None of these alternative keywords appear in the CAS report.
She wasn't "proven guilty", and the CAS did not "declare" her "guilty", of "an offense", nor is an arbitration hearing a "legal trial".
Similarly the CAS did not find she was a "drug cheat".
It all seems rather presumptuous.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport found Houlihan guilty, saying she failed to provide a plausible explanation for the presence of nandrolone in her urine sample and concluded her anti-doping violation must have been intentional.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport found Houlihan guilty, saying she failed to provide a plausible explanation for the presence of nandrolone in her urine sample and concluded her anti-doping violation must have been intentional.
The CAS said "she failed to provide a plausible explanation"? You keep inventing new keywords and explanations which appear nowehere in the CAS report.
Others may be more persuadable, but I am immune to all these feeble attempts to massage and alter what is well documented historical reality.
I am not a lawyer, but is "convicted" the right verb here? That is a term used for criminal defendents, and not for parties in a dispute in arbitration.
I would go with a ban that was upheld in CAS. She wasn’t convicted or found guilty.
Seriously…. where are her recent performances? What is she done in the last few months???? Nothing as far as I can tell, and now she’s gonna go for the ‘American Record’. It feels like she’s on some ‘new juice’ cycle, And now it’s worn off enough to not be detected, so she’s gonna go try to make a record????
The CAS Panel was split on whether these rule violations were proper, and I think the minority split got it right.
None of these alternative keywords appear in the CAS report.
You keep inventing new keywords and explanations which appear nowehere [sic] in the CAS report. Others may be more persuadable, but I am immune to all these feeble attempts to massage and alter what is well documented historical reality.
My goodness it cracks me up how much people are still banging on about this. CAS this, burrito that, blah blah blah. Gee she lives rent free in the heads of a lot of people. The crime was done (maybe, maybe not). The time is done.
So much more to concern yourselves about than this. It is so boring....
My goodness it cracks me up how much people are still banging on about this. CAS this, burrito that, blah blah blah. Gee she lives rent free in the heads of a lot of people. The crime was done (maybe, maybe not). The time is done.
So much more to concern yourselves about than this. It is so boring....
idk if people have reason to believe a competitor was cheating, I don't think there is a statute of limitations on when they have to get over it. And it's not like you have to forgive people if they serve their full sentence in jail...they paid the consequences of their actions, that's it.
Seriously…. where are her recent performances? What is she done in the last few months???? Nothing as far as I can tell, and now she’s gonna go for the ‘American Record’. It feels like she’s on some ‘new juice’ cycle, And now it’s worn off enough to not be detected, so she’s gonna go try to make a record????
.....
Her last outdoor campaign didn't she place 4th at World Outdoors even after having to maneuver around one of her teammates. She didn't gain ground but didn't lose much ground against the 3 best 5000/10000m female kickers.
She may not get the AR but it needs to go under 30 minutes this year!
The CAS Panel was split on whether these rule violations were proper, and I think the minority split got it right.
None of these alternative keywords appear in the CAS report.
You keep inventing new keywords and explanations which appear nowehere [sic] in the CAS report. Others may be more persuadable, but I am immune to all these feeble attempts to massage and alter what is well documented historical reality.
Zing!
Actually, the key words "ADRV" and "proper" do appear in the CAS report. The CAS also reports majority findings -- findings which I did not describe with new keywords or explanations.
To better explain the CAS majority findings as explained by the CAS in their report, we can find in 57, the CAS explains the main issues to resolve, starting with:
57. The main issues to be resolved by the Panel are: (A) Was the AAF properly reported and notified? In case of an affirmative answer to question (A) ...
A related but unasked main issue is, whether the ADRV was properly managed, asserted and notified, which is mentioned in 84.
The CAS never affirms these questions directly. Instead we can see, as a result of paragraphs 60 (presumption), and 61 (presumption), that by 62, they substitute them with alternative questions as to whether Houlihan can rebut these presumptions.
In 73, on the question in 57A, Prof. Ayotte lists 4 criteria which do not appear in the relevant TD -- clear departures from the TD by the WADA lab.
Despite this, the CAS majority finds in 75, and 84, that Houlihan failed to rebut presumptions that AAFs and ADRVs are proper.
Me? I didn't bring burritos and doping bans into a thread about Houlihan's American record attempt. I don't want to relitigate all the issues with the process and the expert testimonies and the CAS findings, but many posters still seem to find the topic ripe for discussion, and want to malign her as a "stubborn, unrelenting drug cheat".
It seems important to keep the record correct, and this site does encourage discussion, so long as it is polite.
I was persuaded by Prof. Ayotte's previous research, by Prof. McGlone's concession, by recent changes in the WADA TD and supporting research, and by unique factors causing supply chain issues during a brief period during the pandemic, that nandrolone in a burrito was at least "a plausible explanation", even if Houlihan failed to establish it as a "more likely than not" source to a panel of arbitrators.
There is no way she breaks Monson' AR. Monson was pushed by McColgan almost the whole way. Who is going to push Houlihan?
You can be pulled to a fast time, not pushed. Unless you are talking figuratively about motivation. In that case, her unemployment should be all the motivation she needs.
The bigger potential problem is that she's not AR-capable without PEDs.
Actually, the key words "ADRV" and "proper" do appear in the CAS report. The CAS also reports majority findings -- findings which I did not describe with new keywords or explanations.
You are hilarious. Right after you scolded me for calling "doping" "cheating" (in what world is "doping" not considered "cheating"?), and scolded the other fella for using "new keywords or explanations", you invented the keyword "split" which does NOT appear in the CAS report, and then changed "Was the AAF properly reported and notified?" into "whether these rule violations were proper".
I am really not interested in your childish games. Unlike you, I am interested in facts and evidence.