She says this news cost her 4-5 seconds on 200m repeats? That's not a bad environment dulling one's edge, that's the difference between an elite and a high schooler.
She says this news cost her 4-5 seconds on 200m repeats? That's not a bad environment dulling one's edge, that's the difference between an elite and a high schooler.
This part is particularly compelling:
“The lack of boundaries surrounding a banned athlete, my inability to enforce my own boundaries, the poor communication surrounding this process, and the disregard for the BTC athletes’ input were the main reasons for my departure,” she says.
Jerry and Shalane should be very transparent if they are letting a banned athlete anywhere near athletes in good standing in a training setting. Something that they should also make sure that everyone there is OK with. But it sounds like they have a massive blind spot with Shelby and don't understand that it's poor form to have a banned athlete still working out around athletes who worry about the consequences for their careers as well as the optics.
btc bbd west coast family wrote:
She says this news cost her 4-5 seconds on 200m repeats? That's not a bad environment dulling one's edge, that's the difference between an elite and a high schooler.
She ran 3:58.93 and finished 5th in the Olympics, so I would say she's more resilient than you're giving her credit for with the high schooler comp.
How is she allowed to train with them while serving a ban? Is it only a competition ban? If so it seems kinda useless as she can just do everything she was before just without races for a little while
Yeah I'm not loving the amount of interaction they still afford someone serving a doping ban.
jamesww wrote:
Yeah I'm not loving the amount of interaction they still afford someone serving a doping ban.
It's crazy to me that Shelby would be training with them in any official capacity. First of all, most pro athletes could do a decent enough job training solo. It's not optimal for many, but she doesn't need to be in peak shape. Second of all, it just seems completely weird/unfair to BTC athletes unless you made sure it was 100% legal AND every team member supported it. That doesn't seem to be the case, at least for the second half of this.
Another perspective wrote:
Quotes from Canadian Running article on her departure. Tl;Dr, not just a mental health thing.
-------
She added that there is general confusion around what an athlete who is serving a competition ban is allowed to do vis à vis training. Given the lack of clarity surrounding the rules, DeBues-Stafford says she has concerns about operating in what she refers to as “the grey area.”
She adds that while the BTC staff and Houlihan’s lawyers have spent a lot of time and energy clarifying what she can and cannot do during her period of ineligibility, none of the other athletes have been given access to this information. “This absence of this clarity surrounding the boundaries between BTC and a banned athlete is the critical reason for my departure,” says DeBues-Stafford. “I need to know 100 per cent, black and white, word for word, all codes and guidelines that might be relevant to me or anyone associated with me in a professional capacity in this sport.”
----
We'll, there it is, plain as day. Schumacher continuing to coach a banned athlete is why she left. Your move Nike, if integrity means anything to you (lol). It's for Jerry to make Houlihan his hill to die on, it's not ok to drag his other athletes onto that hill. Kudos to GDS for getting out and showing some integrity
Yes, her discomfort makes sense. Then again I don't think GDS is clean either, so it is what it is.
Good for her. All Nike athletes are suspect IMO.
Another perspective wrote:
Quotes from Canadian Running article on her departure. Tl;Dr, not just a mental health thing.
-------
She added that there is general confusion around what an athlete who is serving a competition ban is allowed to do vis à vis training. Given the lack of clarity surrounding the rules, DeBues-Stafford says she has concerns about operating in what she refers to as “the grey area.”
She adds that while the BTC staff and Houlihan’s lawyers have spent a lot of time and energy clarifying what she can and cannot do during her period of ineligibility, none of the other athletes have been given access to this information. “This absence of this clarity surrounding the boundaries between BTC and a banned athlete is the critical reason for my departure,” says DeBues-Stafford. “I need to know 100 per cent, black and white, word for word, all codes and guidelines that might be relevant to me or anyone associated with me in a professional capacity in this sport.”
----
Wow — Good for her. It’s crazy that Schumacher, Flanagan, and co. are putting athletes in this position.
If they want to write workouts for Shelby Houlihan, that’s one thing, but having a banned athlete train alongside a team in good standing serves no one’s interests.
What happens when the Swiss Federal Tribunal dismisses Houlihan’s appeal? Are they going to keep working with her for three more years?
The ban is on participation in WA affiliated races and events, not on training, so much as the discomfort of fellow athletes on optics grounds is understandable, what is the moral principle that justifies hurting her training or banning a relationship between two private entities: her and BTC? It’s of course understandable to ban a tainted coach from coaching athletes affiliated with WA.
hmm. wrote:
The ban is on participation in WA affiliated races and events, not on training, so much as the discomfort of fellow athletes on optics grounds is understandable, what is the moral principle that justifies hurting her training or banning a relationship between two private entities: her and BTC? It’s of course understandable to ban a tainted coach from coaching athletes affiliated with WA.
The moral principle would be not having an abundant amount of nandrolone in your system to begin with.
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
Read it Here.
This makes her unhappiness with the situation even more understandable. I tend to agree with other posters that Jerry/Shalane are making a big mistake in not establishing boundaries with Shelby until she is actually exonerated (if that ever happens). I would definitely be uncomfortable training with her at the track. And if she was there, I'd want a legal explanation of why it was OK that it doesn't seem she's gotten.
Nike and the term ‘grey area’ being thrown around a lot lately. Where there’s smoke there’s fire!!!
hmm. wrote:
The ban is on participation in WA affiliated races and events, not on training, so much as the discomfort of fellow athletes on optics grounds is understandable, what is the moral principle that justifies hurting her training or banning a relationship between two private entities: her and BTC? It’s of course understandable to ban a tainted coach from coaching athletes affiliated with WA.
Not quite.
See WA's 10.14 "Status during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension", and the explaining comment:
Ineligible Athletes cannot participate in a training camp, exhibition or practice organised by their Member or a club that is a member of that Member or that is funded by a governmental agency.
Presumably she may join, say, Frerichs and Schweizer during a casual run in the woods, but she can't train on the track with BTC.
However GDS did not outright say that Houlihan trained with them in an official practice session:
DeBues-Stafford says that during this time, Houlihan has continued to train; she strongly implied (but would not explicitly confirm) that Houlihan has been running with the team occasionally.
Well, when you basically steal the coach's training program and dump him so you don' have to pay him anymore, I call that sketchy. Her husband was reportedly filming all her workouts that Cook ran her through.
casual obsever wrote:
Not quite.
See WA's 10.14 "Status during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension", and the explaining comment:Presumably she may join, say, Frerichs and Schweizer during a casual run in the woods, but she can't train on the track with BTC.
However GDS did not outright say that Houlihan trained with them in an official practice session:
I think this is one of the critical grey areas. If you long run with someone is that training? What's the difference between a casual jog and a training run? you run with someone while you're on a training camp?
To me it's definitely not black and white
High hopes wrote:
We'll, there it is, plain as day. Schumacher continuing to coach a banned athlete is why she left. Your move Nike, if integrity means anything to you (lol). It's for Jerry to make Houlihan his hill to die on, it's not ok to drag his other athletes onto that hill. Kudos to GDS for getting out and showing some integrity
If true, 10.14.3 of WA's Anti-Doping Rules should apply:
10.14.3 Violation of the Prohibition of Participation during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension
Where an Athlete or other Person who has been declared Ineligible violates the prohibition against participation during Ineligibility described in Rule 10.14.1, the results of such participation will be Disqualified and a new period of Ineligibility equal in length to the original period of Ineligibility will be added to the end of the original period of Ineligibility.
Four more years!
As for Jerry, see further down in 10.14.3:
Where an Athlete Support Person or other Person assists a Person in violating the prohibition against participation during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension, the Integrity Unit will pursue the matter as a potential Rule 2.9 anti-doping rule violation.
Brojos! Will you investigate and/or notify AIU?
casual obsever wrote:
Brojos! Will you investigate and/or notify AIU?
Ha! They are 100x more likely to help cover-up for Shelby and Jerry than actually do some investigating.
BrainCell wrote:
In that recent interview where Shalane said she 'forgot she had the i5000m record', she did talk about this and how actually now Shelby is in a 'holding pattern' while the appeal is reviewed still, with a decision set to be June/July + Shalane is still providing coaching for SHThat appeal process may be the reason for some of the 'training together'?
but also fwiw from my understanding of when this ban was initially announced, no, even a casual run with Courtney F (as a member of the team) would constitute a violation (presuming that the 'holding pattern' doesn't currently effect the ban).
Honestly, this "Grey area" is more upsetting than anything NOP did. Salazar did plenty of stupid stuff, but did he ever allow his athletes to train with a banned runner and then admit to it??
If you think Shelby is innocent, that's one thing. If you want to root for her appeal and contribute to her gofundme, I get it. But for these coaches to be so brazen to continue coaching A BANNED ATHLETE and actually admit it is just perplexing...