Soo... What ever happened to the Doping Allegations against Salazar, Rupp, and the NOP?

Gelling like felon wrote:

Of course. Only a crazy witch hunter could think that Salazar experimenting with testosterone gel to learn how much could be applied before triggering a positive test could be evidence of doping. No doubt that's the sort of thing all respected and upstanding coaches do routinely.

So this is evidence of what exactly? His experiment didn't break any laws or violate any doping rules.

The allegations are that he doped his runners. There's no proof of that. Just a bunch of people making assumptions.

Senior Software Engineer wrote:

So this is evidence of what exactly? His experiment didn't break any laws or violate any doping rules.

The allegations are that he doped his runners. There's no proof of that. Just a bunch of people making assumptions.

Your post inspired me to go look this up because I have thought for a long time Alberto Salazar could possibly face sanction for running the androgel experiment on his sons as it may be a doping violation.

I've pasted the full section (2.6.2) at the bottom but it says that possession of a prohibited substance by a support person (Alberto Salazar) is a doping violation unless that person has a TUE for the substance or "other acceptable justification" for it if I'm reading it correctly.

So if Alberto Salazar possessed androgel then that normally be a doping violation. However, Alberto has a personal prescription for androgel so I think he'd argue that is an "acceptable justification" for androgel.

However, Alberto does not have permission to give that androgel to someone else. If he is possessing androgel to give it to someone else that would be outside the valid reason for it and one could argue a violation of 2.6.2.

Change the name of the drugs. Say Alberto had a prescription for EPO, but decided to get and give androgel to his sons. One could easily argue his possession of androgel would not be "consistent with a TUE granted to an Athlete in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification" and that would mean its a doping violation.

Now in this case Alberto has a prescription for androgel but he doesn't have a prescription that lets him give it to his sons. If that is what he did, not only would that be a violation of prescription drug laws but one could easily argue a violation of WADA code.

Alberto might try and argue that the his worry of being sabotaged is an "acceptable justification." However, if Alberto used his personal prescription of androgel to conduct a doping experiemnt on his sons, I think one can easily argue Alberto broke not only prescription drug laws but committed a doping violation.

WADA code 2.62: "2.6.2 Possession by an Athlete Support Person

In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or

any Prohibited Method, or Possession by an

Athlete Support Person Out-of-Competition of

any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited

Method which is prohibited Out-of-Competition

in connection with an Athlete, Competition or

training, unless the Athlete Support Person

establishes that the Possession is consistent

with a TUE granted to an Athlete in accordance

with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification."

OP. Good post. I was thinking the same thing myself. With the Russians and what not, it was easy to forget the Salazar investigation. I was like, "Did it just die quietly." I've made a few calls. I have reason to believe that things are still ongoing. Weldon's post is very much on the money. I expect we'll hear something in early 2016.

Well you are reaching to find something based on a technicality and even if they decided to throw the book at him based on this technicality, it doesn't prove at all that he doped his athletes.

If he hasn't doped his athletes, then who cares.

rojo wrote:

OP. Good post. I was thinking the same thing myself. With the Russians and what not, it was easy to forget the Salazar investigation. I was like, "Did it just die quietly." I've made a few calls. I have reason to believe that things are still ongoing. Weldon's post is very much on the money. I expect we'll hear something in early 2016.

easy to forget salazar given russian doping??? why and how can you forget?

Huh? What? Duh?

You got the american doping program with more or less everybody using at the top.

you have the russians

you have the east africans

you have the moroccans, turks, spanish

then you had the italians

before that you had the chinese

then you had the finns and .... onto europe in the 80's with blow doing big time.

you gotta look into Coe and Radcliffe and that bunch by now too..

your sport is Dope and Filed.

your sport is ruled by corrupt self serving mediocre bureaucrats.

your sport is rotten to the core.

which is not to say that guys like nick willis and many others are not clean and decent.

we're talking about the overall status of affairs.

get it.??? rotten to the core.

You are stating exactly what I was thinking. If there was a violation, it would come from a long reach, and be based on a technicality. On top of that, it was his son that was taking the androgel, not an athlete as defined by the rules. It seems the only ones who care are the "haters" and I find it sad to see "haters" so focused on this that they are obviously making their lives miserable.

Making The Mostofit wrote:

You are stating exactly what I was thinking. If there was a violation, it would come from a long reach, and be based on a technicality. On top of that, it was his son that was taking the androgel, not an athlete as defined by the rules. It seems the only ones who care are the "haters" and I find it sad to see "haters" so focused on this that they are obviously making their lives miserable.

Sleazy is going down.

rojo wrote:

OP. Good post. I was thinking the same thing myself. With the Russians and what not, it was easy to forget the Salazar investigation. I was like, "Did it just die quietly." I've made a few calls. I have reason to believe that things are still ongoing. Weldon's post is very much on the money. I expect we'll hear something in early 2016.

The big russian smokescreen covers all....

It's designed to deflect attention away from the reports about ALL nationalities doping, including NOP, Radcliffe, 1st and 2nd ARD reports + more.

Propoganda and misdirection - its hilarious just how effective it is!

Making The Mostofit wrote:

You are stating exactly what I was thinking. If there was a violation, it would come from a long reach, and be based on a technicality. On top of that, it was his son that was taking the androgel, not an athlete as defined by the rules. It seems the only ones who care are the "haters" and I find it sad to see "haters" so focused on this that they are obviously making their lives miserable.

Who should be banned are Cook, Goucher and Magness. Cook was caught lying, Goucher was caught either being misleading or lying or both, and Magness was caught making incredibly stupid and poorly thought out accusations. You literally have to be an idiot to think the questionable testosterone notation on his chart at age 16 was evidence of cheating.

Technicality? Maybe by your definition. But proving Sleazy Sal guilty of a Federal Crime would ban him from working with athletes for the rest of his life and that would be a good thing. Not proving him guilty of doping his athletes does not make him innocent

Let us not forget that Al Capone was arrested for tax evasion. The Feds NEVER could connect him to Organized crime in "a court of law". Everyone knew he was involved in Organized Crime but they had to go with what they had. The end result of tax evasion created the necessary result.

Convict Sleazy Sal for whatever we can and get him out of the sport.

Inv stigmatizing take time and allegations =/= proof. Maybe they're doping and maybe they're not but a bunch of people whining on the Internet puts them no closer to disqualification.

*yawn*

more click-bate

The BBC reporter and Epstein conspired to obtain and use a prescription drug illegally (EPO) to make a point and gain information for their story.

Can you explain in detail the lies? I don't remember Cook being central to anything.

Furthermore, it seems like you're saying that USADA can't prove a damn thing but for a possible prescription misuse, despite a number of people coming forward. Not one shred of hard evidence of coach/athlete doping, just a bunch of wishy-washy anecdotes from athletes and Magness saying they were with the team for a few years, never cheated themselves, but believe there may have been cheating going on.

So all we have left is proof that Salazar gave his prescription to his adult son. Let's get him!! God help the millions of American families that have one time or another shared a prescription. Cast the first stone....

Trouble wrote:

So all we have left is proof that Salazar gave his prescription to his adult son. Let's get him!! God help the millions of American families that have one time or another shared a prescription. Cast the first stone....

Do we have proof that Salazar gave *his* prescription to his adult son? Given the circumstances, I 100% agree that this what happened. However, this is Sleazy Sal and Nike we are talking about. How hard would it be to find a doctor willing to forge a document stating that the son had a longstanding prescription for androgel? They could use some BS about not coming forward with this info before because the son was embarrassed by his "condition".

Anyways, we are in total agreement on your overall point. This androgel thing will not bring down NOP.

Making The Mostofit wrote:

You are stating exactly what I was thinking. If there was a violation, it would come from a long reach, and be based on a technicality. On top of that, it was his son that was taking the androgel, not an athlete as defined by the rules. It seems the only ones who care are the "haters" and I find it sad to see "haters" so focused on this that they are obviously making their lives miserable.

There are no technicalities. The use of ANY controlled substance requires approval for A SPECIFIC ATHLETE, not a coach or anyone else.

162430 wrote:

Do we have proof that Salazar gave *his* prescription to his adult son? Given the circumstances, I 100% agree that this what happened....

What do you want? A video of Sleazar rubbing his prescription into his son's loins?

Nothing will happen.

They have TUEs. It's a joke but that's the state of the sport now.