The overriding principles of justice trumping Wada is a fascinating view.
Why is that? Nobody is going to believe it if RUSADA clears her.
What do you mean by "overriding principles of justice"?
1. Cos that is the procedure.And what if grandad said that he often looses tabs or splits them in the kitchen and Rusada follow CAS re fairness for a child.
2. Read the decision but fairness and proportionality was referenced.
CAS hasn't said she isn't a doper. They have said she wasn't given enough time by the authorities to respond to the test finding, which is a procedural point that only delays a finding of doping. She will be found a doper, just like Houlihan was, because she, too, won't come up with any better excuse. "Grandad's medication" won't cut it, any more than a pork burrito did for Houlihan.
You assume that she will be found guilty and dismiss the significant point the the drug does seem to be in the household unlike Houlihan.
Was the skater badly served by Wada.?
Only politics will exonerate her. The facts won't.
You assume that she will be found guilty and dismiss the significant point the the drug does seem to be in the household unlike Houlihan.
Was the skater badly served by Wada.?
Only politics will exonerate her. The facts won't.
Unless her B Sample shows no trace of a banned substance.
But even if her B Sample comes back positive, there is the possibility of her getting a "public reprimand" and not a suspension, which means she and her Russian teammates would still get the gold medal.
Only politics will exonerate her. The facts won't.
Unless her B Sample shows no trace of a banned substance.
But even if her B Sample comes back positive, there is the possibility of her getting a "public reprimand" and not a suspension, which means she and her Russian teammates would still get the gold medal.
What if the B sample comes back positive, but they also document her grandfather had TMZ in the house and she shows that was the likely explanation for the positive test?
Who decides if she is suspended? Is that RUSADA? Then the USA would appeal and that would be decided by CAS?
What if the B sample comes back positive, but they also document her grandfather had TMZ in the house and she shows that was the likely explanation for the positive test?
Who decides if she is suspended? Is that RUSADA? Then the USA would appeal and that would be decided by CAS?
There is the fact of a failed drug test from yet another Russian. I'm not really interested in "Grandpa's medication" excuses.
So just one fact then.
Would you ever have a hearing after a lab has said there is an AAF?
yes. its the only fact that is needed.
basicially the system is; sample a is positive = presumption of guilt - immediate suspension. (unless 'protected' as a minor).
Everything after that is excuse seeking, including the b test, looking for an excuse that the a test was wrong.
after the a test (unless b is ok) then everything else isnt finding guilty - that bit is finished - all you are doing is finding excuses and lokking for mitigation and penalty reduction.
Nobody is going to accept the grandpa excuse since it will just get apealled and laughed out at the apppeal.
gold medal athlete. 15 yrs old. ex US coach. on 3 heart meds. she and her three fellow stable mates are the only ones to do the quad.
so, other actors; her, her stable mates, her parents, the coaches and support staff, general approach and ethics of any high level sporting nation; us, uk, norway, china, france etc etc
Look, she is taking the mick with TUEs and then micro dosing. she screwed up the micro dosing TMZ due to an unexpected and so far 'unexplained' sensitivity in the test or timing in the micro dosing.
And what TUE’s are you aware of?
And a 15 year old capable of working out micro dosing ?
And all three taking all the effort on a minor enhancer?
Robin Cousins said he saw loads of 10 yr olds getting trained to do quads.
oh dear.
1) three tues were on her form - this is stated at the start of the cas report. two were readable and listed, the thrdr was illegible. strangely, later in the report, all three were listed.
2) this one really gives you away. No athlete (ok, very few) is capable of working out micro dosing. This is done by the expert coach / doctor / support staff.
3) because of the exactness of micro dosing and masking drugs and drug interference, the entire regime needs to be monitored. when oyu put in the knowledge and expertise for one athlete, it is much easier for the next athlete. this is why some coaches have spectacular results and why doping was considered systemic in russia (and to any sensible observers, in uk, usa, kenya, norway etc.
4) yes, its a machine. a state acknowledged machine that examines the schools and gyms from a very early age and streams those with potential, then it picks the best and gives them special treatment - sound familiar?
Lets look at it the other way. the war is now so sophisticated that individual athetes have very little chance of getting away with the high level stuff themselves - only the basics. everyone knows epo and roids and micro dosing those, but then you get onto the 'minor gains' which need the real experts.
And the standard therapeutic dose and normal medical papers are virtually irrelevant.
Its all out war and the dopers get all the rewards. in order to get caught you need to have very low levels like kamila and sh (getting doses / glowing interactions wrong) or be monumentally stupid aka scr.
Therefore crying 'it is such a low dose' or 'they cant be that stupid' is inevitable and to be ignored.
Would you ever have a hearing after a lab has said there is an AAF?
yes. its the only fact that is needed.
basicially the system is; sample a is positive = presumption of guilt - immediate suspension. (unless 'protected' as a minor).
Everything after that is excuse seeking, including the b test, looking for an excuse that the a test was wrong.
after the a test (unless b is ok) then everything else isnt finding guilty - that bit is finished - all you are doing is finding excuses and lokking for mitigation and penalty reduction.
Nobody is going to accept the grandpa excuse since it will just get apealled and laughed out at the apppeal.
Ah, applying the rule that the B test is done is looking for an excuse.You don’t understand science do you?
Given that you know the results of the hearing to come and the appeal what do you think caused the AAF of this child?
And given that knowledge what sanction would you apply?
And a 15 year old capable of working out micro dosing ?
And all three taking all the effort on a minor enhancer?
Robin Cousins said he saw loads of 10 yr olds getting trained to do quads.
oh dear.
1) three tues were on her form - this is stated at the start of the cas report. two were readable and listed, the thrdr was illegible. strangely, later in the report, all three were listed.
2) this one really gives you away. No athlete (ok, very few) is capable of working out micro dosing. This is done by the expert coach / doctor / support staff.
3) because of the exactness of micro dosing and masking drugs and drug interference, the entire regime needs to be monitored. when oyu put in the knowledge and expertise for one athlete, it is much easier for the next athlete. this is why some coaches have spectacular results and why doping was considered systemic in russia (and to any sensible observers, in uk, usa, kenya, norway etc.
4) yes, its a machine. a state acknowledged machine that examines the schools and gyms from a very early age and streams those with potential, then it picks the best and gives them special treatment - sound familiar?
Lets look at it the other way. the war is now so sophisticated that individual athetes have very little chance of getting away with the high level stuff themselves - only the basics. everyone knows epo and roids and micro dosing those, but then you get onto the 'minor gains' which need the real experts.
And the standard therapeutic dose and normal medical papers are virtually irrelevant.
Its all out war and the dopers get all the rewards. in order to get caught you need to have very low levels like kamila and sh (getting doses / glowing interactions wrong) or be monumentally stupid aka scr.
Therefore crying 'it is such a low dose' or 'they cant be that stupid' is inevitable and to be ignored.
Sorry, I missed any reference to TUEs.Could you point out where such was referenced, please.
the point is that b tests very very rarely 'fail'.
My ongoing concern remains a lack of knowledge of what is the detectable limit and what is the threshold? I am worried both the a and b test will be found at levels below the accepted resolution and below the threshold. If that is the case then the lab and wada etc need to be disbanded.
My prediction; public reprimand, all medals kept, never seen in competition again.
And a 15 year old capable of working out micro dosing ?
And all three taking all the effort on a minor enhancer?
Robin Cousins said he saw loads of 10 yr olds getting trained to do quads.
oh dear.
1) three tues were on her form - this is stated at the start of the cas report. two were readable and listed, the thrdr was illegible. strangely, later in the report, all three were listed.
2) this one really gives you away. No athlete (ok, very few) is capable of working out micro dosing. This is done by the expert coach / doctor / support staff.
3) because of the exactness of micro dosing and masking drugs and drug interference, the entire regime needs to be monitored. when oyu put in the knowledge and expertise for one athlete, it is much easier for the next athlete. this is why some coaches have spectacular results and why doping was considered systemic in russia (and to any sensible observers, in uk, usa, kenya, norway etc.
4) yes, its a machine. a state acknowledged machine that examines the schools and gyms from a very early age and streams those with potential, then it picks the best and gives them special treatment - sound familiar?
Lets look at it the other way. the war is now so sophisticated that individual athetes have very little chance of getting away with the high level stuff themselves - only the basics. everyone knows epo and roids and micro dosing those, but then you get onto the 'minor gains' which need the real experts.
And the standard therapeutic dose and normal medical papers are virtually irrelevant.
Its all out war and the dopers get all the rewards. in order to get caught you need to have very low levels like kamila and sh (getting doses / glowing interactions wrong) or be monumentally stupid aka scr.
Therefore crying 'it is such a low dose' or 'they cant be that stupid' is inevitable and to be ignored.
Your point 2. You said she messed up the micro doses, not me.That really gives you away.
the point is that b tests very very rarely 'fail'.
My ongoing concern remains a lack of knowledge of what is the detectable limit and what is the threshold? I am worried both the a and b test will be found at levels below the accepted resolution and below the threshold. If that is the case then the lab and wada etc need to be disbanded.
My prediction; public reprimand, all medals kept, never seen in competition again.
1) three tues were on her form - this is stated at the start of the cas report. two were readable and listed, the thrdr was illegible. strangely, later in the report, all three were listed.
I searched for "TUE" in the CAS report and did not find any. I also searched for "therapeutic" and did not find any in the context of "therapeutic use exemption". So, what CAS report are you referring to? And what paragraph mentiones the TUEs?
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.