Compassion Shown by USOC Members : Olympic committee: Most members don’t criticize Steinbrenner, believing he will ‘do the right thing.’

Robert J. Kane, who as a former president of the U.S. Olympic Committee remains a member of the board of directors, was among the few dissenters when New York Yankee owner George Steinbrenner was elected as a USOC vice president in February of 1989.

But Kane, who often has been called the USOC’s conscience since stepping down as president in 1981, said Monday that he has been “won over” by Steinbrenner’s performance as a USOC officer.

“It has been a very different George Steinbrenner than I was led to believe,” Kane said by telephone from his home in Ithaca, N.Y.

“He has worked seriously and well with the USOC. He’s done everything that he’s been asked to do, not in a flamboyant way, not in the way he comes across with the Yankees.”

Kane, however, said that he is concerned that public support of the USOC might be eroded if the committee continues its association with Steinbrenner after major league baseball’s action Monday against the Yankee owner.

“I think this will sway public opinion,” Kane said. “If he’s banned from a profession, and it’s an athletic profession, that, unfortunately, will have an effect. Sure, it will.

“Public support is all important to us. Without it, we’re out of business.”

Asked to speculate on current USOC President Robert Helmick’s response, Kane said: “I have enough faith in George that I don’t think Helmick will have to say anything. George is bright and intelligent. I’m not trying to evict George, but I feel he’ll do the right thing.”

A USOC spokesman said that Helmick will not comment until today.

Neither did Steinbrenner comment Monday on his position with the USOC, but sources close to the Yankee owner said they did not believe he was inclined to resign.

As a public sector member of the USOC’s executive board, Steinbrenner first moved to the forefront of the Olympic movement during the 1988 Winter Games, when he was named by Helmick to chair an overview commission.

Assigned to recommend modifications in the USOC structure that would better serve athletes, the commission’s report was generally well received by the House of Delegates in February of 1989. At that same meeting, Steinbrenner was elected one of three vice presidents.

Opposition to Steinbrenner centered on his controversial reputation as Yankee owner and skepticism about his commitment to Olympic sports. But, based on the long line of USOC members who sought his autograph after the election, he had many more supporters than opponents.

His fellow officers and other members of the board of directors since have praised him for his business acumen and leadership qualities. He also has been a generous financial contributor, even organizing and funding his own track and field club in Florida.

“You have to compartmentalize your feelings,” said USOC secretary Charles Foster of Duxbury, Mass. “What happened (Monday) was a baseball area. Then, there’s the Olympic area.

“I’m an Olympic friend of his. Really, he has contributed a lot to the Olympic Committee. I would hate to see him go. I don’t think any purpose would be served by it.”

Andrew Kostanecki, one of 121 members of the board of directors, was a member of the nominating committee in 1988 that submitted Steinbrenner’s name for consideration as vice president and said he remains supportive.

“It makes me sad that he’s run into personal problems that seem to run deep,” said Kostanecki, who is from New Canaan, Conn.

“It’s hard for me to say what’s going to happen or what should happen. There’s no question that the USOC is sensitive to public opinion. The Olympic movement sits on a pedestal. Therefore, we have a mode of behavior that has to be different.

“But we also have to be fair. I suspect that whatever happens will be between Mr. Steinbrenner and Bob Helmick.”

Gene Edwards, a board member from Milwaukee who frequently criticizes USOC officers, said he would like to speak for Helmick in that situation.

“I would say, ‘George, I think for everyone involved, and the image of the U.S. Olympic Committee, you ought to resign,”’ Edwards said.

“Basically, we can’t afford that kind of publicity. I know we’re not Simon pure, but you can’t do just anything and remain a member of the Olympic Committee.

“You have to be held accountable. George has to have a conscience and has to be embarrassed. If that happened to me, I’d move so far away that you’d have to pay $750 to send me a postcard.”

Edwards described himself as a “lone voice in the wilderness,” but he had a least one companion in board member Don Porter of Oklahoma City.

“I feel George should never have been elected to an office in the first place,” he said. “He’s too controversial.”

He also took issue with those who believe Steinbrenner’s impact on the USOC has been positive.

“I don’t know if he’s done any good work ever for the USOC,” he said.

“I think George should seriously consider resigning in the interest of the people who have worked so hard on the USOC’s behalf. It’s my gut feeling that we might be better off without someone like that.”