Alberto Salazar BANNED For Life for "Sexual Misconduct"

OozmaKappa 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.

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.

If it was the intimate details of your private life that were the subject of a hearing (like it was for these women) you might take a different view about "transparency".

Nor do any of you realise that the harm to Salazar has also been reduced because it could look much much worse for him if we knew all the details of what he done.

Armstronglivs 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

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.

Alberto is a very high profile public figure who has just had his career taken from him with no details as to the charges against him provided.

Scary that you think this is just fine and dandy

carmine9 wrote:

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

Thanks but still not clear.

What exactly can’t he do? The term coaching has many contexts.

In the Uk you can no coaching licence but still coach.

carmine9 wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

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.

Alberto is a very high profile public figure who has just had his career taken from him with no details as to the charges against him provided.

Scary that you think this is just fine and dandy

He will know. What is our right to know based on? We have no say in his employment.

It COULD look worse for him or the truth could come out and someone other than Salazar would look mighty foolish.

liar soorer wrote:

Link won’t open.. sorry.

However my earlier reading indicated that what actually is banned is not clear. He can still coach …. yes.

Not in anything connected to the US Olympics.

Theoretically he could coach high schools and universities, but probably not with this on his resume.

Theoretically, he can coach in foreign countries not related to the US.

“Permanent Ineligibility

a. This means that a Participant is permanently prohibited from participating, in any

capacity, in any program, activity, event, or competition sponsored by, organized

by, or under the auspices of the USOPC, any NGB, and/or any LAO, or at a facility

under their jurisdiction. This sanction is imposed only when a Participant is found

to have engaged in egregious forms of misconduct, and represents a permanent bar

from participation in Olympic & Paralympic sport.”

See:

Could look worse for Nike officials, who were paying for this Misconduct ! Think about it 😜

bubbly butt wrote:

It COULD look worse for him or the truth could come out and someone other than Salazar would look mighty foolish.

If the decision is wrong he could appeal it before a court. I doubt that he would do it. He could be subjected to extensive cross-examination on his past behaviour - not to mention the risk of wider media coverage. It would not be pretty.

rekrunner wrote:

liar soorer wrote:

Link won’t open.. sorry.

However my earlier reading indicated that what actually is banned is not clear. He can still coach …. yes.

Not in anything connected to the US Olympics.

Theoretically he could coach high schools and universities, but probably not with this on his resume.

Theoretically, he can coach in foreign countries not related to the US.

“Permanent Ineligibility

a. This means that a Participant is permanently prohibited from participating, in any

capacity, in any program, activity, event, or competition sponsored by, organized

by, or under the auspices of the USOPC, any NGB, and/or any LAO, or at a facility

under their jurisdiction. This sanction is imposed only when a Participant is found

to have engaged in egregious forms of misconduct, and represents a permanent bar

from participation in Olympic & Paralympic sport.”

See:

https://uscenterforsafesport.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/CDD-Link-1-overview-and-definitions-v2.pdf

So what would happen if he went to the hills to coach a load of athletes who volunteered to take his services or advice.

OozmaKappa wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

you don't have to be a fan of Salazar to realize the implications of equating comments about an athlete's weight to sexual harassment.

So calling a fat girl fat is now considered sexual harassment? Is that what this is about?

Yes, it can be considered a form of sexual harassment. Are you employed? Don't you have to attend sexual harassment seminars mandated by your company?

I do have to attend such seminars and that sort of behavior does fall into sexual harassment and creation of a hostile work environment.

Yet another LRC racist comes out to condemn Salazar without any facts to support their claims.

All they see is a Latino man who succeeded where they failed, so he must be taken down.

This article lists zero examples of sexual misconduct by Alberto. It gives two examples of him saying two female runners were overweight. Is that it??? Seriously. Insane.

liar soorer wrote:

So what would happen if he went to the hills to coach a load of athletes who volunteered to take his services or advice.

I’m just guessing here, as I did provide you a huge PDF to read. (Maybe I didn’t link the latest version).

I think nothing prevents him from being a private or personal coach, even for US athletes subject to WADA, after his 4-year ban is finished, and they can re-associate with him.

He just couldn’t be involved in any capacity at USOC or USATF sponsored events or facilities (see fuller list I quoted).

He could also coach non-Olympic sports.

Practically speaking though, with an USADA ban and a Safesport ban on his record, his options look limited even if we think US Safesport rulings have limited enforceability. May be time to consider early retirement.

How come Robert Kraft was untouched by the cancel crowd after what he pulled?

NYDCRunner1 wrote:

OozmaKappa wrote:

So calling a fat girl fat is now considered sexual harassment? Is that what this is about?

Yes, it can be considered a form of sexual harassment. Are you employed? Don't you have to attend sexual harassment seminars mandated by your company?

I do have to attend such seminars and that sort of behavior does fall into sexual harassment and creation of a hostile work environment.

The left has made it illegal to state simple facts.

Sal fan wrote:

Yet another LRC racist comes out to condemn Salazar without any facts to support their claims.

All they see is a Latino man who succeeded where they failed, so he must be taken down.

I haven't condemned Salazar. That was the body that decided he wasn't fit to coach.

OozmaKappa wrote:

NYDCRunner1 wrote:

Yes, it can be considered a form of sexual harassment. Are you employed? Don't you have to attend sexual harassment seminars mandated by your company?

I do have to attend such seminars and that sort of behavior does fall into sexual harassment and creation of a hostile work environment.

The left has made it illegal to state simple facts.

While the Right simply likes to make sh*t up.