What you fail to understand is that WA/AIU/WADA/CAS had ZERO standing in Ajee Wilson's case. This was the jurisdiction of USADA and their finding was that although Wilson tested positive for a prohibited substance, they determined that the substance had been ingested by her "without fault or negligence." USADA believes the same for SH - so in the future, actually look into the details before spouting misinformation.
-
317
-
BTCFan wrote:
What you fail to understand is that WA/AIU/WADA/CAS had ZERO standing in Ajee Wilson's case. This was the jurisdiction of USADA and their finding was that although Wilson tested positive for a prohibited substance, they determined that the substance had been ingested by her "without fault or negligence." USADA believes the same for SH - so in the future, actually look into the details before spouting misinformation.
1) Where exactly did USADA say they "believe" SH is "without fault or negligence"? (Remember, Travis T is not "USADA.")
2) Even if USADA believes that, who cares? Since USADA was not involved the SH case, their opinions have no special standing.
141 -
USADA exists to protect US athletes. USADA pads his numbers by consistently testing clean athletes, while giving cheaters a pass. It's shameful for the US that AIU is doing more than USADA.
172 -
USADA, aka Travis T, "had ZERO standing," BRO wrote:
BTCFan wrote:
What you fail to understand is that WA/AIU/WADA/CAS had ZERO standing in Ajee Wilson's case. This was the jurisdiction of USADA and their finding was that although Wilson tested positive for a prohibited substance, they determined that the substance had been ingested by her "without fault or negligence." USADA believes the same for SH - so in the future, actually look into the details before spouting misinformation.
1) Where exactly did USADA say they "believe" SH is "without fault or negligence"? (Remember, Travis T is not "USADA.")
2) Even if USADA believes that, who cares? Since USADA was not involved the SH case, their opinions have no special standing.
You are correct, but this was in response to:
Ajee is the wrong comparison for many reasons:
1) She never got banned.
2) AIU never challenged her story.
3) WA never charged her.
4) CAS never ruled on her case.
5) Her steroid's amount wasn't too much for her beef.
6) Her steroid did not have the wrong CIR.
etc. etc. but you know all that, rojo.66 -
BTCFan wrote:
You are correct, but this was in response to:
Ajee is the wrong comparison for many reasons:
1) She never got banned.
2) AIU never challenged her story.
3) WA never charged her.
4) CAS never ruled on her case.
5) Her steroid's amount wasn't too much for her beef.
6) Her steroid did not have the wrong CIR.
etc. etc. but you know all that, rojo.So which of these points do you claim to be wrong, and why?
60 -
casual obsever wrote:
BTCFan wrote:
You are correct, but this was in response to:
Ajee is the wrong comparison for many reasons:
1) She never got banned.
2) AIU never challenged her story.
3) WA never charged her.
4) CAS never ruled on her case.
5) Her steroid's amount wasn't too much for her beef.
6) Her steroid did not have the wrong CIR.
etc. etc. but you know all that, rojo.So which of these points do you claim to be wrong, and why?
AIU, WA CAS were not involved, so those points are irrelevant ... and if they had jurisdiction, they would have likely ruled the same as in the SH case.
34 -
no longer a fan wrote:
Shalane showed her colors in recent years by the way she supported a drug cheat and the disrespect she showed GDS both when GDS was in the group and after she left.
I was a huge fan of Shalane for so many years. But it appears she is shady as all get out.
Honestly this move is really shady. It just seems like Nike is making this sudden change to shield Jerry, Shalane and BTC from something.
Now Oregon is on Shelby watch. When will Shelby get a role at the school, and how on earth will that be fair for college kids to have to work with a drug cheat or the coaches of a drug cheat. Ugh.
So when she was with John Cook… you were A-okay with that ..?! Sheep, hero worshipers ..most of you guys.
70 -
BTCFan wrote:
What you fail to understand is that WA/AIU/WADA/CAS had ZERO standing in Ajee Wilson's case. This was the jurisdiction of USADA and their finding was that although Wilson tested positive for a prohibited substance, they determined that the substance had been ingested by her "without fault or negligence." USADA believes the same for SH - so in the future, actually look into the details before spouting misinformation.
This is absolute horsesh*t. Rojo keeps referring to a "contact" at USADA who said something along these lines, but he never states what level this person works at. For all we know, he's talking to an intern working in the marketing department. Until someone senior, with responsibility for doping control from USADA says something on the record, I'm assuming they have agree with the Houlihan judgement..I don't want to hear second hand "he said, she said", I want it from the horses mouth. USADA and Tygart have never been shy of criticizing WADA/AIU, I don't see why he'd be reticent in this case if he thought Houlihan was a victim of identity injustice.
42 -
Damn, autocomplete added "identity" to that last sentence for some reason
00 -
+1
To add: WADA could have appealed in Ajee's case, but chose not to.
10 -
Burr-Eat-Oh wrote:
olyrun3 wrote:
Houlihan has admitted after the fact that it probably was not a buritto but it was the only defense she could come up with.
When did this happen?
LetsRun interview dated May 25th 2022
40 -
Brosnan to UCLA, Shalane to Oregon.
I missed this one big time, but concerning the Ducks I do smell something cooking.
00 -
Disclaimer: I don't follow competitive running very closely, and I don't really care about its ultimate fate.
But am I crazy that this whole sport feels like a massive incestuous joke? Nike pulling strings and de facto guiding the future of the sport. Like maybe there's no smoking gun, but there's all this BS. Maybe it's a good thing for the powerful people in the sport that it's not on many people's radars. Otherwise there'd be constant stories like "hey did you notice how Nike is handling this accusations about salazar", "hey isn't it weird that shelby seems to still somehow be associated with her former team", "isn't it weird that one man (Lannanna) could suggest a world championship event be held in NikeTown, and the entire bureaucracy would ditch the selection process and listen to him", "isn't it weird that the coach of this convicted doper claimed not to know what the commonly abused drug was, then took a job as a college coach at NikeUniversity and brought another nike-affiliated coach on board?"
This all feels like clown world to me. It feels like there are a few key decision makers who get together at a frickin ranch retreat every so often and plot out the future of pro running, and it has so much to do with their egos and their own pet projects and interests. Next it will be an influential old dude hand-picking an athlete who doesn't make it out of the olympic trials to represent the US, because they think that person is just the better option. Like how absurd do things get?
200 -
For the records, see for example
10 -
casual obsever wrote:
For the records, see for example
Good point, that was actually on my mind when I posted. It felt like the articles were just like "hmm people are saying this is sketchy, and now that we have another email which is heightening how sketchy this seems, people are calling for it to not be sketchy, investigation coming", and nothing ever really came? Is that how it happened? Idk just all those weird details, like Lannanna insisting that Nike wasn't involved only for this email to disprove that and he's like...oops lol...and on we go on the path he charted for us.
If I'm misrepresenting events I'm sorry, I don't mean to - I have like half-filled-in knowledge about this stuff and I don't know what I don't know.
30 -
rogermortimer wrote:
I am curious as to the strategy that the new coaching staff intends to use in the distance events. Go after high performing American high school athletes in volume? For the kids who value academics, and there are quite a few of them. Oregon won't win over against Stanford, et. al. in those sweepstakes. Go after foreign athletes? This works to a degree, but will Nike be happy with that approach? Plus for most they often need full rides, meaning bigger bets. Oregon has a great tradition so they will likely be competitive, but they want to win national championships. I am curious as to their intended approach. T
I'm not sure you aren't overestimating how many top high school athletes value academics so much that they'd pass up a deal at a place that they think will maximize their chances of success in their sport. Oregon now has perhaps the best known pro coach in the country coaching their teams. It will likely have some of the best pros he coaches in the country in Eugene as potential training partners. It has the shiny, new, takes my breath away, stadium. And Oregon is a major, recognized university. It's not Stanford but it's not East Jesus State either.
And what I want to see is how the NIL deals play out for cross country and track. Until now a real blue chip kid who wanted to have his payday right out of high school had to sign his shoe deal and let go of the idea of running in college. But I can't see why a shoe company can't do an NIL with a blue chipper and send him off to run for one of the company's schools. Is there a reason that can't happen that I'm missing?
50 -
Also it feels like the competitive aspect of the sport is so small compared to the commercial side, that all the people involved with the competitive side will have some conflicts of interest with the commercial side. Like the competitive side is such a joke in comparison, that Seb Coe can be like "hell yeah I have interests in Nike, what are you gonna do about it? Try and find another qualified person for this role. No one cares enough to do this job."
40 -
I like what you're posting.
30 -
HRE wrote:
And what I want to see is how the NIL deals play out for cross country and track. Until now a real blue chip kid who wanted to have his payday right out of high school had to sign his shoe deal and let go of the idea of running in college. But I can't see why a shoe company can't do an NIL with a blue chipper and send him off to run for one of the company's schools. Is there a reason that can't happen that I'm missing?
That is a really good point. While the NIL stuff is a step forward for student-athletes, it would not at all surprise me that the corporate side of the sport would have anticipated how to monetize it and is currently cracking away. A company like Nike is definitely going to respond to a shockwave like that, especially when it essentially provides them access to athletes even earlier in the pipeline.
10 -
beat me t wrote:
drug cheats out. wrote:
There’s a due process, and Shelby lost. She is at fault. Shalane blamed the system. Nice girls cheat. Shelby consumed nandrolone that equates to a burrito the size of your arm.
you know I didn't blame Shalane for standing by Shelby like this. But I was perturbed when I found out how they treated Gabriela.
Gabriela had legitimate concerns and was a current member of BTC. How were her concerns dismissed so a drug cheat could have rules bent over backwards for her? It was proof positive to me that there was way more to the story there.
this is kind of off topic, but didn't Debues stafford have issues with her previous training group (coach Andy Young, Jemma Reekie, Laura Muir)? Said she was leaving to be closer to home when she was still a flight away which I thought was odd, also Reekie doesn't even follow Debues Stafford on any social media
75
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.