if an NCAA athlete tests positive drugs how long do they have to sit out for?
if an NCAA athlete tests positive drugs how long do they have to sit out for?
If there is more to the story then Mississippi St. should be trying to get that info out. We contacted them asking for information on Steve Mullings competing despite being banned by the Jamaican Federation. We did not receive a response and felt the need to go forward with a petition to draw attention to this matter.
And of course now we're not impartial on this matter. If an editorial is supposed to be unbiased then perhaps you need to think again.
Even "professional journalists" are not impartial when they write editorials or opinion pieces.
zubrek wrote:
From a thread on Trackshark.com (Tom Borish posted this):
"Trackshark.com is going to have a complete report on the facts of this situation.
Letsrun.com is not reporting everything that they should be and we'll show you why Mullings may be innocent.
We'll have complete documents, including Mullings' conflicting test results.
This should be posted by Friday night on the front page of this website"
http://www.trackshark.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2489
We contacted the head coach for comment and he hung up. You would hope if he knew better than the Jamaican Federation on drug testing he would want to get the information out to the public.
We are not legal experts but do know the Jamaican Federation has ruled against mullings and he has been banned from competition.
wejo wrote:
If there is more to the story then Mississippi St. should be trying to get that info out. We contacted them asking for information on Steve Mullings competing despite being banned by the Jamaican Federation. We did not receive a response and felt the need to go forward with a petition to draw attention to this matter.
And of course now we're not impartial on this matter. If an editorial is supposed to be unbiased then perhaps you need to think again.
Even "professional journalists" are not impartial when they write editorials or opinion pieces.
Did you delete the post where Coach Dudley's email had been posted???
Selective Critism, great points. You have to remember one thing. Rojo is O.J. Simpson, the devil, Roseanne Barr, Mr. Burns and Ty Cobb all rolled into one.
That is what I was going to ask. In the email it went as far as to say that they did not think it was even his urine that was tested. I am not pro or con Mullings, but like you say, if they have more info that shows he actually may not taken drugs then they should at least say something.
Watcher wrote:
WADA chose a level that it felt would be highly unlikely to occur naturally. The key words are highly unlikely. Given the perceived problem of drugs in sports picking a level that was absolute would allow far too many, and probably almost all, cheats to get through. But it is possible to convict an innocent person, although unlikely.
Idealistically, that would be less unacceptable, but the reality is that false positives are very likely to happen, and probably do occur quite regularly.
For what it's worth:
Mullings has been banned not only by the Jamaicans, but by the IAAF.
The NCAA has a rule set to go into effect in August banning athletes under drug suspensions from competing.
Is tb, Tom Boorish, the operator of trackshark?
I'm just trying to clarify this.
I'm surprised at his animosity towards us.
And rojo is not acting in any function as a cornell coach. He is acting as a letsrun.com owner. Sure he has dual roles but that is clear.
But I'm sure robert (rojo) would be willing to stand up in front of the coaches committee and state that an athlete banned internationally should not compete for the NCAA.
That tb guy says:
"Mississippi State did nothing wrong."
It is wrong in our opinion to let a drug cheat compete. We're glad many of you agree. The Jamaican federation took nearly a year in reviewing the facts and banned him.
TB can personally choose to dismiss us because of typos if he wants but I'd prefer he attacked us on the substance of our argument. I think that is what needs to be discussed. Not personal attacks. Leave everything else aside and discuss the issue at hand, please. Is it right for Steve Mullings to compete? We say no.
rojo wrote:
[quote]Selective Criticism wrote:
The Steve Mulling's petition gets at the core of athletics. If people are just going to turn a blind eye on people using performance enhancing drugs, then there is zero reason for me to be a coach or for any of us to try to compete seriously.
You might want to send one of those emails to Tom Jordan, because the start list for the mens 100m at Pre are finally out, and while Marion Jones is NOT in the meet Tim Montgomery IS in the meet. Yes, there is an appeal still in process, so he's only 99.9995% guilty, but they don't have to soil their meet with his presence. They certainly could have found another sprinter happy to fill the lane.
Yes, tb is Borish, the trackshark guy.
1337hax0r wrote:
Did you delete the post where Coach Dudley's email had been posted???
Yea I'd like to know that too.
It's one thing to bring truth to light, and something else entirely to obscure it.
Why did you delete my post wejo?
BroBro
Where did my post go?
Weldon and Robert:
Damn you boyz are kickin up a fuss!!! Ur daddy shure musst bee pudy dang prowd of y'all.
God Bless Uhmerica
so again.. it is OK to allow them to CHEAT by drinking while underage but not ok to allow them to cheat at athletics? and that is called ethics???
i asked in the beginning... how many ncaa athletes would test positive for marijuana? why is that any dift from this situation? it is not, pure and simple.. you need to convolute any argument into 'ethical' or 'morality plays' to even try.
far more college age kids will die or become ill from drinking than from any PED use so why are we not testing athletes for alcohol? wouldnt that be the Ethical or Moral thing to do?
90% of the visitors agree with you Wejo. Such a shame a cheat like that gets to go and compete. While Miss State may not be violating any 'current' legal NCAA rules, they actions are tacky, unprofessional, and rediculous. Unfortunately that is the way college sports seems to be heading, win at all costs.
Reminds me of Lawrence Phillips getting 3 chances at Nebraska to play, each time running afoul with the law. Beating up girlfriends and he still got to play.
AZTrackie wrote:
so again.. it is OK to allow them to CHEAT by drinking while underage but not ok to allow them to cheat at athletics? and that is called ethics???
i asked in the beginning... how many ncaa athletes would test positive for marijuana? why is that any dift from this situation? it is not, pure and simple.. you need to convolute any argument into 'ethical' or 'morality plays' to even try.
far more college age kids will die or become ill from drinking than from any PED use so why are we not testing athletes for alcohol? wouldnt that be the Ethical or Moral thing to do?
how many times does this need to be gone over? marijuana is not a performance enhancer. alcohol is not a performance enhancer. people are not cheating by doing those, they are breaking the law. the distinction is performance enhancement. it's not the ncaa's concern if someone j-walks either, so i don't want to hear that brought up. iaaf bans should be enforced by the ncaa - it's sad that they didn't impose the rule change with immediate effect. it is unethical that miss st. is allowing a drug cheat to compete for their university while under an international ban.
You silver spooned boys can have all you petitions and polls, but in the end, the kid is still going to run. And that's the bottom line.
marijuana use is indeed banned by the ncaa. if an athlete tested positive they would not be eligible.
cheating is cheating.