Unfair treatment results in replacement
An “unfair” trial has shattered the hopes of Karnataka state swimmer Siddharth Rai (14 yrs) who was earlier celebrating for being qualified in the Junior National Aquatics Championship. Days before the event, he has now come to learn that he has been replaced by another swimmer by the Karnataka Swimming Association (KSA).
Replaced at the last moment
The KSA conducted a trial for the team. Siddharth Rai finished second in 50m individual freestyle and had qualified the relay team by virtue of coming fourth in the 100m individual freestyle at the State Junior Aquatics event. However, he has been replaced by another swimmer, Sri Hari, who couldn’t take part in the main trial because of suffering from dengue. The KSA without informing other students conducted Hari’s individual trial and selected him for the national event replacing Siddharth. Now Mr. Subhash, Siddharth’s father has raised several questions upon the credibility of the KSA on the ground that time trial cannot be equivalent to competing under pressure. A boy who has legitimately earned his place in the nationals cannot be suddenly dropped on the basis of a solo trial of someone. Also, there is no evidence of Hari clocking a better timing than Siddharth. There’s only a piece of paper serving as documentation for the trial conducted by KSA. While Mr. Subhash is trying his best to arrange for a retrial so that it should be transparent, the KSA has rejected any such speculations. As per Bangalore Mirror report, KSA secretary SR Sindhia said a bye-law allows them to conduct a trial. “We have a rule which says if anybody is sick and cannot take part in the competition, he would get a retrial within 10 days.
Olympian Nisha Millet had also lost an opportunity of giving trials for National selection, because of her sinus infection. But she was not allowed to give a retrial that year.
The Logical Indian urges our community members to share this post so that it reaches the KSA. Selection process cannot be twisted suiting to someone’s requirements. Competition should always be held in such a manner that it gives everyone a fair and equal opportunity. And even if Hari clocked better than others, his trials should have been done in the presence of other candidates. And there should have been specific video evidence to prove the facts.