thunderdome wrote:
When will rojo create a petition to overturn this greatest of tragedies? How will we continue? Should lord Coe step in and “make it right”?
Thank gosh there are still some organizations that don't break down and allow the social media mob rule to make their decisions....
This is all a front because she tested postive for a PED and they cut a deal for hush money. Guaranteed.
There is no rule about having to make the final.
USATF can select whoever it wants for the relays.
USATF’s statement made it sound like they felt they couldn’t select her ‘ While USATF fully agrees that the merit of the World Anti-Doping Agency rules related to THC should be reevaluated, it would be detrimental to the integrity of the U.S. Olympic Team Trials for Track & Field if USATF amended its policies following competition, only weeks before the Olympic Games,’
There’s some rule about being eligible to represent the US when selected. I’d argue she’s eligible to represent the US as she’s a citizen . She’s not eligible to compete. One could argue they are different things. But the rule isn’t clear as to what it means .
Bad move for USATF.
It contributes to the unpopularity of the sport.
Putting in her on the relay would be a spark to ratings.
More eyes on the sport. More money.
Dummies.
the athletic establishment's obsession with "purity" and "integrity" is making sure no one will ever care about t&f.
eagle scout wrote:
the athletic establishment's obsession with "purity" and "integrity" is making sure no one will ever care about t&f.
If athletes need to act like that for people to care about t&f then the sport has no hope for a future.
Have you ever seen the movie idiocracy?
Star wrote:
Bad move for USATF.
It contributes to the unpopularity of the sport.
Putting in her on the relay would be a spark to ratings.
More eyes on the sport. More money.
Dummies.
More eyes on the sport for the wrong reasons and these 'eyes' will not stay and be track fans. I think she is an arrogant disgrace.
this and this wrote:
This is the least controversial decision.
Could she be trusted to be focused on continuing to train and prep to run at her best for just the relay?
What is her history/experience running the 4x100? Especially with people she does not know?
The US has a history of problems getting the stick around in the 4x100. Although she may run the fastest leg, leaving her out of the relay pool improves the opportunities for good exchanges ( more practice, less controversy).
Presuming the US team should get some type of medal, could she be trusted to not do something that could DQ the whole relay team? The hopes, dreams and potential careers of other runners on the US womens 4x100 team must also be considered.
Japan does not like controversy and her on the relay team would be controversial esp in Japan (although that probably did not factor much into the decision since the games are being forced upon the Japanese people against their wishes by the powers that be.)
She said we do not know what she has been or goes through. She implied she used a banned substance partly due to learning about the loss of her mother. We do not know her, but she could still be focused on grieving that loss. (although she did say she would like to run on the relay).
I wish her the best, hope she learns from this and uses it as positive motivation to come back strong in Diamond League races this year the 2022 Championships and beyond.
They'll be hoping and dreaming for bronze at best. This 4 x1 team is Oliver plus a bunch of 200 runners.
Nobody has really said this before, but here goes. We are being asked to believe she knowingly ingested a banned substance hours before the biggest race of her life knowing full well that she would be tested for that exact same substance after the race. Really?
There's two possibilities:
1) A combination of her being the dumbest person alive and having absolutely no self control.
2) Something else.
Now everything we know about her suggests that (1) might actually be true. But what about (2)? Did she want to get banned?
Bobby SSS wrote:
Star wrote:
Bad move for USATF.
It contributes to the unpopularity of the sport.
Putting in her on the relay would be a spark to ratings.
More eyes on the sport. More money.
Dummies.
More eyes on the sport for the wrong reasons and these 'eyes' will not stay and be track fans. I think she is an arrogant disgrace.
Wrong reasons?
They let Carl Lewis run in the 1988 Olympics after a positive test from the Olympic Trials that was supposed to carry a 90 day ban.
Letting him compete was a good move.
This has nothing to do with a stance on drugs, grieving for her mother, etc. I think it is a pretty simple decision for the coach -- she knowingly took a banned substance right before she was tested, and she knew she was going to be tested. She could do it again at the Olympics and ruin the chances of everyone on the team of winning a medal. She is unreliable. Now if there were a discretionary spot in the individual 100, a coach would take her and hope for the best. She is so good that she is worth the shot. But for a relay where the entire team is relying on her to refrain from drug use? No way.
Star wrote:
Bobby SSS wrote:
More eyes on the sport for the wrong reasons and these 'eyes' will not stay and be track fans. I think she is an arrogant disgrace.
Wrong reasons?
They let Carl Lewis run in the 1988 Olympics after a positive test from the Olympic Trials that was supposed to carry a 90 day ban.
Letting him compete was a good move.
No it wasn't. I guess if the cover-up had never come to light, maybe. But since it did, it made the US governing body over track and field look just as corrupt as any other country's governing body. The fact that FloJo was dominating that same year also didn't help its reputation.
Bound4Glory wrote:
Nobody has really said this before, but here goes. We are being asked to believe she knowingly ingested a banned substance hours before the biggest race of her life knowing full well that she would be tested for that exact same substance after the race. Really?
There's two possibilities:
1) A combination of her being the dumbest person alive and having absolutely no self control.
2) Something else.
Marijuana can linger in your body and I'd say finding out your biological mother is dead from a reporter could cause you to do something dumb. Very possibly she could be someone who uses every now and then to cope with anxiety/pain. The rules only discourage this for in-competition use so if she does this while in training or weeks from races that would be totally fine. She made a dumb mistake to do this, but she's 21 and had a traumatic experience. Doing some gummies is much better than drinking herself to a stupor which wouldn't even be illegal.
I don't get the need for conspiracy theories on this one.
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
I don't get the need for conspiracy theories on this one.
I'm having a tough time with it too. But, I just find it hard to believe she is that stupid. Colin Kaepernick makes a lot more money as a banned athlete who stood up for justice then he would as a third-rate backup quarterback.
She only ran 10.86 on the fastest track in the work. If she competed at the Olympics and did not medal, which is likely, then she's a nobody . Now, she's practically a household name.
Bro her mom died. If your mom died and you found out from some rando, your concerns over your upcoming race feel a lot less important.
noconspiracies wrote:
Bro her mom died. If your mom died and you found out from some rando, your concerns over your upcoming race feel a lot less important.
Biological mom. Not the mom who raised her. When was the last time she even saw her?
STEVE THE ADDICT^^^^^^""""-""""--'-"--^' wrote:
This is all a front because she tested postive for a PED and they cut a deal for hush money. Guaranteed.
Holy hell. I've found some common ground with my boy Steve.
I actually think this is a possible scenario and what has me believing this is how willing Richardson was to go public and accept responsibility. Considering how bold she has been on the track, and how bold she was for smoking while in competition knowing that it was against the rules, I certainly expected her to come out and speak against he rule and demand the rule be changed. Look at how many other athletes came to her defense. She just laid down, without public complaint, and accepted that she wasn't going to compete at the Olympics.
So, to your point Steve-o, wouldn't surprise me if we heard she was positive for a PED and this was the deal that was cut to save her reputation and the reputation of USA track and field.
But can we at least discuss how ridiculous this site looks for actually starting a petition to have Richardson excused?
The Clown Show wrote:
But can we at least discuss how ridiculous this site looks for actually starting a petition to have Richardson excused?
Yes for sure. But, that's par for the course after the brojos stood up against the bans of Coleman and Houlihan in their fight for an even dirtier sport.
The Clown Show wrote:
So, to your point Steve-o, wouldn't surprise me if we heard she was positive for a PED and this was the deal that was cut to save her reputation and the reputation of USA track and field.
That could very well be. What does not make sense is the standard version that everyone else accepts right now: that she trained her entire life to make the Olympic Team, and then the very night before the biggest race of her life, she knowingly ingests a banned substance knowing full well she would be tested for that exact same substance the very next day.
There is more to this story.