Seven world class Russian track athletes banned for doping scandal

djerrr wrote:

the Russians females were successful in substituting urine because they injected themselves with someone else’s urine, using a catheter within 10-20 minutes before the testers arrived. They peed out that substitute urine while being watched by an unsuspecting tester (of same gender). They somehow got advance notice of when the testers would arrive. They needed advance notice, because the urine they injected into themselves was hard to keep in their bodies for more than 30 minutes or so.

Of course you know this because, the more unbelievable the lies, the easier it is to get the masses to accept them.

Actually what happened was that WADA sent invisible green aliens to pee in the cups, and neither the athletes or the test observers could see them. Now you have the whole story, which is a total bunch of CRAP.

There is no proof that the Russian athletes did anything unusual with their samples. All the evidence points to the drug testing agencies blotching up and making a mess of the whole procedure again.

The real shame is the corrupt drug testing agencies are the ones who BENEFIT from the mess, and as usual it is the hard working athletes who are hurt.

Slow again wrote:

I guess the author was really “lost in translation”, as this is not what Balakhnichyov said:

Exactly. Why did it take a year for WADA to come up with some strange bogus charges. The athletes were witnessed giving their samples. If there was a problem it should have been brought to attention immediately, not hid and tampered with behind closed doors and later brought out with no supporting evidence.

Any federation or athlete that fails, refuses a test/retest should be banned by all sports world wide irrevocably for life.

That includes the Russian Federation, Lance Armstrong, and UCI.

They suck.

The Russian women did not refuse any test and did not fail any test.

A peculiar comment from Pierre Weiss, General Secretary of IAAF:

http://www.allsport.ru/index.php?id=19874

“We obtained the text of the decision of the Russian [Athletics] Federation – that is all I can say on this matter, warned Pierre [Weiss]. - As you know, I give no commentaries on the topics if IAAF has not reached the final decision yet. When the resolution could be made? It could happen during the IAAF council in Monte Carlo on November 21 to 22, perhaps during the council, perhaps after it - I can not say for sure. Our President, Lamine Diack, is travelling at the moment. Therefore, until he returns and studies the decision of Russian Federation, on all questions about the case of Russian sportswomen I will answer – ‘no comments’. Then, on Mister Diacks's return, we will issue the press release, in which IAAF will state its position. This will clearly not occur within the next few days, but I can not tell when precisely.”

I am not sure about the protocol in this situation, but should IAAF make a decision within 30 days? Otherwise the case could not be taken to CAS if there is a dispute.

J.R. wrote:

The Russian women did not refuse any test and did not fail any test.

They did fail the test, but it took a long time to be able to determine that failure. Specifically, it took some period of time to discover that the DNA was the same for all seven samples. Then, they had to get DNA samples from the athletes and test all of them and compare the results. Because this procedure is unique (has not happened like this before), it will have taken much more time than usual the determine what the situation is.

Furthermore, this is evidence of systematic cheating, which is viewed as more serious than an individual 'positive' test. Therefore, a substantial penalty is more likely. I expect (and hope) that the outcome is something like: 1) All result dating back to the initial test are nullified; 2) there is a two-year ban from the date of the positive identification, which as part of the test; 3) all prize money won in competitions since the initial test are forfeit and must be repaid before the athlete can come back from suspension, this includes not only IAAF official prizes (e.g., WIC), but also other awards. It might be up to the individual meets to get any appearance money back, but I would guess that the contracts for such payments have clauses that indicate that they cannot be retained in the case of a related fraud.

There is a thread on this with comments on the TrackandFieldNews.com board.

This entire case is B.S. the Russian girls did not fail any tests and anyone who believes that it is possible that they injected someone else's urine into their bodies is a complete idiot. They were banned because they were suspected of doping but they never tested possitive to anything. Why do we even do the test if we can ban people on suspicion alone, next time someone runs a world record they should be banned because we suspect that they use drugs. These girls are most likely drug cheats but they never tested positive and they should never have been banned! If we work on a basis of suspicion and not prove even the clean athlete's run the risk of being banned because they are simple better than everyone else therefore everyone suspects that they must be cheats!!! Next we will ban people because we dont like them.

[quote]Can you not read?? wrote:

The samples the seven athletes were providing were not theirs! The DNA did not match! Why would they do this?? Do you think they couldn't be arsed to pee into a bottle, so got a mate to do it for them??!!

quote]

First of all Ive done one of these tests and it is physically impossible to provide a sample other than your own and second of all it is impossible to tell someone's DNA from their urine!

Poster J.R. is Regina Jacobs. She just flipped her initials. Don't waste your time replying to her nonsense.

That is very funny and you gave me a good laugh.

No I am not Regina Jacobs and don't know her personally.

I don't know if what Russian fan says is true about not being able to test for DNA in urine. However, the testing procedure was witnessed and verified by representatives of the testing agency. The athletes did all that was required in providing their samples. Any onus falls on the testing agency, and any of their failures make the samples invalid.

They cannot just say the athletes are banned, because the agency failed to find something wrong with the athletes.

Additionally, the testing agency had the samples for a very long time, and the samples were out of the vision and inspecting of the athletes and any athletes representatives. There might have been cheating and tampering, but if so, it was and is being DONE BY THE TESTING AGENCIES. Not by the athletes.

Get a clue guy (gal?). When it has been shown that the urine sample was not their own they FAILED the test. While not identical, if you refuse an test in a DUI case, it is prima facie evidence as for as the statue is concerned.