Alberto Salazar Possibly Still Coaching

USA! USA! USA!

Same exact scenario with Shelby? Salazar isn't banned for doping any of his athletes (excepting indirectly Magness' own goal), so maybe you mean Shelby?

Prison or labor camp?

Doping doesn't rise to the level of a crime, so prison isn't an option. If it were to be punishable as a crime, the standard required for conviction and the legal burden on the prosecution would be much higher. No strict liability for accidental, unknowing ingestion, nor shifting the burden onto the athlete.

As the current WADA process stands now, any athlete can be railroaded to a 4-year ban for unknowing accidental ingestion when they are unable to prove it, and they are at the mercy of the doping tribunal. To poor salt in the wounds, die-hard fans of doping will argue how it was most probably intentional, based on a set of presumptions that it is intentional until proven otherwise. A 4-year ban and missing two Olympics seems like it would be a pretty good deterrent.

Nice post

You're welcome.

I'm still puzzled. What is the non-compliance here that needs to be sorted out?

Why would WA be the one to sort it out? Ignoring the detail that WA delegates these issues to the AIU, they simply don't have the reach into US Professional sports, the NCAA, or US high school athletes.

The USA is not alone. For example, FIFA is a signatory to the code, but UEFA is not (although they are a member of FIFA). UEFA bases its anti-doping program on the WADA Code, but intentionally omits and deviating from many parts of the Code, e.g. managing whereabouts. This is not unlike US Professional supports and the NCAA, who define their own anti-doping programs, reserving their right to deviate from WADA approved rules and lists.

This distinction of FIFA, UEFA, and the limit of WADA's reach, was discussed quite a bit with respect to Russia being able to host and participate in Euros:

insidethegames.biz

WADA confirm Russia to remain as host of matches at UEFA European Championship

@insidethegames

Russia's hosting of matches at next year's UEFA European Championship is unaffected by recommendations the country be banned from staging major events...

Open link

goal.com

Explained: Russia's World Cup ban & why they haven't been kicked out of Euro 2020 | Goal.com

Russia have been banned from the World Cup but not Euro 2020 after a ruling from the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) following the Russian doping scandal

Open link

I think Wada knows it limits and dare not make US non compliant re it’s College type stuff.

Interesting about UEFA. The players unions in Europe esp the UK draw a line at at home and holiday testing.
They are employees and thus work/employee law applies.

The DCO’s in the UK have a different set of procedures when testing at football training facilities. One of which is that the testers have to sign in and wait.I am also given to understand that some facilities there is a doping testers car park space signed up that they must use.So back to the power of some sports to tell WADA what to do.

UKAD won’t make a fuss about this as it will risk bringing the whole system down.

Dang, you must really love your kids huh?

First inquiry: No. You are just reading a book as probably millions of others.

Second inquiry: If you consult him and he gives you advise on a regular basis, yes. Out of a casual conversation only once at the local supermarket line, maybe not, but there are sticklers out there that might construe a case against both of you.

Fingering someone in a private part, presumably one with an orifice is not sexual?

Indeed it is.

But proven was the issue.

Was it? That statement

"Nothing has been proven that Alberto did anything sexually to anyone that he coached."

came out of nowhere, without any evidence whatsoever. SafeSport, and the following arbitration, thought otherwise, and they actually did see the evidence.

I guess it hinges on what is meant by "proven", and whether what SafeSport and the arbitration decided is something that can be considered "proven".

What I saw was Salazar said "he did not speak with or see the runner on the days in question", and it came down to what the arbitrator believed was credible and accepting "his accuser’s version of events".

It's difficult for the outsider, simply going on media reports, presumably from a linked summary of the verdict, to say "nothing", or "something", has been "proven", without actually seeing the proof.

This post is spot on 100 percent right. Why you bozos can't see it is beyond me

Cain & Gougher are tag-teaming up their lawyers to try and bring down Salazar with false accusations and milk Nike for all the money that they can get, to get back at them for their crap

careers that went bottom up. This whole thing is about the money -totally. Salazar never fingered anyone - it's all total and complete BS!!!

I agree as well with the poster NOtSOFasT CO.

He or she is correct. Alberto would not do something like that, it’s a witch hunt. He’d know 100 percent that the athlete would tell, so he’s got nothing to gain and everything to lose. The poster is correct, Alberto would not do those things.

Idiots here need to read the news: Salazar has been brought down. He's done. Good riddance.