Sign my petition to keep Sha’Carri Richardson in the women’s 100 at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics

big bopper wrote:

It is a sport, stupid. It is not the law of the land. When you participate in a sport, you agree to the rules. Nobody makes you particioate. This is very straightforward.

Nobody is contesting that she broke the rules including her. The other law of the land is that she gets a 30-days ban. Not that she can't run in the Olympics. The absurd idea that her results should be invalidated because of breaking a rule that didn't impact her performance is at stake here. In any country that has a discretionary pick, she'd be in as soon as she was back eligible. If ever there was a chance to ignore the top 3 on the day thing it's right here.

She absolutely has the right to appeal. And yes in the appeal process if WADA/CAS decides to overturn the ban and also negate the rule because they see it as unnecessary then that would be a fair process.

Her coach is the convicted doper Dennis Mitchell. She claims Nike introduced them. He is possibly the dirtiest person in athletics. So much so even his wife was busted for nandrolone. His main protege, Tyson Gay, also a doper...and Sha'carri's training partner/mentor. Meanwhile her times rival Flo-jo's and is crushing the PBs of Marion Jones.

Now you are asking for clean athletes to rennounce to the Olympics because the rules could finally be bent to stop an obvious doper? Cheaters use every loophole available in an already laughably weak anti-doping system. Lobby to change the cannabis rule, sure, but Sha'carri should not be running in Tokyo. Al Capone got jailed for tax fraud after killing hundreds. No clean athlete associates with Mitchell and runs 10.6s.

hope she gets to run that 4x1 and hope that this is the impetus to get a stupid rule changed.

i respect the way she owned up to it without even calling out what a stupid rule it is. It would appear she is either very savvy herself, or has very good management. Maybe both.

Next olympics is only 3 years away. Have got to take the long view here, and that is exactly how she appears to be handling it.

I’m surprised no one has brought up that cannabis is illegal in Japan. She can’t bring it with her to the Olympics , and she can’t smoke it over there, either. If the USOC/USATF selects her for the relay team, they better drill that into her head.

I won't sign. With an Olympic spot on the line and many years of hard work at stake....she got high? Seriously couldn't go a few weeks without weed? Sad.

jackedtothetits wrote:

Lobby to change the cannabis rule, sure, but Sha'carri should not be running in Tokyo.

You realize if Sha'Carri was basically any nationality besides American with our top 3 on the day gets in system, she'd be free and clear to run in Tokyo?

Her 1-month ban runs out before the 100m women's first round. The only reason she wouldn't be eligible to run is invalidating Trials results over the failed test for weed.

So we are allowing people to sign petitions after someone breaks the rules now??? These athletes are supposed to be role models, superior athletes and conduct themselves as such!! Do you have children Mr. Johnson? Is this a good role model for them if you do? Nieces or nephews, good role model? Should we let Holihan back in? All the drug cheats? That's the problem with society now a days, its either a rule or isn't! Its black or white! Its right or wrong! Too much living i the grey area!!!

Seriously. It isn’t that much to ask that someone isn’t high during competition. It is such a low bar.

An athlete also can’t take a bump of cocaine before a race. Yes, there is a small performance advantage. That is why it is banned in competition.

High hopes wrote:

This has got to be the dumbest crusade yet from LRC. Asking other 100m runners to give up bonuses, maybe new contracts or salary increases, to let someone slide onto the team with a drugs ban? And they do that out of the goodness of their hearts?

It's also disappointing to see LRC continually adopting a soft line on doping. Every time a US medal contender gets sanctioned, LRC advocates for a rule change. With Coleman it was change the rules so that there's always a warning phone call, with Houlihan it was change the rules to allow more nandrolone to be present in an athlete's system, now it's change the rules to allow THC.

Maybe the rules aren't the problem here, maybe it's the athletes themselves and the enablers around them who are always trying to absolve them of responsibility for their actions

No, the rules are the problem because we are continually banning the best athletes and DQing them from races for technicalities that provide no advantage over the competition. This sport suffers enough and not allowing the best athletes to compete for stupid reasons doesn't help.

thunderdome wrote:

Seriously. It isn’t that much to ask that someone isn’t high during competition. It is such a low bar.

An athlete also can’t take a bump of cocaine before a race. Yes, there is a small performance advantage. That is why it is banned in competition.

Cocaine is also illegal and dangerous. It has much more performance-enhancing potential than weed. Not really a debate.

I don't think it's too much ask, which is why she should probably get the 30-day ban on her first violation. But to wipe away a performance that then due to our Trials system bumps her from a properly-earned spot is ridiculous. If she's any other nationality, she serves her ban and is on the starting line.

Signed

No one cares about THC anymore. It's 2021 not 1980!

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

thunderdome wrote:

Seriously. It isn’t that much to ask that someone isn’t high during competition. It is such a low bar.

An athlete also can’t take a bump of cocaine before a race. Yes, there is a small performance advantage. That is why it is banned in competition.

Cocaine is also illegal and dangerous. It has much more performance-enhancing potential than weed. Not really a debate.

I don't think it's too much ask, which is why she should probably get the 30-day ban on her first violation. But to wipe away a performance that then due to our Trials system bumps her from a properly-earned spot is ridiculous. If she's any other nationality, she serves her ban and is on the starting line.

Would you say the same thing if this was the 200 and she stepped on the lane line on the curve? How measurable is that advantage?

Iron Bars wrote:

NO.

A blatant disregard for the rules. A slippery slope to make exceptions to the rules. The issue of Marijuana being a banned substance is a SEPARATE issue.

^This and only this, if you are physiologically dependent on Marijuana you shouldn’t be competing, if you are taking it to deal with emotional distress during competition then it is a performance enhancer and is not fair to other competitors who also may be dealing with similar emotional distress who don’t take the substance.

This is a very simple case where the athlete has admitted to the violation, unfortunate timing but that’s life. In the end it’s really only her Trials results that are annulled and she we still be at the Olympics.

I don’t think in competition marijuana use should be allowed for risk that some athletes will take it believing it could improve performance. If you like it other times - fine but the rule should remain for in competition. Additionally the substance remains illegal in most of the world and not being thrown in jail during international competition is also important.

[quote]THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

Cocaine is also illegal and dangerous. It has much more performance-enhancing potential than weed. Not really a debate."

Weed is still illegal in the US. These states pretending that it is "legal" cannot nullify Federal law. The Congress and the WH have run away from legalization faster than an Olympic sprinter.

Justice Thomas brought up the nightmare scenarios that could play out IF the Congress doesn't provide some clarity on the status of marijuana. And that's just the legality of it, regarding Richards case she still has to get past WADA- that's not the US that's the freakin WORLD.

thunderdome wrote:

Would you say the same thing if this was the 200 and she stepped on the lane line on the curve? How measurable is that advantage?

That's literally breaking the rules for an advantage and 100% worthy of a ban. Apples and oranges.

YersiniaPestis wrote:

regarding Richards case she still has to get past WADA- that's not the US that's the freakin WORLD.

Incorrect. Once she serves 30 days, she will be free-and-clear of the WADA requirements. The US Trials system is blocking her from the starting line, not WADA. If USATF had a discretionary pick or just picked athletes like nearly every other country, there would not be an issue here.

Good point. Don't send her if a committee decides. Send Felix in the 100. I like it. Don't send some lower when we have nice upstanding women to fill all spots. Be careful what you ask for. Out team would be at least 50% different and not for the better.

Why did she risk her spot to smoke if it didn't make her feel better?