I think I am being entirely reasonable here. Other runners that have used other people's bib to run marathons have been swiftly banned. The same rules apply for Andy Sloan. There is no reason he should get special treatment and it would be unfair and massively hypocritical to not advocate for him being banned just like all the others.
You are contending that 1) all bib swappers are swiftly banned for life and 2) that there isn't and shouldn't be any consideration into the nature of the bib swapping impacts. I don't agree on either of these points.
LRC psyc wrote:
You are contending that 1) all bib swappers are swiftly banned for life and 2) that there isn't and shouldn't be any consideration into the nature of the bib swapping impacts. I don't agree on either of these points.
So which illegal bib swappers that are caught have you seen not banned? And there is no difference between other cases of bib swapping and this one. Zero difference.
Look up Dr Hilary Jones who was banned for life along with his son after his son ran in his place. They know the consequences of doing this as it's in the literature they receive after getting their place. No sympathy.
This sort of thing just adds to reasons of why people are getting cynical about donating to charities/fund raising and it's getting worse.
It's slow death by association for the charities, being economical with the truth, little white lie, scamming, whatever you want to call it, it discredits and disrespects the charity by association with such practices and is not good for their business of fund raising.
The "yeah but, it's for charity so it's OK" is not OK and the saying so and carrying out the untruths, etc need to be called out and stopped. In some cases there are even laws against it, go and check the UK Charity Commission website.
The Sloan's, Reading's, Young's, etc, etc need to be called out and banned.
If there were some moral motivation behind it then the likes of Tinfoil Hat would report it and that would be the end of it. What people find distasteful is the seeking of plaudits by joyfully posting about it with such vitriol - chuck a sick kids charity into the hat and it just makes you look like an utter ****.
BTW, it may still be shown that Andy was a legitimate late substitute for BLISS.
Seems a few of you are attacking Mr Tinfoil for his crusade, who GAF if he is a basement dweller who hasn't got a life, how about attacking the problem of all this cheating, lying, scamming, fake news, etc.
It's the sort of stuff no one benefits from in the long run and why anyone would want to defend it because it's for charity is beyond me.
Attacking the messenger. wrote:
Seems a few of you are attacking Mr Tinfoil for his crusade, who GAF if he is a basement dweller who hasn't got a life, how about attacking the problem of all this cheating, lying, scamming, fake news, etc.
It's the sort of stuff no one benefits from in the long run and why anyone would want to defend it because it's for charity is beyond me.
I loathe real cheating and cheaters. (yes there is a spectrum)
I think Mr. Tinfoil is a sick individual.
These statements are not mutually exclusive.
Loop me in wrote:
If there were some moral motivation behind it then the likes of Tinfoil Hat would report it and that would be the end of it. What people find distasteful is the seeking of plaudits by joyfully posting about it with such vitriol - chuck a sick kids charity into the hat and it just makes you look like an utter ****.
BTW, it may still be shown that Andy was a legitimate late substitute for BLISS.
Defending cheating/lying makes YOU look like an utter ****.
"If there were some moral motivation behind it then the likes of Tinfoil Hat would report it and that would be the end of it."
Reporting AND outing cheating on public forums, social media, blogs, Marathon Investigation blog, etc, will help to put an end to it.
"What people find distasteful is the seeking of plaudits"
If he were after plaudits he would post under his real name, otherwise what's the point if you're after "plaudits".
What most people find distasteful is cheating, lying, etc, whatever the reason is they're doing for.
frequenter wrote:
Attacking the messenger. wrote:Seems a few of you are attacking Mr Tinfoil for his crusade, who GAF if he is a basement dweller who hasn't got a life, how about attacking the problem of all this cheating, lying, scamming, fake news, etc.
It's the sort of stuff no one benefits from in the long run and why anyone would want to defend it because it's for charity is beyond me.
I loathe real cheating and cheaters. (yes there is a spectrum)
I think Mr. Tinfoil is a sick individual.
These statements are not mutually exclusive.
Perhaps we should all live by your moral compass of what is "real cheating and cheaters", whatever that spectrum is, perhaps you can enlighten us, I'm sure the rest of the world would be 100% in agreement.
Look at this case of Andy Sloan:
- We do not know under what circumstances he got this charity place.
- He completed the race.
- He raised over £2k via JustGiving (so no chance he kept the cash).
Does this seem sufficient grounds to publicly call him out as a cheater/fraud? If you Google his name, this thread will likely appear. And what about Clare Sloan who two pages ago was so clearly part of this deception?
Loop me in wrote:
Look at this case of Andy Sloan:
- We do not know under what circumstances he got this charity place.
- He completed the race.
- He raised over £2k via JustGiving (so no chance he kept the cash).
Does this seem sufficient grounds to publicly call him out as a cheater/fraud? If you Google his name, this thread will likely appear. And what about Clare Sloan who two pages ago was so clearly part of this deception?
-You do not have any proof he has a charity place and it doesn't matter anyway because it is 100% someone else's bib.
-Doesn't matter that he completed the race. He was not suppose to be in it.
-"It's for the kids" / "It's for charity, he can do whatever he wants" excuse.
-We stopped talking about Clare pages ago. We were only investigating what connection she had and concluded none. And I said she is attractive. What's wrong with that?
Spectum detector. wrote:
frequenter wrote:I loathe real cheating and cheaters. (yes there is a spectrum)
I think Mr. Tinfoil is a sick individual.
These statements are not mutually exclusive.
Perhaps we should all live by your moral compass of what is "real cheating and cheaters", whatever that spectrum is, perhaps you can enlighten us, I'm sure the rest of the world would be 100% in agreement.
Look at what the fellow above me wrote. Doesn't seem like a reason to skewer someone. You, aka Tinfoil, are clearly not in agreement which is why I think you are a sick individual.
Oh, yes, I'm so wrong for thinking Andy Sloan should be following the rules just like everyone else and suffer the same consequences that have been dealt to lots of other bib swappers. Oh, gee, God forgive me for thinking we all have to follow the same rules.
Tinfoil Hat wrote:
I think I am being entirely reasonable here. Other runners that have used other people's bib to run marathons have been swiftly banned. The same rules apply for Andy Sloan. There is no reason he should get special treatment and it would be unfair and massively hypocritical to not advocate for him being banned just like all the others.
I agree
You are lambasting a guy who raised money and ran a race because you don't think he jumped through all of the right hoops. You are a sick individual.
After reading most of this thread, it seems as if Andy Sloan, using someone else's bib, ran the marathon in 3:44:08. His wife ran it in 3:44:09. It is obvious that they ran together.
Random observation: If you run an entire marathon with your wife, you should be a gentleman and let her cross the finish line first. Andy Sloan apparently did not do that. Andy Sloan is a jerk.
frequenter wrote:
You are lambasting a guy who raised money and ran a race because you don't think he jumped through all of the right hoops. You are a sick individual.
And your point is???? Lots of other bib swappers raised money for charity and got banned because they are not suppose to be in the race. The "it's for charity so he can do whatever he wants" excuse is a piece of crap and you know it. Go post that piece of crap on the Ultra Running Community Facebook page.
You are lambasting a guy who raised money and ran a race because you don't think he jumped through all of the right hoops. You are a sick individual.
Loop me in wrote:
Look at this case of Andy Sloan:
- We do not know under what circumstances he got this charity place.
- He completed the race.
- He raised over £2k via JustGiving (so no chance he kept the cash).
Does this seem sufficient grounds to publicly call him out as a cheater/fraud? If you Google his name, this thread will likely appear. And what about Clare Sloan who two pages ago was so clearly part of this deception?
I take my hat off to Mr Tinfoil. Races have rules and those rules must be followed in order to avoid anarchy. There is a certain irony surrounding Mr Foil's postings and I adore that.