Sign my petition to keep Sha’Carri Richardson in the women’s 100 at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics

CrispyChicken wrote:

She knew the rules, she made the choice to break them. She's out. No way will I sign your bleeding heart petition. There are far too many cases of Rules for Thee, not for Me.

Has no one pointed out she had just been told by a reporter that her biological mother had died?

It’s like when a cop pulls you over for speeding and you tell the cop, “I’m sorry my wife is in labor.” The cop could give you a ticket - but he normally doesn’t.

Common sense people.

1) It’s a dumb rule

2) There were extenuating circumstances.

No way I'm signing the petition! Sha'Carri knew the drug rules going into the Olympic Trials. And she irresponsibly chose to break them anyway! Poor judement by her. But at least she owned up to her stupidity, and she is taking the punishment given to her. If you want to change the rule going forward, then show up at the yearly rules meeting and debate this issue. But don't by whiney, entitled American, always wanting your way!! I'm more impressed with Sha'Carri's reaction to this punishment than I am with Letsrun's reaction! Once again, spoiled brat Americans having no self awareness or concept of the real picture!

Uh-huh wrote:

Exactly. This is a classic case for "rule for thee, not for me". These apologists don't maintain the same standards for international athletes, or even less popular athletes from within the USA.

+1.

1. If this were an athlete from another country, would you sign a petition?

2. If this were a 3rd place finisher in an obscure event who has no chance to win a medal, would you sign a petition?

If the answer to either question is "no" then why would you sign this petition?

rojo wrote:

CrispyChicken wrote:

She knew the rules, she made the choice to break them. She's out. No way will I sign your bleeding heart petition. There are far too many cases of Rules for Thee, not for Me.

Has no one pointed out she had just been told by a reporter that her biological mother had died?

It’s like when a cop pulls you over for speeding and you tell the cop, “I’m sorry my wife is in labor.” The cop could give you a ticket - but he normally doesn’t.

Common sense people.

1) It’s a dumb rule

2) There were extenuating circumstances.

https://www.today.com/news/today-show-exclusive-sha-carri-richardson-speaks-out-about-failing-t224363

Gotta give props to her for breaking out the XXXL lashes for the sympathy interview.

She admitted to doing it to cope with the stress of the situation. Maybe the 5th place finisher would have finished 3rd had she been allowed to use it to cope with the stress of the situation. Should we give someone a headstart next if they have a sore calf because they aren't at 100% but would win if healthy? Hiw about a banned painkiller? That is what you are advocating for her. I can't believe that extenuating circumstances would change your mind about handicapping an event. Disgusting.

rojo wrote:

1) She’s clearly the best 100 runner in the US.

2) Marijuana isn’t a performance enhancer in track and shouldn’t be on the banned list.

3) The only way I can see her keeping her spot is if all of the US100 runners with the standard turn down the spot if offered it by USATF. Then USATF will have to nominate her.

Please spread the word.

http://chng.it/t6KMB27ph4

PS. I don’t want to get into any marijuana debates. Yes, it was foolish for her not to abstain right before the Olympics but it’s also foolish for those in charge to even be bothering to test for it.

Rojo, keep your sticky beak out of it. You want to changes the rules = FINE. But do it in the offseason. Why weren't you there for others, earlier athletes who had to abide by the rules and suffered the punishment currently in place. Why a special carve out for Richardson?

rojo wrote:

Has no one pointed out she had just been told by a reporter that her biological mother had died?

It’s like when a cop pulls you over for speeding and you tell the cop, “I’m sorry my wife is in labor.” The cop could give you a ticket - but he normally doesn’t.

Common sense people.

1) It’s a dumb rule

2) There were extenuating circumstances.

What does any of this have to do with your decision to use your "bully pulpit" to try to bully other athletes into voluntarily removing themselves from a spot on the U.S. Olympic team? The more I've thought about this, the more disgusted I am with your decision. I think you should withdraw your petition and apologize to the athletes that it "calls on." It's just shameful.

As for her story about why she did whatever she did, I don't know whether anyone on this thread "pointed out" what everyone has heard by now. It's idiotic (which, by the way, is not the same as "common sense") to justify your petition by analogizing this to a speeding ticket issued for someone who says something about his wife being in labor. It's more like publicly shaming and "calling on" certain other motorists to pay an extremely large ticket, based on whatever beliefs you have about road safety, or biochemistry, or social policy, or cultural norms, or the actual facts of the case. Why should another runner have to spend all of her time researching such matters and arriving at whatever conclusions you happen to believe while she is trying to do other things, like preparing for the race of her life?

Because his powers of discernment have been compromised by his desire to appear cool to the woke crowd.

JBaller33 wrote:

+1 Let’s get that rule changed, but the fact remains that it was an established rule entering the competition.

This is an empty pleasantry in the face of the mass of rules and regulations, laws and edicts, mandates and codes, often contradictory, that famously congest the courts and render prosecutorial discretion and common sense the only reason that the entire population is not in jail.

The posters on this board should read the works of Philip Howard, from the "Death of Common Sense" to "Life Without Lawyers" and "Try Common Sense." The head of Common Good, he is close to Bill Bradley and Al Gore and has shown that the effect of the congestion of rules has the effect of fostering chaos and arbitrary power.

This is a perfect case in point, WADA enforcing a mistaken and counterproductive regulation that has nothing to do with its actual mission since pot is if anything an anti-PED.

If you were one of the other runners who had the qualifying time and were offered the spot, would you take it? I don’t think I would ( esp. if I was already running the 200). I would want to make the team based on my performance, rather on some lame drug rule that was broken under mitigating circumstances.

Dumbest post ever on LR by the OP. As a coach I have been in tech meetings at the national championships and the OT as well as many major races and seminars announced by USATYF and USADA. All have warned on the use of cannabinoids and the potential for disqualification and results of a positive test. Whether you agree with the rule or not, we all know the rule. She chose to disregard the warnings. Sorry. Lesson learned. Rojo, the big antidoper should be ashamed of himself for being such a hypocrite.

rojo wrote:

Has no one pointed out she had just been told by a reporter that her biological mother had died?

It’s like when a cop pulls you over for speeding and you tell the cop, “I’m sorry my wife is in labor.” The cop could give you a ticket - but he normally doesn’t.

Common sense people.

1) It’s a dumb rule

2) There were extenuating circumstances.

Rojo going from the 'ridiculous to the moronic'.

Someone speeding to get his wife to hospital in an emergency gets equated to an athlete who knows she will get tested, chilling out with some weed.

As I said, they just continue to count the ads.

It was never an issue for them when it didn't affect a possible gold medallist.

Why don't you guys focus on some real reporting on athletics?

advice? wrote:

If you were one of the other runners who had the qualifying time and were offered the spot, would you take it? I don’t think I would ( esp. if I was already running the 200). I would want to make the team based on my performance, rather on some lame drug rule that was broken under mitigating circumstances.

If I were Prandini or Thomas, I would pass on this opportunity and focus on 200.

If I were Gardner, I would take it. Why shouldn't I?

If I were Hobbs, I would have even a bigger reason to take it than Gardner. I am the one who was screwed in the trial, and it wasn't my fault.

rojo wrote:

Common sense people.

1) It’s a dumb rule

2) There were extenuating circumstances.

You protest dumb rules before their consequences upset you, not now. And the idea that extenuating circumstances should matter is pretty funny. What counts as extenuating? Does WADA have a list of extenuating circumstances? Who decides on the list? The appeals would be endless. Do you ever stick with the idea of strict liability? If you knowingly take and it's all right if there are what someone has deemed extenuating circumstances (and I'm not suggesting that the death of a parent wouldn't make everyone's list), surely it's an extenuating circumstance if you take a supplement that doesn't list prohibited substances as an ingredient but contains them.

rojo wrote:

CrispyChicken wrote:

She knew the rules, she made the choice to break them. She's out. No way will I sign your bleeding heart petition. There are far too many cases of Rules for Thee, not for Me.

Has no one pointed out she had just been told by a reporter that her biological mother had died?

It’s like when a cop pulls you over for speeding and you tell the cop, “I’m sorry my wife is in labor.” The cop could give you a ticket - but he normally doesn’t.

Common sense people.

1) It’s a dumb rule

2) There were extenuating circumstances.

https://www.today.com/news/today-show-exclusive-sha-carri-richardson-speaks-out-about-failing-t224363

1) But what about the athletes that follow the rules?

2) So I have a tragedy in my life and that excuses me to break the rules? I felt down so decided to eat a 10 ounce non castrated boar offal contaminated carne asada burrito from an authentic Mexican food truck?

Get out of here. You can argue all you want to get change but fact of the matter is she failed a drug test. Maybe moving forward we can remove pot from the banned list. As of now it is banned. If the other athletes conformed so should she. Regardless of how upset she was with her biological moms passing potential olympians make proper choices.

Hey the rules for life aint fair. That's life.

That being said, I think she should be allowed to compete as weed is not a PED. I'd spend a night with her for 10 grand. Whatever. Life is short. I know she'd be down.

Marijuana isn't the only drug she will have taken. So - nah.

N O