umstead wrote:
Perhaps if people had more details, everyone could finalize their judgement instead of speculating for the rest of everyone's lives. Nothing good really comes of keeping everything silent. No names are needed, but people need to know precisely what happened to warrant such a death sentence.
Agreed.
It’s amazing that we’ve somehow given Safesport the power to end careers. This is not a legal court of law. This is what they feel. I understand the attempt to protect athletes. Who protects the coach from angry athletes?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/alberto-salazar-running-coach-banned-11640204152liar soorer wrote:
carmine9 wrote:
So the career of a world famous runner and coach is ended for sexual misconduct and nobody can say what the misconduct is?
How bad does that stink?
Why is it over?
I repeat…. what exactly has he been banned from?
This thread has certainly brought the lower IQ percentiles in droves. Because we don't know the details of the case against him that resulted in a lifetime ban we can confidently proclaim he hasn't done anything to deserve it. Because we don't know of anything he did he therefore didn't do anything. Yet the body that ruled against him clearly thought otherwise - because it had the facts. We don't.
Further, to publicly disclose the details of the charges against him likely risks causing further harm to those affected by his actions. But those harmed by him don't matter here; it is Alberto who must be defended. Misogynists like to band together.
umstead wrote:
What exactly constitutes secret sexual misconduct? If it is bad enough to ban someone for life, why hasn't the man been charged? I don't know of a single person accused of sexual harassment in the workplace who has been banned for life for working in their chosen field. Sexual harassment is a fireable offense, but its not a death sentence of employment. Anything past that is brought to the authorities.
Expand your thinking a bit and think of doctors or lawyers who have lost their license. They are generally unable to ever practice again.
Armstronglivs wrote:
This thread has certainly brought the lower IQ percentiles in droves. Because we don't know the details of the case against him that resulted in a lifetime ban we can confidently proclaim he hasn't done anything to deserve it. Because we don't know of anything he did he therefore didn't do anything. Yet the body that ruled against him clearly thought otherwise - because it had the facts. We don't.
Further, to publicly disclose the details of the charges against him likely risks causing further harm to those affected by his actions. But those harmed by him don't matter here; it is Alberto who must be defended. Misogynists like to band together.
Very true. Cogently said.
Armstronglivs wrote:
This thread has certainly brought the lower IQ percentiles in droves. Because we don't know the details of the case against him that resulted in a lifetime ban we can confidently proclaim he hasn't done anything to deserve it. Because we don't know of anything he did he therefore didn't do anything. Yet the body that ruled against him clearly thought otherwise - because it had the facts. We don't.
Further, to publicly disclose the details of the charges against him likely risks causing further harm to those affected by his actions. But those harmed by him don't matter here; it is Alberto who must be defended. Misogynists like to band together.
Come on.
If you are going to take away a man's livelihood you ought to provide the reasons why. Hiding behind "we want to protect the victims" is a pile of poop.
Make the reasons none.
No secret courts
bubbly butt wrote:
It’s amazing that we’ve somehow given Safesport the power to end careers. This is not a legal court of law. This is what they feel. I understand the attempt to protect athletes. Who protects the coach from angry athletes?
How do you know it is just angry athletes. Have you seen the charges of the sexual misconduct?
Safesport is not a court of law. If this was bad enough for a lifetime ban, would a civil suit in court be an appropriate next step? Or not because it would not hold up. Safesport has overstepped their bounds here.
carmine9 wrote:
Come on.
If you are going to take away a man's livelihood you ought to provide the reasons why. Hiding behind "we want to protect the victims" is a pile of poop.
Make the reasons none.
No secret courts
But HE DOES know why.
We are the ones who do not.
As regards Mary Cain. She moved back to New York in 2015 and was not thereafter under Salazar's direct supervision. Safe Sport was not established until March, 2017 and so did not publish its first code until then. I don't think it was misconduct allegations by Mary Cain that sank Salazar, at least at Safe Sport.
Salazar was suspended by USADA on October 1, 2019. Hence, the alleged sexual misconduct by the 58+ year old Salazar must have occurred in the period between March 3, 2017 and October 1, 2019.
Dwightarm wrote:
carmine9 wrote:
Come on.
If you are going to take away a man's livelihood you ought to provide the reasons why. Hiding behind "we want to protect the victims" is a pile of poop.
Make the reasons none.
No secret courts
But HE DOES know why.
We are the ones who do not.
How do you know Alberto knows why?
Why would a high profile person be banned for life with no detail as to his transgressions?
I guess we are the Soviet Union now
bubbly butt wrote:
It’s amazing that we’ve somehow given Safesport the power to end careers. This is not a legal court of law. This is what they feel. I understand the attempt to protect athletes. Who protects the coach from angry athletes?
Investigative and appellate process.
But please, feel free to list examples of all those poor innocent coaches who had their careers ended by “angry athletes.”
carmine9 wrote:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/alberto-salazar-running-coach-banned-11640204152liar soorer wrote:
Why is it over?
I repeat…. what exactly has he been banned from?
Link won’t open.. sorry.
However my earlier reading indicated that what actually is banned is not clear. He can still coach …. yes.
Armstronglivs wrote:
This thread has certainly brought the lower IQ percentiles in droves. Because we don't know the details of the case against him that resulted in a lifetime ban we can confidently proclaim he hasn't done anything to deserve it. Because we don't know of anything he did he therefore didn't do anything. Yet the body that ruled against him clearly thought otherwise - because it had the facts. We don't.
Further, to publicly disclose the details of the charges against him likely risks causing further harm to those affected by his actions. But those harmed by him don't matter here; it is Alberto who must be defended. Misogynists like to band together.
Oh insults from the man who uses racist phrases
And again he can’t tell the difference between commenting on the system and the convicted.
So should we pay any attention to a person who will not deny they are racism deniers.
Armstronglivs wrote:
This thread has certainly brought the lower IQ percentiles in droves. Because we don't know the details of the case against him that resulted in a lifetime ban we can confidently proclaim he hasn't done anything to deserve it. Because we don't know of anything he did he therefore didn't do anything. Yet the body that ruled against him clearly thought otherwise - because it had the facts. We don't.
Further, to publicly disclose the details of the charges against him likely risks causing further harm to those affected by his actions. But those harmed by him don't matter here; it is Alberto who must be defended. Misogynists like to band together.
No one has any faith in this woke institution that offers zero transparency and which no one elected supreme ruler of our sport. Other than lower IQ percentiles of course.
WSJ: "Famed Running Coach Alberto Salazar Banned for Sexual Misconduct
The U.S. Center for SafeSport’s decision against the former Nike-backed elite distance coach has become final
Alberto Salazar is among the most famous coaches to be declared permanently ineligible by the U.S. Center for SafeSport.
By Rachel Bachman and Louise Radnofsky
Updated Dec. 22, 2021 5:31 pm ET
The permanent ban of famed former Nike running coach Alberto Salazar for sexual misconduct has been upheld, according to an update Wednesday to the U.S. Center for SafeSport’s disciplinary database.
Copied and pasted from the article.
Seems he cannot coach again
Interestingly, Safe Sport derives its authority from the US Olympic & Para Olympic Committee and so does not have authority over sporting activities not regulated by the USOPC. Thus participants in professional sports such as football are not under the authority of Safe Sport. There is definitely ambiguity about its authority over sporting activities not regulated by the USOPC, but whose participants may also be aspiring Olympic athletes or the supporting staff who supervise such participants. Is college baseball regulated by safe sport, or professional hockey? Are certain areas of track and field (regulated by the NCAA, for example) not under the jurisdiction of Safe Sport? Activities narrowly related to cross country would appear to be outside of its jurisdiction. But I think Safe Sport makes a broad claim that might snare the unwary who are involved in areas that touch on Olympic sport.
carmine9 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
This thread has certainly brought the lower IQ percentiles in droves. Because we don't know the details of the case against him that resulted in a lifetime ban we can confidently proclaim he hasn't done anything to deserve it. Because we don't know of anything he did he therefore didn't do anything. Yet the body that ruled against him clearly thought otherwise - because it had the facts. We don't.
Further, to publicly disclose the details of the charges against him likely risks causing further harm to those affected by his actions. But those harmed by him don't matter here; it is Alberto who must be defended. Misogynists like to band together.
Come on.
If you are going to take away a man's livelihood you ought to provide the reasons why. Hiding behind "we want to protect the victims" is a pile of poop.
Make the reasons none.
No secret courts
If someone is sacked from a company are the details made public? This is not a criminal court. Salazar has lost an employment position. The parties will be informed of the decision. That does not give the public the right to know the details.
bubbly butt wrote:
Safesport is not a court of law. If this was bad enough for a lifetime ban, would a civil suit in court be an appropriate next step? Or not because it would not hold up. Safesport has overstepped their bounds here.
Hopefully AlSal sues the f*** out of them.