepted the CCA's committee findings, either the public should accept the CCA doing thir job, or toss the whole works of them.

Anonymous said...

Eric,

What you are saying is that the CCA, in your view has not done their job?

Anonymous said...

It seems if you are viewed as a good wheelchair curler all is forgiven even if you are a criminal and that goes for others besides Jim.

Anonymous said...

Can Armstrong travel now? I don't believe anyone awaiting sntence can travel outside their jurisdiction, which here would be B.C. only.

Anonymous said...

Jim had to relinquish his passport.....I asked this earlier, and then got a response from a lawyer buddy. There is NO WAY Jim would be able to get his passport back prior to January 28.

So who is going to Scotland in January? Is this te reason they are looking at taking a developmental team?

Anonymous said...

That would make sense. Joe is taking a developmental team BECAUSE Jim cannot travel.

Has to be the answer.

Anonymous said...

Can this be confirmed? That seems to fly in the face of the CCA requirement to travel.

Anonymous said...

WHAT A COINCIDENCE.,.,...,A DEVELOPMENTAL TEAM TO SCOTLAND...,,.,.TEAM CANADA HAS HAD, TO MY KNOWLEDGE ONE EVENT THIS SEASON (RICHMOND) AND A DEVELOPMENTAL TEAM IS GOING TO A WORLD TUNE-UP EVENT?

IF JIM CANNOT TRAVEL, LET THE CCA DEFEND THIS.

JIM HAS TO BE ABLE TO TRAVEL, AT THE REQUEST OF CCA.......SO, CCA, COINCIDENTALLY IS NOT REQUESTING TRAVEL BEFORE JANUARY 28????

Eric Eales said...

I think there is a good case for giving a developmental squad an opportunity to gain some foreign experience that has nothing to do with whether or not Jim can travel.

Anonymous said...

So, then, WHO is going to Scotland?

Anonymous said...

JIM cannot travel? Does this not contradict the CCA own requirements?


Jim CANNOT have his passport since it was surrendured. What gives?

Anonymous said...

Who is going to Scotland? eam Canada without their skip? Call it a qualified developmental squad?

DON'T THINK SO.

Eric, please confirm the Canadian team.

Anonymous said...

Something simply doesn't make sense. Jim gave up is passport. CCA accepts him n the Program, yet he cannot travel.

Is he in or out?

Anonymous said...

I think this whole US issue is over, and January 28 is to formalize it all. Jim had been ramping up his throwing these past weeks, and all seemed find around Richmond Curling Club.

His play was better than ever at their Richmond Event.

How could this happen, though?

Anonymous said...

kay, so wat do we seem to know?

Jim has te support of the CCA, Sport, Canada, etc. AT THIS POINT. He as to be able to travel as we speak, yet, obviously cannot.

So where does this leave us? Apparenly a team going to Scotland, but no one can find out whom. Apparently a team going to Wolrld's, but no one can find out wom.

Who is wo in the zoo?

Was this CCA committee struck to be ready post January, to save time?

If so, wy ot just say so?

Anonymous said...

Jim somehow maintains he can travel.

I cannot see how. Have you asked him, Eric?

Anonymous said...

Our great skip Mr.Armstrong will walk.......oops he already walks.......but no problem......Mr Kevin Martin is complaning of an ingrown toe nail......he will be classified fast-track by cca in order to have him ready on time to the worlds....sorry wheelchair users.....maybe next time

Anonymous said...

How can anyone still dwell on eligibility three years after WCF, not CCA approval?

Anonymous said...

Who is going to Scotland? Surely tickets have been issued...

Anonymous said...

ask a true wheelchair user.....

Eric Eales said...

Wendy Morgan told me "Joe is taking the Paralympic team to Scotland."

Anonymous said...

Five member team or four?????

When (and how) did Wendy confirm?

Anonymous said...

How can ANYONE possibly still be dwelling on eligibility issues?

Anonymous said...

Wendy is talking to you, Eric?

Anonymous said...

because we actually use wheelchairs