Al Sheahen is a national treasure. Besides being the former publisher of National Masters News and a 1997 candidate for the presidency of World Masters Athletics, he remains an astute observer of masters politics. Recently I asked him to review my interviews with WMA presidential candidates Stan Perkins and Cesare Beccalli. He sent this reply yesterday: “I’ve been out of WMA politics for eight years, so I’m hardly an expert on what’s been going on since 1997. But, since you asked, here are a few quick observations on the upcoming election.”

Al writes:
First, both Cesare and Stan should be commended for replyng seriously to your 17 excellent questions. But Stan was much more specific in his replies. For example, question #1: “Why are you running for President?” Stan’s replies are very detailed, including promising “a totally open policy on all WMA Council policy and financial matters.” Cesare’s administration was very open in publishing financial statements, but I’m told that hasn’t been the case in the past eight years under the regime of Torsten Carlius (Sweden).
#2. How would your administration differ from Carlius? Cesare chose not to answer this question, but Stan accurately points out that both Cesare and Torsten adopted a style of leadership that “has centralized power around them” rather than the Council and Assembly. This seems to be a difference in style between Europeans and non-Europeans. The biggest complaint against Cesare in his 10 years as WAVA President (1987-1997) was that he never learned how to fairly run a Council meeting or General Assembly meeting. The Europeans don’t seem to be as concerned with democracy as do the non-Europeans. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Europeans, with over 50% of the delegates in the General Assembly, voted as a virtual bloc for Beccalli.
#3. What about the budget deficit of $60,000? Cesare says he’s “not aware of any deficit.” Stan replies that we need a more realistic projection of participant numbers, and that we should look into a merchandising program. He says WMA “is in the process of negotiating a per competitor fee with the World Masters Games in return for our participation in their quqadrennial competition.” He even suggests cutting costs by perhaps trimming the number of people on the Council.
#4. Does the rule prohibiting promotion of masters competition, not sanctioned by WMA, of Council members need to be scrapped or more vigorously enforced? What a stupid rule. What’s wrong with a Council member, or anyone else, promoting a masters meet or masters activity? That’s what we’re supposed to be doing: creating more participation opportunities for masters athletes. So what if it’s not “WMA sanctioned.” Who cares? Cesare wants to keep the rule; Stan says the General Assembly should review the policy.
#5.What can be done to spread the world championships around? Cesare did a good job in getting plenty of bidders for WAVA Championships in 1991 (Finland), 1993 (Japan), 1995 (USA), 1997 (South Africa), and 1999 (Great Britain). He says he’s encouraging Brazil to try for 2011. Stan also calls for moving the championships around as much as possible, cautioning that “South America does not generally have the financial resources to meet the requirements of the event.” He says WMA would need to use some of its accumulated funds to help out either South America or Africa.
#6. Is the current “rights fee” of $150,000 too high? Cesare says maybe. Stan says no. A high fee may preclude a third-world nation from bidding. Stan says $150,000 is proper for an event which draws 5000 participants. (Note; The sanction fee for the World Masters Games, which draws about 20,000 athletes every four years, is $1 million.)
#7. Why was Kuala Lumpur dumped as the 2001 Championship site after the General Assembly voted for it? Cesare says he wasn’t on the Council at that time and knows nothing about it. Stan says there were good reasons, such as “the organizers were unwilling to comply with the requirements.”
#8. Cesare was accused of paying the registration fees of some Hungarian delegates in 1987 to gain extra votes for President and what about it? I think this is a non-issue. The way the voting was structured in 1987, there was nothing illegal about what Cesare allegedly did. It’s old news. To his credit, the first thing Cesare did when he took office was to ask for ideas as to how to change the voting method. A new system, based on each country’s participation, was created in 1989, and is still in effect today.
#11. Should WMA combine its championships with the WMG? Cesare feels we should cooperate with WMG. He leaves the door open, providing WMA maintains its independence and control. Stan also argues for WMA attaining a position of influence within WMG. However, Stan “rules out any consideration of our combining our world championships into the Games…we would lose our identity.” I plan to attend the WMG in Edmonton next week. I’ll let you know what I learn.
#12. Did changing the name of WAVA to WMA help gain sponsorship, the alleged reason for the name change? Cesare says ask the current Council. Stan says it’s too early to tell. All I can say is it appears Keith Whittaker, who favored “WAVA,” was right and Ron Bell, who lobbied for “WMA,” was wrong.
#13-#14. Both Cesare and Stan seem to take a common-sense approach to the problem of drug testing.
#17. Cesare speaks five languages. That’s certainly one point for him.
Finally, It seems to me the delegates to the General Assembly have a clear choice: go back to the past or move into the future. Cesare had his shot. He did some good things, but it’s time for a fresh approach, which Stan will bring. Besides, Cesare has been virtually out of touch for the past eight years, while Stan has been an active Council member as Oceania delegate.