Are you allowed to say people have a mental illness as an insult?
Mods… ban this poster again.
Why have you refused to discuss your racist terms. If you follow your arguments on Jackson you are hiding something.
Cant have it both ways can you ?
You continue to repeat your lies about what you claim is my racism on every thread, which I have refuted. I can only ascribe that to a mental illness on your part.
I'm not the one complaining about Gault's question.
You’re the one crying about people asking why Gault and LR treat athletes so differently in a discussion in large part about Gault.
The whiners here object to Gault's question. I have sought to explain why I think it is a fair question. But I realise the indignantly stupid - like yourself - will not see that.
So everyone on Letsrun knows about Flojo and the doping arguments. But a 200m runner who is knocking on Flojo's world mark doesn't have a view on that? If she doesn't care whether the record is doped then she doesn't care about doping. We can form our own views as to why that would be.
Seb Coe disagrees because he would like to see Jackson erase Flo Jo’s mark.
He literally thinks the exact opposite of what you think regarding Jackson.
You completely miss the point of course. It is that Lord Coe's response shows that Gault's question was legitimate - which is the subject of the thread. I also have that view of Gault's question, that it is a fair question, even though my perceptions of Jackson might differ with those of Lord Coe .
YOU spent all day yesterday saying that Jackson is a doped athlete.
Then YOU use Coe says that if Jackson erased Flo Jo’s old mark that would be better for the sport.
Surely you get how damn stupid that is????
Power on, you’re humiliating yourself.
I can see why you like to work so SLOWLY. You are as thick as a bunch of bricks. The point of this thread is whether Gault's question was a legitimate question. It is. From one perspective, that has been shown to be so by Lord Coe's comments. I don't have to agree with everything he said in order to make the point that a top official in the sport has effectively validated the point of Gault's question. Lord Coe's response is independent of my own view that Jackson is herself a doper. Neither view is incompatible with the fact that Gault's question was a fair question. But I realise these distinctions are beyond you and most on this thread. Running is clearly not a cerebral sport.
Have you noticed how multiple other posters think you undermined yourself regarding Jackson yet your on your own?
Maybe, just maybe you messed up. Childish stubborn refusal to admit it is not a good look.
You’re the one crying about people asking why Gault and LR treat athletes so differently in a discussion in large part about Gault.
The whiners here object to Gault's question. I have sought to explain why I think it is a fair question. But I realise the indignantly stupid - like yourself - will not see that.
I can see why you like to work so SLOWLY. You are as thick as a bunch of bricks. The point of this thread is whether Gault's question was a legitimate question. It is. From one perspective, that has been shown to be so by Lord Coe's comments. I don't have to agree with everything he said in order to make the point that a top official in the sport has effectively validated the point of Gault's question. Lord Coe's response is independent of my own view that Jackson is herself a doper. Neither view is incompatible with the fact that Gault's question was a fair question. But I realise these distinctions are beyond you and most on this thread. Running is clearly not a cerebral sport.
Have you noticed how multiple other posters think you undermined yourself regarding Jackson yet your on your own?
Maybe, just maybe you messed up. Childish stubborn refusal to admit it is not a good look.
That multiple posters missed the point shows only that the average IQ here is not very high.
The whiners here object to Gault's question. I have sought to explain why I think it is a fair question. But I realise the indignantly stupid - like yourself - will not see that.
Why are you so angry and insulting to everyone?
You don't seem to have noticed that insults have been liberally dispensed by those who have sought to disparage my views - and Gault's question (and not simply disagree with them). What they choose to dish out they get back.
Seb Coe disagrees because he would like to see Jackson erase Flo Jo’s mark.
He literally thinks the exact opposite of what you think regarding Jackson.
You completely miss the point of course. It is that Lord Coe's response shows that Gault's question was legitimate - which is the subject of the thread. I also have that view of Gault's question, that it is a fair question, even though my perceptions of Jackson might differ with those of Lord Coe .
It is legitimate that you are challenged about your admitted comments are those of a racist.
Are you allowed to say people have a mental illness as an insult?
Mods… ban this poster again.
Why have you refused to discuss your racist terms. If you follow your arguments on Jackson you are hiding something.
Cant have it both ways can you ?
You continue to repeat your lies about what you claim is my racism on every thread, which I have refuted. I can only ascribe that to a mental illness on your part.
You provided an academic reference that said that the terms you use are racist and should not be used. You admitted it. And then call people who point to your admission as being mentally ill.
There is no way Ms. Jackson has the freedom to say, yeah, I am bummed to be chasing a doper's, and in particular Flo Jo the doper's, records. Still active leaders in the sports were dopers, there are dopers who turned to doper coaches everywhere, the broadcasting booth is full of dopers, and it would wreak economic and social disorder on the whole breadth of the establishment, and many legacies if the dominos started to fall. That's why it was unfair to single out a single athlete for the question. Also, go ask the female marathon record chasers between April 13th 2002, and April 23rd, 2017. I don't remember LR asking that.
You’re the one crying about people asking why Gault and LR treat athletes so differently in a discussion in large part about Gault.
The whiners here object to Gault's question. I have sought to explain why I think it is a fair question. But I realise the indignantly stupid - like yourself - will not see that.
The whiner is the guy having a melt down because most posters want to know why Gault/LR treat Jackson so differently from Wightman, Ingebrigsten and especially Houlihan on a thread about JGault.
It is a legitimate question and one that Gault has so far refused to answer. I think we all know why.
The whiners here object to Gault's question. I have sought to explain why I think it is a fair question. But I realise the indignantly stupid - like yourself - will not see that.
The whiner is the guy having a melt down because most posters want to know why Gault/LR treat Jackson so differently from Wightman, Ingebrigsten and especially Houlihan on a thread about JGault.
It is a legitimate question and one that Gault has so far refused to answer. I think we all know why.
Jackson, Knighton, Jeruto, Getachew, ... the pattern is hard to deny. The way they act around Ingebrigtsen especially, is quite embarrassing.
The whiner is the guy having a melt down because most posters want to know why Gault/LR treat Jackson so differently from Wightman, Ingebrigsten and especially Houlihan on a thread about JGault.
It is a legitimate question and one that Gault has so far refused to answer. I think we all know why.
Jackson, Knighton, Jeruto, Getachew, ... the pattern is hard to deny. The way they act around Ingebrigtsen especially, is quite embarrassing.
You continue to repeat your lies about what you claim is my racism on every thread, which I have refuted. I can only ascribe that to a mental illness on your part.
You provided an academic reference that said that the terms you use are racist and should not be used. You admitted it. And then call people who point to your admission as being mentally ill.
I can probably provide an academic reference that establishes your IQ is two standard deviations below the norm.
Armstronglivs: Well done Gault, Jackson is a dirty doper.
Seb Coe: would like to see a clean athlete like Jackson erase a dirty record.
Armstronglivs: Lord Coe proves my point.
Everyone else: 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Armstronglivs: But but but Lord Coe.
This has truly been one of the funniest conversations to follow, thank you Armstronglivs for the laughs.
The jokes are yours, since you clearly couldn't follow what was being said. The issue was entirely whether Gault's question was legitimate. It was - because it was about Jackson knocking on what is widely believed to be a doped world record. Coe and I are on the same page on that. But I also happen to believe Jackson is also a doper. I realise these distinctions go way past your humble intelligence and that of most of the plodders on this thread.