I can't understand why Coe and the IAAF are doing nothing about this. Was Coe a doper himself?
I can't understand why Coe and the IAAF are doing nothing about this. Was Coe a doper himself?
"There are approximately 500 abnormal blood results between 2009 and 201, and according to the guidelines, they have to be sent immediately for expert review," Ashenden told ARD. "Yet according to the data base, the next blood test was conducted with an average delay of around eight months and in many cases more than a year. According to the data base, around a quarter of all abnormal values had no further blood tests at all."
Have we reached the conclusion the IAAF is okay with doping yet?
Can the "extraordinary Kenyan genes" argument please die? Please?
I want to know why/how the IAAF gives Russia and Kenya a free pass
This is an attack on my sport. It\'s on high time those so called experts shut up.
Edward Teach wrote:
http://lawm.sportschau.de/peking2015/nachrichten/Experts-present-new-analysis-of-IAAF-blood-test-data,doping312.htmlI can't understand why Coe and the IAAF are doing nothing about this. Was Coe a doper himself?
Coe has to toe the line for people who control things at a much higher level, the same people who work as a group to control things while atomized populations go about their business. This is why these people run the media and banks in the US and GB, and administratively run most sports in the US and tell the IAAF what to do. These people want sports to have a certain look, send messages to the always gullible peoples of Europe and their kin in the US that they aren't good enough to compete in anything, that they should feel guilty about any success they have, that they should allow third world peoples who are incapable of building successful countries of their own invade the first world ("refugees" lol) and destroy. Laugh now, but it's going on right in front of you. Lord Coe knows which side his bagel is buttered on.
FROM THE ARTICLE:
...Ashenden also criticised the infrequency of IAAF blood tests on young Kenyan athletes.
"Only seven Kenyans were tested at the Junior World Championships in 2010," Ashenden said. "That means 30 medals, and just seven of the 215 blood tests were allocated to Kenyans. And that makes me question just how hard the IAAF was trying to monitor them."
Edward Teach wrote:
Was Coe a doper himself?
How dare you question the integrity of an elite miler from the early 80's pre-random-testing era.
Coe is no more a doper than Cram was. Not much, at least.
I think that you meant to post this here:
http://www.stormfront.orgLooks like he's softened his stance on drugs already:
"After a world championships enlivened by some stunning performances but taking place under a cloud of doping allegations, Coe said he hoped to move the agenda on. It is sadly slightly the territory we have inherited, he said. Part of my responsibility is to move the sport off that territory. We are more than a discussion about test tubes, blood and urine.
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/aug/30/sebastian-coe-defends-links-nike-iaaf-president
i dont know if seb coe took drugs or not,but his talent was jaw dropping.his nickname was the human deer.as for whether or not hes sticking his head in the sand,im not sure.i suspect theres only so much he can do,and if there really is a culture of drug use in track and field(as so many people seem to think)i doubt he can change that.
Edward Teach wrote:
http://lawm.sportschau.de/peking2015/nachrichten/Experts-present-new-analysis-of-IAAF-blood-test-data,doping312.htmlI can't understand why Coe and the IAAF are doing nothing about this. Was Coe a doper himself?
He's been in charge just over a week!? How can all these allegations and evidence of being lax with testing be his fault? Surely it was during Lame Duck's tenure. You don't blame a cabinet minister for a government's ineptitude, you blame the PM.
If similar stats and evidence are leaked in 2 years time, then yes, Coe will be accountable. But he can't be blamed for things that happened before he was in charge. No one is blaming Bubka for this apparent reluctance to be more stringent with dope testing, yet he was in exactly the same position as Coe.
A few other points that no one ever brings up, which highlight that no matter how much you want to do extra to stamp out doping, the legal set up is totally against you.
1. In the 1990's Diane Modahl was tested positive for steroids. She was banned by the IAAF and by the BAF. She appealed and finally won. But in the process the BAF (British Athletic Federation) went bankrupt fighting her appeal through the courts. This compromised OOC testing for other athletes as a result. Do any of you know how many court cases are being fought at any time by the IAAF regarding appeals from athletes over doping? Do any of you know how much that costs?
2. Coe attempted to ban athletes found guilty of drug doping from ever competing in the Olympics in 2007. This proposal was overhauled by the Court of Arbitration, who deemed it illegal.
3. The IAAF tried to enforce life bans but were prevented doing so by EU's council on Human Rights, who deemed it illegal, as it denied an athlete the human right of making a living. A similar verdict was made over the 4 year ban.
So there are financial and judicial barriers preventing the IAAF from being the body that everyone wants them to be. It would be interesting to hear how these can be overcome by those sitting at their PCs happily criticising Coe for all the ills of Athletics.
What can be done to stop athletes appealing and draining limited IAAF funds?
What can be done to over rule the EU court of Human Rights and the Court of Arbitration for Sport?
Edward Teach wrote:
http://lawm.sportschau.de/peking2015/nachrichten/Experts-present-new-analysis-of-IAAF-blood-test-data,doping312.htmlI can't understand why Coe and the IAAF are doing nothing about this. Was Coe a doper himself?
Coe will turn out to be the Sepp Blatter of athletics I can assure you.
Already his ridiculous claim that his connection with Nike is not a conflict of interest is an indication of the sort of devious creep who is now in charge of our sport.
If it doesn't make sense, maybe it's nonsense. Why would you think Coe (only in office for a week) and the IAAF are doing (or have done) nothing? After all, they have caught many Russians and Kenyans since 2007.
Edward Teach wrote:
http://lawm.sportschau.de/peking2015/nachrichten/Experts-present-new-analysis-of-IAAF-blood-test-data,doping312.htmlI can't understand why Coe and the IAAF are doing nothing about this. Was Coe a doper himself?
No. Maybe you reached it before all this started.Not even close - read The Sports Gene to find out why.Did the IAAF give Russia/Kenya a free pass?
pop_pop! wrote:
"There are approximately 500 abnormal blood results between 2009 and 201, and according to the guidelines, they have to be sent immediately for expert review," Ashenden told ARD. "Yet according to the data base, the next blood test was conducted with an average delay of around eight months and in many cases more than a year. According to the data base, around a quarter of all abnormal values had no further blood tests at all."
Have we reached the conclusion the IAAF is okay with doping yet?
Can the "extraordinary Kenyan genes" argument please die? Please?
I want to know why/how the IAAF gives Russia and Kenya a free pass
I can't think of any big names that the Iaaf have taken down. Europe and Russia hate each other, so taking their athletes is easy, not a war on the sport as coe would say. Knocking off some low level kenyans, probably having more to do with protected Dibaba and Defar, is not really impressive. I personally think that some of the bans might be under the table. Usain bolt disappears. Bekele disappeared. Injury?
Maybe the big names aren't blood doping.
well. wrote:
I can't think of any big names that the Iaaf have taken down. Europe and Russia hate each other, so taking their athletes is easy, not a war on the sport as coe would say. Knocking off some low level kenyans, probably having more to do with protected Dibaba and Defar, is not really impressive. I personally think that some of the bans might be under the table. Usain bolt disappears. Bekele disappeared. Injury?
They did not hire Coe off the street like a day laborer. What was he doing before the presidency? Vice president at the IAAF.Nothing is changing. IAAF reports to no one.
rekrunner wrote:
If it doesn't make sense, maybe it's nonsense. Why would you think Coe (only in office for a week) and the IAAF are doing (or have done) nothing? After all, they have caught many Russians and Kenyans since 2007.
Edward Teach wrote:http://lawm.sportschau.de/peking2015/nachrichten/Experts-present-new-analysis-of-IAAF-blood-test-data,doping312.htmlI can't understand why Coe and the IAAF are doing nothing about this. Was Coe a doper himself?
Obama fixed the economy in less than a week, why can't Vote do the same with doping?
pop_pop! wrote
I want to know why/how the IAAF gives Russia and Kenya a free pass
Don't you get it by now?
Jamaica is part of the British Commonwealth. Kenya is part of the British Commonwealth. The Russian ("anti-") doping equivalent is a friend of the British head of WADA. Doping is permitted if you are a friend of the United Kingdom. Doping is only bad if you are American. See Lord Coe say how terrible it was for Tyson Gay get off with a 1 year ban for helping authorities....but see the same Lord Coe say nothing when Asafa Powell had an 18 month ban cut to 6 months.
Does that explain it for you?
I don't know. Was Coe involved with, or in any way responsible for, anti-doping as vice-president?Considering the IAAF budget for anti-doping, and their leading role in using the ABP to sanction athletes, is no-change a bad thing?Two things that could change for the better: 1) make anti-doping more independent; 2) work with national "'ADAs" to improve their testing capability (i.e. Kenya) and compliance (i.e. Russia).I can understand the scientists who will argue that we need more funding, more blood tests, and more infrastructure. Until anti-doping is 100% effective, instantaneously, it is easy to find reasons why and areas where they could have done more. On one side, the IAAF can demonstrate targeted testing was performed, athletes were sanctioned, funding was increased, tests were improved, etc. But even if 50% effective, that means 50% slipped through.What's missing in this whole discussion is a benchmark. How does the IAAF compare with other sports federations? Top 10%? Average? Bottom 10%? Which organization does better than the IAAF? The UCI? If they are one of the leaders in the anti-doping effort, then the tone of this whole conversation is wrong.
pop_pop! wrote:
They did not hire Coe off the street like a day laborer. What was he doing before the presidency? Vice president at the IAAF.
Nothing is changing. IAAF reports to no one.