Jgault asks Shericka Jackson a stupid question then deservedly gets treated like a clown

I don't speak for them. I don't endorse the defence of Houlihan here but I think the question to Jackson is legitimate. Athletes (like Flojo) will dope without testing positive.

It's a legitimate question, but it was a dumb one to ask in that setting. When Ryan Crouser openly talk about chasing a doped record that's one thing. But Shericka is on US soil, so why she would change the conversation from her amazing run to whether a popular athlete from the 80s who is no longer alive was doping? Like the record is the record. Do you think a Moroccan record would go up to Jakob in Rabat if he ran 3:26 and ask him: "Hey Jakob, do you think El G was mainlining EPO ok thanks?"

Look at the responses 🥶

*reporter.

But one more thing it just put her in lose-lose situation. Flo Jo never tested positive, there are many fans of her who believe she was clean and an icon. No athlete would want to touch that with a ten-foot pole after the high moment of their career. Read the room, and save this for a more appropriate setting.

Your false beliefs are why intelligent people like me don't get the clot shots and you do.

BroJos and Gault,

Skip to 1:05 and learn a lesson please.

I admit to being confused as to the amount of antagonism towards Gault for asking this question. My instinct is that it was fine, assuming that his implication was that Shericka should be considered the clean WR holder and not that she too is dirty.

Does the above summarize the primary complaint against the question? That mixed zones after events should be reserved for praise and/or talking about the race itself? I'm not sure what protocol is, so I'd appreciate input.

There's only so much revenue from this website. And the lay-about brothers must take 40% of it each. So, Gaulty probably makes a solid $75K for ruining his reputation.

But he does love him some Shelby though. Or did Rojo command him to support her?

It's the DailyMail of running. Peep the racism and right wing douche-baggery.

It was the wrong time and place to ask her. If they want a serious answer from Jackson have her on the podcast. But really, it's not her opinion that matters anyway. FloJos record is on the books and there is nothing she can do about it except to try and run as fast as possible. What purpose would it serve for her to question it and insert herself into the controversy?

TMZ like question lol

Wow. With so much going on at Worlds we have 5 pages on a thread started by someone with the screen name "Rojo the clown".

This thread is for the haters! (I'll put the link for you to sign up to the Supporters Club below).

It's a perfectly reasonable question to ask. Asking a question does not imply the person who is #2 is dirty, it is implying person #1 is dirty.

When Randy Barnes had the shot put record, I'm pretty sure Crouser was asked what he thought about it.

Now you may think right after she won it isn't the time to ask it, but this is the 1 time when athletes have to talk to the media and now for the first time ever it is 1. Flojo 2. Shericka on the all-time 200 list.

Jonathan's goal isn't to be chummy with the athletes. His goal isn't to be antagonistic either. But in the course of Worlds where he asks hundreds of questions to athletes, if a few don't like the question he asked or are uncomfortable answering, then I think he's doing his job. If Jon went a whole Worlds and never asked a question that he was uncomfortable himself asking, I'd argue he wasn't doing his job. "Tell us about your race" only gets us so far.

Right....if everyone is doping, then why ever ask a question about it or question any performance?

The ones who always say someone is doping, never provide proof. They are just guilty. These are some people who scream that when they are accused of a real crime, are innocent until proven guilty.

SMH.....you are dead wrong. That is the exact opposite time to ask Jackson that question about FloJo. That question is not reasonable at all on any level to her.

Your response is just as ignorant as the question that was asked.

You can surely note the difference between asking Crouser about a living athlete from the US who was banned twice for doping (including a rare lifetime ban) vs. a foreign athlete (to Shericka) who isn't alive to defend herself and was never banned. I get your argument that you never get to ask about it, that is fair. But asking Shericka Jackson to make a referendum on Flo-Jo is weird. In the Grant Fisher episode you kinda did the dance with Rupp, but it was in a longer conversation and done far less directly.

I don't think that she knows even that many believe that Flo Jo was doping or why. After all, she was born six years after all this. And then too you don't know whether they want to touch any doping questions. There were a lot of Jamaican sprinters caught up in supplements positives years back, after which the men more or less disappeared, except for Bolt. The so-called female GOAT was one, if I remember correctly. Who's to say that someone who improves this much in a year is not doping?

What on earth are you talking about? Gault obviously wasn't accusing Jackson of doping, I have no idea how you could possibly come to that conclusion. It would be like someone asking Shannon Rowbury if she thinks she's the true AR holder, and then you thinking that somehow implied that Rowbury was on roids.

I suppose you could say the contrast between attitude Jackson vs Houlihan is that they have only discussed Houlihan with regards to doping.

One of those responses:

"This was a question to sew division and make me either hate Shericka or love her. Flo Jo never tested positive for any drug even during her autopsy."

I guess they mean the autopsy that occurred 10 years after she retired from T&F.