I was surprised how racially charged the ban got online. Do a quick search on Sha’Carri on Facebook and read the comments attached to the post, photo or article.
You see plenty of implications that Sha’Carri was banned because of some kind of racism.
I for one think the whole no marijuana rule is stupid and nonsensical but I understand the IOC can’t just change the rule for one person, it would reak of favoritism.
here is my story wrote:
Justputthebongdown wrote:
If you have worked for a decade or more to get to the pinnacle of your sport, the Olympics, then just show enough damn self control to put the weed down for a couple of months! Dumbest move ever. Reminds me of Ricky Williams...
Here's my Rick Williams story. I was a junior year xc/track athlete when he got drafted. His team was using the university fields for their preseason training camp. I, a bunch of team mates, and other Fall sport athletes were doing weight workouts in the intercollegiate athletics weight room. Ricky Williams and an entourage of three other guys come in and the other guys come around and announce that Ricky would like to do his workout in private and we all needed to leave. Pretty much everybody looked at them like, who the f... are you? Several people laughed and everybody went back to what they were doing. Williams and his entourage looked unhappy and left.
UW La Crosse
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nor/training-camps.htmenergeticlotuseater wrote:
I was surprised how racially charged the ban got online. Do a quick search on Sha’Carri on Facebook and read the comments attached to the post, photo or article.
You see plenty of implications that Sha’Carri was banned because of some kind of racism.
I for one think the whole no marijuana rule is stupid and nonsensical but I understand the IOC can’t just change the rule for one person, it would reak of favoritism.
I am sure non-blacks have been banned for marijuana use.........plenty of them.
How in the hell does ‘Smoking Weed’ make you fun faster?
What agency/federation has stated that it was marijuana she tested positive for?
eltjim wrote:
Richardson took responsibility for her actions unlike the burrito-blamer from BTC.
Yes, and that acknowledgment of wrong-doing should be considered. Did she also show remorse, or was she unapologetic?
Her acknowledgment puts her well ahead of douches like Coleman, Rollins McNeal, and Houlihan, IMO. I would take it into account.
Comparing and contrasting the moral outrage and indignation expressed by some here with Richardson's own statement is something else. People here want to teach her a lesson? You don't think she's learning that lesson right now while her entire world falls apart around her? She has had the most reasonable reaction of anybody who has commented on her situation, doing what every doper refuses to do until five years down the road after they're washed: she admitted her infraction, indicated she is willing to accept the consequences, and expressed a desire to move on.
Even worse, compare the memeification of BTC after Houlihan's positive against the venomous reaction spewed at Richardson. Sure, Houlihan may have cheated, but so does everyone. Richardson, though? This is just more evidence she's stupid. Hardly surprising somebody stupid like her would do something so stupid. Wasted an opportunity somebody who acts stupidly like her doesn't deserve. Crazy and stupid with stupid nails and stupid hair. Talks stupid. Boastful and stupid. Bad attitude, stupidly celebrates her world class performances the wrong way. Disrespectful to her opponents, stupidly doesn't understand sportsmanship. Wouldn't want somebody that like that representing my brand. Somehow worse than somebody receiving a 4-year ban for actually cheating? Well... no, but kind of yes, because stupid people waste their potential and successes.
Who do you think you are? You're not special. Your opinion isn't right just because you're allowed to have it, and using "because I think it should be this way" as the anchor point for your worldview is the hallmark of an idiot. I sincerely hope you're young enough to mature, otherwise you're in for a hard life full of anger because things aren't the way you want them to be.
The question is why are you so worked up over this?
She acted stupidly, she is getting punished for it (whether the rule is old or not aside). She accepted it. Many here accepted it.
At this point this is all old news.
Off topic, but is anybody else seeing just an earlier version of the message board page? I am on an iPhone, and it will not load an updated page, but I can get to this thread via the link on the LR front page.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
eltjim wrote:
Richardson took responsibility for her actions unlike the burrito-blamer from BTC.
Yes, and that acknowledgment of wrong-doing should be considered. Did she also show remorse, or was she unapologetic?
Her acknowledgment puts her well ahead of douches like Coleman, Rollins McNeal, and Houlihan, IMO. I would take it into account.
It is a bit easier to take responsibility when the substance is not considered cheating and the ban is 30 days. I doubt she would handle it so well if one of her steroids showed up...
Yawn^7 wrote:
The question is why are you so worked up over this?
She acted stupidly, she is getting punished for it (whether the rule is old or not aside). She accepted it. Many here accepted it.
At this point this is all old news.
Chauvin broke the law, as judged by a jury of his peers, accepted it, and is being punished for it.
How about in the classroom?
That will be appealed. Cosby was also found guilty and look at him now.
She admitted to the weed.
2 completely different cases but they both lead to one thing: 1 failed troll attempt.
Yawn^7 wrote:
That will be appealed. Cosby was also found guilty and look at him now.
She admitted to the weed.
2 completely different cases but they both lead to one thing: 1 failed troll attempt.
1) Cosby was released due to prosecutorial misconduct. Anyone with a brain knows that the truth is he’s still guilty. But we can’t just have prosecutors lying to defendants. It was the correct decision.
2) You missed the point AGAIN. You’re having a rough day. You were bemoaning how we have pages and pages of discussion if she’s obviously guilty by-the-letter. Clearly we are discussing the moral aspect and how things should be handled in the future and what’s “fair.” Just like you did with Chauvin verdict - he’s guilty but we still had endless debates about what’s right or not outside of the narrow confines of the law.
Each post just increases your “internal inconsistency” score. I applaud your dedication to being so dumb.
Yawn^7 wrote:
That will be appealed. Cosby was also found guilty and look at him now.
She admitted to the weed.
2 completely different cases but they both lead to one thing: 1 failed troll attempt.
1) Cosby was released due to prosecutorial misconduct. Anyone with a brain knows that the truth is he’s still guilty. But we can’t just have prosecutors lying to defendants. It was the correct decision.
2) You missed the point AGAIN. You’re having a rough day. You were bemoaning how we have pages and pages of discussion if she’s obviously guilty by-the-letter. Clearly we are discussing the moral aspect and how things should be handled in the future and what’s “fair.” Just like you did with Chauvin verdict - he’s guilty but we still had endless debates about what’s right or not outside of the narrow confines of the law.
Each post just increases your “internal inconsistency” score. I applaud your dedication to being so dumb.
whaletail wrote:
Things that make you go "Hmmm" wrote:
The same morons (like 2600 bro) are projecting their ignorance on to others (who oppose masking/lockdown mandates) as usual. The ethical consistency here is preserving individual liberty as a value against unfounded and unproven authoritarianism, which is embraced by the regressive left who if given any more power would have us locked down permanently and forced into testing and being drugged/vaxxed against our will 24/7/365. In their perverse Orwellian dystopia, The Olympics would be conducted via zoom and no participants would be allowed to perform above any others.
Although surprisingly well written, how does any of this nonsense apply to the Richardson situation?
I was pointing out that opposing idiotic rules against recreational drugs and idiotic and ineffective rules against freedom of movement and breathing are mutually consistent with each other from the standpoint of defending personal liberty. 2600 bruh was claiming hypocrisy where there was not, at least in my own case.
davies report wrote:
Nico wrote:
Oh, please spare me all your apologetic diatribes.. No, weed is not performance enhacing for sprinters but it is for many other sports (shooting - serves as a sedative, moto sports - serves as a concentration detractor). In any case, Richardson must have known about it, and yet she still smoked the night or two before the race. No chance she would have tested, 180 ng or more from second hand smoke. Ban her for 3 months and stop yapping about how unjust this whole system is. Unjust for Richardson, undjust for Houlihan, unjust for Coleman, unjust for everyone except your favorites...
But it is not cheating
It doesn’t have to be cheating. She broke the rules. She knew she was breaking the rules (she admitted as such ). It doesn’t matter that the rule is a dumb one.
2600 bro wrote:
Yawn^7 wrote:
That will be appealed. Cosby was also found guilty and look at him now.
She admitted to the weed.
2 completely different cases but they both lead to one thing: 1 failed troll attempt.
1) Cosby was released due to prosecutorial misconduct. Anyone with a brain knows that the truth is he’s still guilty. But we can’t just have prosecutors lying to defendants. It was the correct decision.
2) You missed the point AGAIN. You’re having a rough day. You were bemoaning how we have pages and pages of discussion if she’s obviously guilty by-the-letter. Clearly we are discussing the moral aspect and how things should be handled in the future and what’s “fair.” Just like you did with Chauvin verdict - he’s guilty but we still had endless debates about what’s right or not outside of the narrow confines of the law.
Each post just increases your “internal inconsistency” score. I applaud your dedication to being so dumb.
Lol I’m having the rough day?
The smart people like myself have already told you why the DQ stands and why it is proper. I have also openly said many times that if people want to change the rule they are free to do so.
There isn’t anything really moral to argue here. I’m actually starting to feel concerned for your mental health.
mordechai wrote:
energeticlotuseater wrote:
I was surprised how racially charged the ban got online. Do a quick search on Sha’Carri on Facebook and read the comments attached to the post, photo or article.
You see plenty of implications that Sha’Carri was banned because of some kind of racism.
I for one think the whole no marijuana rule is stupid and nonsensical but I understand the IOC can’t just change the rule for one person, it would reak of favoritism.
I am sure non-blacks have been banned for marijuana use.........plenty of them.
Michael Phelps was treated like a criminal, and yes, he served a ban.
She's gonna be doing a lot of doobie rolling when she's living in a van down by the river!