MEETINGS ABOUT MEETINGS

Posted on Friday, December 2nd, 2011 at 10:46 am and is filed under Archive | 0

In my previous blog, I characterised the Association of International Marathons (AIMS) as a ‘toothless’ organisation whose principal pursuit was to have ‘meetings about meetings’. Hugh Jones, the general secretary of AIMS wrote in to take issue with my assessment. (scroll back to the previous blog)

However, lo and behold, not a week later, I get the most recent AIMS Newsletter, whose header I reproduce below. As you will see, under the graphic for the 19th World Congress of AIMS (in Prague next May), the very first heading (of a dozen or so) is, guess what?

 

 

20th World Congress of AIMS

One of the questions to be determined at the 19th Congress will be the venue for the 20th Congress, which should take place between November 2013 and October 2014. Any member interested in hosting the Congress should contact the AIMS Secretary aimssec@aol.com.

AIMS/ASICS Athlete of the Year Award……

So the most important task for the 19th World Congress of AIMS is, yes, where to hold the 20th World Congress of AIMS.

I rest my case.

Or rather, I would, if there were not other more important questions to discuss with Mr Jones, a former winner of the London Marathon (in 1982).

Many of you will not have seen a riposte to Jones’ reply to my previous blog, a riposte from Zane Branson, one of the originators of the complaints about Ian Ladbrooke, and his dishonesty and thievery. (again, scroll back to see)

I make no apology for returning to the Ladbrooke case, since nothing appears to be being done about a man who has ‘lost’ an estimated $500,000 due to athletes and managers.

Well, one thing is being done about Ladbrooke, and it is being done by Hugh Jones, and it is, incredibly, to defend Ladbrooke.

Several days before last weekend’s Delhi half-marathon – one of three events, organised by Procam, for which Hugh Jones is Race Director (or, as he prefers ‘consultant), and Ladbrooke is elite recruiter – Athletics Kenya (AK) circulated managers, agents, race organisers et al, to say that no Kenyan athlete could go to Procam races, while Ladbrooke was involved.

Jones wrote a letter on behalf of Procam, pointing out firstly that he is AIMS gen. sec. To which the only response can be, what is the general secretary of AIMS doing moonlighting as a Race Director, or is that, consultant?

Furthermore, having pointed out to AK that he is gen sec of AIMS, an organisation theoretically dedicated to helping marathons around the world, what on earth is Jones doing defending a man who has stolen a half-million dollars from marathons and marathoners, with over $300,000 of that sum having been diverted from those Procam races, for which Jones is Race Director, or is that consultant?

Since the original revelations on this site, Ladbrooke has been sacked by the Ras Al Khaimah half-marathon, and the organiser himself has paid off Ladbrooke’s five figure debt. England Athletics has also paid off Ladbooke’s debt to British athletes, for whom he collected (and never delivered) prize money from a Danish race last spring. The London Marathon has also paid off debts that Ladbrooke owes for participation in the British capital.

Yet not only does Ladbrooke continue to work for Procam – an organisation from which, I repeat he has diverted over $300,000 – but Hugh Jones, the general secretary of AIMS defends Ladrooke.

Maybe Hugh Jones would like to defend his actions a little more publicly?

He can have a whole blog here to do it, and I will publish it as he has written it.

follow the links back to the previous stories on this subject fit-for-purpose

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *