A leaked and now deleted roster from the Turkish Athletics Federation has sent tremors through the global track-and-field community: 11 elite athletes, including five Kenyans, reportedly signalled intentions to compete for Turkey at the Los Angeles 2028 Olympics.
If confirmed, the move would be one of the most dramatic recruitment drives in recent athletics memory, blending big-name talent, financial muscle and complex eligibility hurdles.
The headline names
Kenyans: Brigid Kosgei, Ronald Kwemoi, Catherine Amanang’ole, Brian Kibor, Nelvin Jepkemboi.
Jamaicans: Rojé Stona (2024 Olympic discus champion), Rajindra Campbell (2024 Olympic shot put bronze), Jaydon Hibbert (world U20 triple-jump record holder), Wayne Pinnock.
Others: Favour Ofili (Nigeria), Sophia Yakushina (Russia).
The list appeared as part of a reported 53-man Turkish Olympic roster and was later removed from the federation’s channels, leaving more questions than answers and a swirl of speculation across social media and sports desks.
Why this matters now
Turkey’s alleged recruitment push is not just about adding names to a team sheet. It signals an aggressive strategy to fast-track medal prospects by courting established stars.
High-profile additions such as Brigid Kosgei, a former marathon world-record holder, and Jaydon Hibbert, a generational triple-jump talent, would instantly reshape Turkey’s medal calculus at LA 2028; provided the transfers clear the regulatory bar.
Beyond medals, the story raises thorny questions about fairness, national identity and the modern marketplace of elite sport.
Reports in the press have suggested substantial financial packages for some recruits, a reality that fuels debate about whether wealthy federations can, or should, buy competitive advantage.
Rules, timelines and the roadblocks ahead
Transfers of sporting nationality are governed by World Athletics. Athletes seeking to represent a new federation must satisfy eligibility criteria, which can include waiting periods, residency requirements and formal approval from the sport’s nationality review processes.
Transfers are not automatic; they can be delayed, contested or blocked.
With LA 2028 three years away, timing is crucial. Paperwork, clearances and any mandatory stand-down periods must be completed well before Olympic selection windows close.
Even if athletes and Turkey reach agreement, the clock and the rulebook will determine whether those signatures translate into Turkish bibs in Los Angeles.
Reactions and the wider debate
Public reaction has been mixed and passionate. Some fans and commentators sympathise with athletes who seek better support, training environments and financial security.
Others view the trend as a talent drain that undermines the development pathways of traditional athletics nations.
Voices on social media have framed the moves as both pragmatic and poignant: praise for athletes who chase opportunity, and frustration from supporters who feel federations at home failed to nurture their stars. The debate touches on athlete welfare, national pride and the ethics of modern sport — a conversation likely to intensify as more high-profile names surface.
Historical context and notable parallels
Nationality switches are not new in athletics. Over the decades, several elite competitors have changed allegiances for a mix of personal, professional and political reasons. Those precedents show the process can deliver fresh opportunities for athletes and new strengths for receiving federations — but they also illustrate how transfers can spark controversy and long-running disputes.
What to watch next
• Official confirmations: Statements from the Turkish Athletics Federation, the athletes involved, and World Athletics will be decisive.
• Eligibility rulings: Any transfer will require formal clearance; the timing of approvals and any appeals will determine whether these athletes can wear Turkish colours in LA.
• Federation responses: How Kenya, Jamaica, Nigeria and other affected federations react — through retention strategies, public statements or reforms — will shape the sport’s landscape ahead of 2028.
Bottom line
The leaked list, if validated, would be a seismic development in the build-up to LA 2028, blending sporting ambition, financial incentives and regulatory complexity.
For fans in Nairobi, Kingston, Lagos and beyond, the story is a stark reminder that elite athletes increasingly navigate a global marketplace where opportunity, recognition and resources can redraw national lines.
Whether this chapter ends in confirmed transfers or a tangle of appeals and denials, it has already forced a wider reckoning about how nations value and retain their sporting talent.
