And Now, Witness for the Defense: Mary Slaney

So here is my question...

If you are innocent, why do you have to gather evidence to prove you are innocent?

How about the accusers presenting factual information (evidence) that this is actually going on.

I am no big fan of pro track and field, didn't like it when it first showed up during my own career, don't care for it today. But, I do believe that everyone has a right to stand tall and not be overrun by a bunch of rumors, innuendoes or false statements.

I used to hear a lot about all the drugging going on in the early 70's, but I never saw anyone taking drugs or admitting they took drugs (PEDS). There was no testing, so what are you going to do. You keep your mouth shut until real evidence is provided or the accused admits it.

"Salazar is gathering evidence that he hopes will clear his name after he was accused of plying Galen Rupp with performance-enhancing drugs throughout the Olympic 10,000m silver medallist’s career."

To me, this just doesn't make sense, if I were innocent. My only comment would be "Prove it". And then I would move on and continue doing the best I could in my profession.

Alberto is truly insane. But there is no insanity defense for running a doping lab.

There are hundreds of quotes from Salazar, both before and after Slaney bust, that say he is the coach. He is making this so easy.

I think Mary Decker is now the Monica Lewinsky of this story. "I did not have coaching relations with that woman."

Mary Decker Slaney, client of Dr. Brown aka Dr. "I have something that can take you to the next level."

justthefacts wrote:

I am no big fan of pro track and field, didn't like it when it first showed up during my own career, don't care for it today. But, I do believe that everyone has a right to stand tall and not be overrun by a bunch of rumors, innuendoes or false statements.

I'll give you points for putting a nice twist on the 'proof' message. Except all the proof needed is in the BBC episode.

I also like the impersonal version of the 'it's bitter haterz doing more hating winners at NOP.'

But, pure nonsense. Sorry, try again.

Maybe throw in a 'think of the children!'. Or a more direct personal attack like, 'Why are you losers still working on this? Go for a run!!' Kind of shaming thing.

Not enough NOP-bots polluting threads.

Does Slaney saying "Salazar was not my coach, in actuality he was my temporary coach during the time of my preparations for the OGs and was quote as saying he was my coach but not explaining fully that he was not actually my day to day coach but just another coach involved in the OG preparation period"- clear all this drugging thing all up?

I infer it does

From OPs link:

Telegraph Sport understands that Salazar has this week been seeking confirmation from Slaney that he was indeed not her permanent coach at the time of the failed test and was merely filling in on a short-term basis in the build-up to the 1996 Atlanta Olympics. Salazar is expected to argue that he was not in charge of her day-to-day training regime and was looking after it only on a temporary basis.

I infer Salazar was brought in to assist in getting Slaney ready for the OGs. I infer he was engaged to add a facet to Slaneys training program she was not normally getting from her regular day to day coach. I infer that what ever that special talent he brought to the table surely had nothing to do with fine tuning her blood chemistry to get her just below but not over specific limits allowed by the rules of the time. I'm sure Slaney will be able to put this silliness to rest when she explains the role Salazar played when he was not actually her regular day to day coach during her preparations for the OGs.

Nothing to see here-move on.

Agree on many points. Most which pro running is awful. NCAA is fun, though awful coaches do their best to ruin the sport. At least NCAA races are exciting and scores the meet. HS level is HUGE.

Pros...Gag.

VIPLounger wrote:

Irony of ironies:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/11663953/Mo-Farah-coach-Alberto-Salazar-calls-on-Mary-Slaney-to-disprove-doping-slurs.html

Aspiring Hollywood script writers should be paying attention to all this.

You are a puppet of Coe and the U.K. press.

As far as I know, Slaney's stand remains that she didn't dope, that the failed test was caused by a variety of factors (birth control, alcohol consumption, age). For her to deny Salazar was her coach during the Olympic Trials is almost implying that the failed test wasn't wrong after all. Why would Salazar want to distance himself from Slaney during that time period if she wasn't doping and the test was wrong? If she didn't dope, what the hell does it matter who her coach was?

I think these two are pretty close friends (wasn't he in her wedding party when she married Slaney?), but I'm not sure she'd be willing to throw herself under the bus for him.

wineturtle wrote:

Does Slaney saying "Salazar was not my coach, in actuality he was my temporary coach during the time of my preparations for the OGs and was quote as saying he was my coach but not explaining fully that he was not actually my day to day coach but just another coach involved in the OG preparation period"- clear all this drugging thing all up?

I infer it does

From OPs link:

Telegraph Sport understands that Salazar has this week been seeking confirmation from Slaney that he was indeed not her permanent coach at the time of the failed test and was merely filling in on a short-term basis in the build-up to the 1996 Atlanta Olympics. Salazar is expected to argue that he was not in charge of her day-to-day training regime and was looking after it only on a temporary basis.

Long time NYTimes T&F writer Jere Longmans article says the temporary coaching arraignment lasted at least two years and focused on modifying her training load. Clearly it did not take two years to count her surgeries and tell her to not train so hard. I'm sure Slaneys comments will indicate Salazars involvement was giving a piece of blanket advice and in no way included monitoring the controlled progression or amplitude of her workouts.

Slaney holds five American records from 800 meters to 3,000 meters, and she may also hold the record for running-induced surgeries -- 18 or 20 by unofficial count of Slaney and her coach of two years, Alberto Salazar.

"It's a two-edged sword," said Salazar, the great marathoner who speaks from painful experience. "The greatest athletes want it so much, they run themselves to death. You've got to have an obsession, but if unchecked, it's destructive. That's what it is with her. She'll kill herself off unless you pull the reins back."

That is exactly what Salazar and Bill Dellinger, the track coach at the University of Oregon, have done with Slaney: Pulled the reins in. Put her on a program of controlled workouts and gradual progression.

She has been surgery-free for a year and has run pain-free since before Christmas. With a time of 15 minutes 38.61 seconds in mid-April, Slaney has qualified at 5,000 meters for the Olympic trials in June. There is talk of doubling up at 1,500 meters.

"I honestly believe she is better poised than ever to win an Olympic gold medal this summer," Salazar said.

Alberto was not my coach when I was not properly tested for not taking drugs. And I remember quite clearly that none of those things happened, as I never inhaled while I didn't have sexual relations with that woman.

And that barefoot girl is STILL a little b%$#

Let me make this perfectly clear: I am not a crook.

A 1946 History Flashback: Bugsy Siegal calls on Al Capone to disprove gangster slurs. "We were just two choir boys collecting cash from Father Salazar's bingo games to help the poor."

One things for sure. Ben Bloom and his editors were laughing their @sses off when they wrote this sub-heading:

"Mo Farah's coach hopes convicted doper can help prove his innocence."

I think these two are pretty close friends (wasn't he in her wedding party when she married Slaney?), Was he the maid of honor or just a bridesmaid. I think you maybe confusing him with Bruce Jenner

Read more:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6549920#ixzz3cfN2fvxc

Whether he was Slaney's coach or not, Salazar was certainly close to the situation. According to this Duke Law publication, he personally contacted her eventual attorneys the same day she was notified of that failed T/E test (July 1996).

https://law.duke.edu/news/pdf/lawmagfall98.pdf

(See page 10)

The attorneys perspective on the case is quite interesting. They consider her as having won the case, which I suppose she did with the USATF. It appears at the time of publication, the IAAF had yet to rule.

hear hear! what happened to the presumption of innocence?

This is the most telling piece of that article in terms of Salazar and Nike's strategy:

Salazar wrote:

knowingly making false statements.

Well, both Salazar and Rupp had the chance of telling their side of the story when they were contacted by Epstein for the ProPublice article. He even sent them the questions (with specific details) on the prednisones/testosterone tests, the Daegu IV story and more. They decided not to answer any of that questiones.