Posted June 3, 2005 (updated with appended resume on July 9, 2005)

JULY 22, 2005, ADDENDUM

By Ken Stone

Cesare Beccalli

Masterstrack.com: Why are you running for WMA president? What are your goals as president?

Beccalli: I’m seeking the presidency because in a situation like the present one, in which so many Council members can’t be re-elected to their office, there is need of experience, coordination, guarantee of continuity. As one of the original members of the Council and former president, I feel long-standing and close ties to WMA. I feel that I can contribute to the program. I also feel that WMA is at the crossroads in terms of relationship with IMGA and the IAAF. I have always had — and still have — the best possible relationship with the leadership of the IAAF as well as with many of its Continental Associations and take a great deal of credit for the successful relationship that WMA and IAAF have. I also personally know the IMGA leaders.

Other main goals as president will be: to find and prepare new officers (possibly not only from Europe or North America) not to find ourselves at the next elections in the same situation as now — to promote organisation of championships in new areas — to realize an adequate strategy on anti-doping together with much more information to affiliates and competitors — fairness, openness and democratic management.

How would your administration differ from that of Torsten Carlius?

I do not wish to engage any comparison with Torsten’s administration.

According to the WMA Interim Financial Statement 2003-2004, WMA had a budget deficit of $60,000 on June 30, 2004. What would you do to increase revenues or cut expenses?

I’m not aware of the alleged deficit. The reasons for which there is such a situation are certainly better known by those who presently are Council members. Obviously, unnecessary expenses must be avoided. This would probably include some travel expenses.

Under WMA bye-laws, a punishable offense is “promoting, organising, conducting or advertising any international masters competition which has not been sanctioned by WMA.” Both of you — as well as outgoing president Carlius — may have run afoul of this rule. Does the rule need to be scrapped or more vigorously enforced?

I do not wish to make comments on the conduct of other persons, so it is up to our delegates to consider if Carlius and Perkins run afoul of that rule or not. Regarding me, the above question includes conclusion which is not true. During my presidency, I never improperly advertised international masters competitions not sanctioned by WAVA (now WMA). I can even state that there has been an occasion in which, through a circular letter to our affiliates, I did exactly the contrary and also obtained that the IAAF did the same with all of its national federations inviting all athletes to not take part. The rule must remain valid.

One of the biggest roles of WMA is selection of meet hosts for world championships, but all the meets since 2004 and projected through 2009 will be in Europe. Why is this? What can be done to spread the meets around?

I would like to underline that during my 10-year presidency one championship only (Turku 1991) took place in Europe. Now I did my best to help Brazil to bid for 2009, unsuccessfully in part for reasons which we are going to consider at point 6. Regarding Brazil, I’ll try again for 2011. All this is self-explanatory.

Some people argue that the $150,000 sanction fee for hosting world meets prevents many good cities from becoming candidates. Would you consider lowering the fee?

I’m very concerned about the rights fee; certainly its so-high level prevents not only cities but also entire areas of the world to become candidates. On the other hand, it would be improper now, by my side, to say that I promise to lower the fee or reinstitute the athletes’ fee because to decide on a matter of such basic nature much more information and details on the WMA financial situation are first needed. It will be one of the most important points to be studied in the new Council. For sure, should the sanction fee remain, we’ll have at least to consider exceptions to promote the organization in areas like South America, Asia or Africa, of course not without the necessary guarantees for our association. ( Note: I believe that Stan was one of the strongest proponents for an increase in the rights fee from USD $20,000 to $150,000).

At Gateshead in 1999, the WAVA General Assembly chose Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, to host the 2003 WMAC. But for reasons never detailed, the WMA Council stripped Malaysia of the meet and awarded it to the runner-up: Puerto Rico. How did this happen? What could prevent the WMA Council from doing this again?

How did this happen? Ask those who were Council members at that time. I was not involved in that decision. What to do for the future ? Vote for me.

During Mr. Beccalli’s 10-year term as president of WAVA ending in 1997), he faced an impeachment attempt based on evidence that he paid the registration fees of an expanded Hungarian delegation to insure his election. For Cesare: Have you sworn off these tactics? For Stan, should this disqualify Cesare as a WMA candidate?

I take great offense at the form of this question as it includes a conclusion that is not true. There was no evidence at all. I had nothing to face simply because to allegations proved to be false and no proceeding resulted. I have nothing to “swear off.” As for the question to Stan if “should this disqualify Cesare,” please note that just after having decided to consider that attempt out of order, the same Assembly voted for the President election and I overwhelmingly defeated Owen Flaherty (one of the organizers of the impeachment attempt) 89-25, that is a majority which I never reached before. Who was “disqualified”? However, I advise anybody against using arguments which could be prejudicial to my honorability.
The WMA Web site is the public face of world masters athletics. But two important features are lacking — a message board (or forum) and an up-to-date seasonal list (such as the IAAF top lists). Will you commit to adding these elements to the WMA site? If not, why not?

I would be open to any ideas that would perform greater service to the athletes. What you have suggested would require dedicated volunteers.

Another important function of WMA is the maintenance of world age-group records, but in recent years many elite (open) marks set in high-profile meets have not been ratified. Many official WMA records in the W35 and M40 age groups are not true world bests. What can be done to fix this?

Better coordination between our Records Committee and that of the IAAF. This needs just those relationships which I have with the IAAF plus probably volunteers as above.

The future of WMA’s world championships is in jeopardy because of competition from the IMGA and its World Masters Games. Should WMA consider combining its world championships with IMGA events? If so, why? If not, why not?

Firstly, I will do all that I can to have WMG change the year of their Championships to odd-numbered years. Should that be realized, we could consider it as a proof of good will and start further negotiations, which do not exclude the possibility of partially combining our events, of course only after having in our hands all needed technical and financial guarantees in order to be able to present a proposal to our Assembly. Should they refuse, again the WMA Assembly would decide what the future relationship with IMGA will be. However the point which must be clear is that negotiations with IMGA can not be conducted with WMA showing any weakness. No promotion, no help to organization, no advertising to Masters Games until a serious agreement be reached. All this being the case, I remain strongly convinced that to reach cooperation and coordination between our associations is in our common interest so that we have to do all what we can do for that goal.

The General Assembly several years ago voted to change the name of the group from WAVA to WMA to boost its chances of gaining corporate and other sponsorship. Has WMA seen any evidence that the change is paying off?

Personally I see no evidence at all, but the incumbent Council members are the ones (who should) respond to this question.

A continuing concern in world sports is doping, but among the older age groups some medications are essential for an adequate quality of life. Many of these medications are banned by IAAF and WADA. WMA provides for a therapeutic-use exemption but makes it difficult to gain approval. And even a TUE is no guarantee that an athlete won’t be suspended after a positive drug test. Should WMA revisit its drug rules to take older-age issues into consideration?

I still was WMA president when the concept that medications prescribed by physicians for physical conditions must not be considered as doping was accepted. So I continue to not have a problem with the concept.

I’m also convinced that it is not so difficult to gain approval, despite something in the procedures certainly must be bettered. In my opinion, as result of many talks with competitors and delegates, the main problem is that there is not enough information for them. So this is something that has been discussed in the past and must be discussed in the future, but any could be the new decisions, (and) much more and better information to competitors is needed.

It’s becoming well-known that masters drug testing is never done in the United States and in many countries — and that drug-testing at world meets is minimal. Is it fair for the U.S. not to test? Is it fair that only a relative handful of athletes are tested at WMA world meets?

It is certainly unfair, but I do not see how WMA could control what happens at National levels. As for the tests during (WMA) championships, presently we can only proceed with random drug testing, which I assume anyway has been successful in reducing the illegal use of drugs. Drug testing is very expensive, so WMA has been doing all that it can under budgetary restraints. If elected president, I’ll try to get more help from the IAAF.

In 2001, following the Brisbane world meet, American Al Sheahen wrote a column critical of the meet and of WMA, saying at one point: “The lack of fairness, openness, and free discussion is becoming more pernicious within WAVA (WMA).” He cited secret meetings that were closed to masters athletes. What efforts will you make to open up WMA and foster greater democracy?

Sheahen also was critical of WMA’s many private VIP receptions, which he said “smacked of elitism, royalty vs. the rabble, and an ‘us vs. Them’ mentality, exactly the opposite of what WAVA is supposed to be about.” What would you do to change this culture?

Your question implies that Al Sheahen’s allegations are true. I can only say that during my tenure as president there were never any claims of elitism and even less “secret meetings,” therefore I’ll continue in my way of doing. Regarding VIP receptions, sometimes they are unavoidable and could not be blamed on us (for example, they could be part of a program decided by local authorities), but it must be a matter of very limited occasions and certainly not become a culture of elitism.

Anything you’d like to add? Feel free to express yourself

In addition: During my 10-year presidency I proved to have an international mentality and capacity of understanding the needs not only of Europeans. I had excellent relationships with Asian, African and South American people as well as USA representatives. Now, for various reasons, it is even better. I live some months per year in Brazil, my wife is Brazilian and has been the Brazilian Masters chair. A new program of cooperation with the IAAF has been already discussed with IAAF President Lamine Diack. It should be based upon further development of our activity , like it is now and in new areas, but also like a joint-venture for promotion of athletics in favor of the new generations all over the world. Last but not least , I speak four languages (five, with the help of my wife), not my native only. That is another guarantee of direct international culture and understanding.

Thank you for the attention, I’ll be honored to get the confidence of the readers of this questionnaire.

Cesare Beccalli , Brenzone June 1st 2005

Cesare Beccalli Curriculum Vitae dated April 2005

Born April 24,1934, in Milan, Italy. Grew up in Milan and lived there until age 52. Moved to Lake Garda. Competed in many WAVA world meets — including Goteborg, Christchurch and Miyazaki — and EVAA and Italian Championships in the 200 and 400 meters. Best performances at age 42 — 25.3 in 200 and 56.4 in 400. (Certainly not a champion, just a good participant). Have two daughters (40 and 35 years old); second wife, Lidia, has two sons, university instructors in Brazil. Lidia also a university professor, teaching physical education, particularly qualified in athletics and volleyball (in her youth, she was selected for the Brazilian national team).

Now resident of Brenzone (Lake Garda, Verona) and part time in Brazil (Porto Alegre).

Studies: Catholic University in Milan (economics and commerce).

In 1955 began 27-year career at Solvay (international chemical group), becoming general manager for PVC (plastic material) in 1975. In 1982 began independent activity selling to producers of mineral water and soft drinks, plastic material, machinery and technical knowhow for their production of bottles. Retired in 1996.

Married to Lidia Olivera, former president of the Brazilian Masters and organizer of the 1998 Masters\u2019 South American Champs in Porto Alegre.

Youth sports: cycling, later , since 1972, athletics.

Only Italian competitor at the 1st World Masters Championships in Toronto 1975.

Founder in 1976 of IMITT (Italian Masters Association) integrated into FIDAL (Italian Athletic Federation) in 1989.

Founder in 1978 of EVAA, organizer of two European Masters Championships (Viareggio 1978 and Verona 1988) and one WAVA world championship (Rome 1985).

President of the EVAA from its founding until 1987, when, in Melbourne, was elected WAVA (now WMA) president on basis of a program of which one of the main points was to have WAVA officially recognized by the IAAF while still remaining independent, a purpose fully achieved.

Re-elected in 1989, 1991, 1993 and1995 then ending presidency in Durban because of the constitutional rule not permitting more than five terms. After 1997, remained two years on the WAVA Council as past-president; attended all of the masters European championships, many of the South American ones and all of the World Championships, with the only exception being Puerto Rico 2003 (due to a very hard physical accident).

Speak four languages: Italian, French, Spanish, English plus some knowledge of Portuguese.

JULY 22, 2005, ADDENDUM:

Al (Sheahen) says: “I wouldn’t be surprised if the Europeans … voted as a block for Beccalli.” As fAr as I know until now, other entire areas, non-European parts of the world, are ready to support my candidacy. It could mean that I have good probability to be elected, even without North American votes, but the only reason for which I’m making these comments to Al’s observations is that I would feel very sad to be elected without the understanding and support of the USA, a Country which I love and where there are persons whom I love.

Certainly Al is right when saying that my way of running Council meetings and Assemblies never was a masterpiece in the past and probably will not be so in the future, despite I promise that I’ll try to do my best.

But my question is: Is democracy only – or mainly – to follow in a perfect way the procedures -– for example the Robert’s Rules of Order -– or be really, at any time, keen to understand the proposals and exigencies of others, also when they did not understand how to behave following the formalities and/or having problems of language?

In many occasions, since 1977, I had to see and also personally suffer, people cut off of discussions because of strict respect of procedures.

In Puerto Rico about 50% of the delegates to the Assembly were deprived of their voting powers because their NGB did not present in the right time their names in writing. Perfect democracy as for respect of rules, a shame in terms of care of the real interests of WMA.

Now there are troubles in the Council because the president is urged to accept nominations from the floor, which he is not keen to do. By the formal point of view, Torsten is completely right, because the time to present nominations expired, nominations from a Country which is not the same of the nominee are presently valid, the proposal from the Council to withdraw the non-stadia activity was just a proposal which could be defeated by the Assembly (so there was no reason to no run for Non-Stadia VP) but I agree that to not accept nominations from the floor could seem unfair and preventing someone to take part of the WMA life.

All this being my question is: Is the concept of democracy and participation always the same or depend on the moment or political interests?

During my presidency some persons (and some of them are now candidates for Council membership) organized a plot against me. At that time, nominations from the Council were accepted. Totally unaware about what was going to happen, at the opening of the Council meeting in Turku 1990, I simply and naively declared that I was happy to be available for another period.

Then the General Secretary declared his intention to run for president, a vote took place in practice without previous discussion and he was nominated by the Council with a majority of one vote. But the worst is that, still keeping his office of General Secretary, he started a very hard and insulting campaign against me –- that is his own president — and that to do so he used circular letters to the affiliates on WAVA headpaper.

The General Assembly defeated him at the elections in Turku 1991. Later, when that group of persons found that through a normal democratic election there was no way to win, they “invented” the impeachment. The procedure of impeachment wasn’t even taken into consideration by the Assembly and the result of the election was 89-25. Now, the same persons, or at least some of those who were cooperating with them, want to teach me what democracy is.

I’m not saying that Al and Stan had to do something directly with all that, but certainly they always were and still are sympathetic with that side.

The reasons for which all that people hate me is that with my election in 1987 I broke the “group of power” whose intention was to continue to handle WAVA as a private association. That desire could be blameworthy but justified by a democratic point of view, provided that the Assembly approves. But the Assembly in Melbourne 1987 elected me on basis of a clear well different program.

Democracy should mean that one can continue to keep his/her ideas and fight for them but not being part of the Council where, to be democratic and correct, you have only to cooperate with all others and the president to realize the wishes of the Assembly.

All this is just the contrary of what some Council members did, with the direct or external support of someone who now wants to be Council member again.

As for the matter “past or future,” in principle Al is perfectly right. I’m the first to affirm that when an association needs to have back its honorary president something is going wrong. Nevertheless, my American friends should know that to run for president was not on my initiative.

Many, after Puerto Rico, warmly pushed me to do so. I was very reluctant, (but) I finally got convinced when I saw who the other candidates were. To be clear, I would never think to run for president if “fresh blood” having some necessary characteristics would be available. That is,in our case, to be relatively young, to be known and appreciated in our world and in that of the IAAF, to be internationally open and speaking languages.

At a personal level, I have nothing against Stan, but I find that he is not the right person. (Besides) being younger than me, he doesn’t have any of the hereabove mentioned characteristics. In addition, he is the last person to negotiate with IMGA from a strong position and — if necessary — to fight to defend our association, which is a matter of basic nature for our future.

why he is certainly not in the right position, I think many already know. I’m not going to write here anything about that, but I’m available to meet in San Sebastian with all those who sincerely desire to be informed (including some criticism which I had and still have on Torsten about this point. But, after all, he is not running for president). As for Brian Oxley, it should be difficult to think of someone who is “older” than him by all points of view, independent of other considerations which I have expressed hereabove regarding his behaviour supporting that “group of persons.”

All this being, and provided that we have to start new programs with the IAAF, I could be the only right person for the next period and, as I have already declared in my program, one of the main tasks for me will be to find and prepare persons for the next elections. In other words, you can see me as “preparing the future” not “belonging to the past.”

Finally, the observation that I have been out of touch during eight years is completely wrong. First, as I have been in the Council as past president during two years it could be matter -– if any — of six years Second, but first as for importance, I attended (with the only exception of Puerto Rico, due to a terrible physical accident) all of the World and European Championships and Assemblies as well as some South American ones.

I kept in close touch with many Council members and discussed with them the WMA problems. The fact that for a matter of style I avoided any interference should not be confused with being no more in the heart of the WMA’s matters.

Note for my USA friends: Indeed I give place to an interference. It has been in Brisbane 2001 where I convinced Europeans and South Americans to vote for Rex (Harvey). Without my help, your countryman would never be elected. Rex knows about (that), openly recognized and thanked me. Thank you for your attention. I remain convinced that I well deserve your confidence.