Why are people here so certain that Shelby intentionally cheated?

I don't doubt she's a nice lady,but i believe she took cocktails of drugs intentionally.Her,and perhaps the entire group she trained with.She had to have noticed the changes in her body.Her adam's apple was popping out,she became leaner,and much more muscled.Her jaw and face were changing shape.I don't believe she's a psychopath,sociopath or any other path.She took drugs and played the game like other elite athletes.

You’re twisting the truth. The ban was set to the standard 4 years, not 3. She was offered a deal to have the ban reduced to 3 years if she admitted guilt. The initial ban and what she ultimately got was the standard 4.

Not at all. Here are two pieces of evidence that prove I’m right. The first is an article from back in 2013, when WADA decided to increase its penalty for first time offenses to 4 years.

The article states: “The code will take effect Jan. 1, 2015, in time for the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro. It will ensure that athletes found guilty of intentional doping miss the next games, a position strongly backed by the International Olympic Committee.”

usatoday.com

USA TODAY

@usatoday

Doping offenses receive harsher punishment starting January 2015.

Link:www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2013/11/...

The second piece of evidence is the World Athletics’ Athletics Integrity Unit anti doping rulebook. Under Rule 10.2: Ineligibility for Presence, Use or Attempted Use, or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (pages 55-56), it states “the period of Ineligibility will be four years.”

You always miss the point. The aim of doping bans is to take athletes out of the sport. The Olympics are an important competition and part of the sport but they don't determine the length of a doping ban.

It made sense for a process introduced in 2015 to apply to the global competition the following year. They simply wanted to make sure the process applied as soon as possible. But you will also see that a ban introduced in 2015 for 4 years would have expired before the Olympics in 2020. There was nothing in the rules that says the aim of a ban should be to remove athletes from a single Olympic competition as its primary goal. Antidoping applies to athletes at every level and only a fraction will compete at the Olympics. You have also not recognised that the World Championships can also be included within a ban, so that an athlete who is banned for 2 years might miss both an Olympic and World Championship competition. Thus an athlete who has only a 2 or 3 year ban in 2022 would miss both the World Championships as well as the Olympics. Lastly, the most obvious point is that if the primary purpose of a ban is to remove the athlete from Olympic participation the ban would not apply to other forms of competition (including World Championships). It does. They can't compete anywhere in the sport for the period of the ban. For a professional athlete, that is the cessation of their livelihood. The Olympics is only two weeks in their career.

You are being increasingly ridiculous and obtuse. Do you like arguing just for the sake of it? Or maybe you’re just trolling?

It’s preposterous to think that the motivation to set the standard penalty for doping at four years wasn’t based on wanting dopers at the highest level to miss an Olympic year as part of their total (not sole) punishment. That motivation doesn’t need to be stated in the rulebook, LOL. It was part of the discussion before and after the rule was adopted, as shown in the article I shared.

Missing the Olympics is not the only reason for a four-year penalty, but it’s certainly a big one. You are hopefully bright enough to understand competing in the Olympics is the biggest goal that athletes have. The specter of a four-year ban that would include an Olympic year on top of world championships and everything else is therefore intended to be a powerful deterrent.

You argue as though the world championships and other events (DL) are irrelevant to the consideration of a ban. The Olympics are but two weeks; a ban takes an athlete out of all competition for several years. That is the essential penalty because it is the end of a professional athlete's livelihood for the period of a ban. Two weeks out of pocket is nothing. 3 or 4 years is a long period with no income from their sport. But you are also so clueless as to not realise that the ban will also apply to athletes who don't make it to the Olympics and never will. However, all this is a digression from the essential fact that Houlihan was banned for 4 years because of the seriousness of her offence, which was deemed an intentional ADRV. She is "innocent" only to nutjobs like yourself.

You’re in need of some humble pie, and I happen to be in the mood to bake. Eat up:

The push to increase WADA’s standard ban from 2 years to 4 years came after many people got upset that LaShawn Merritt was able to compete in the 2011 world championships and 2012 Olympics after being suspended in 2009. The International Olympic Committee tried to bar Merritt from competing in the 2012 Olympics based on their Rule 45 that was established to keep suspended athletes from competing in the next Olympics, but their decision was overturned by CAS because it was deemed to be a second punishment. Hence the push to strengthen the standard punishment.

An early draft of WADA’s rule change shared in June 2012 had a provision that was similar to IOC rule 45. As reported at the time by BBC: “Article 10.15 of the latest draft of the new Wada code now makes clear the provision for banning athletes from the next Olympic Games.

It states: "Where an athlete or other person has been sanctioned for an anti-doping rule violation other than under Articles 10.3.3 (Filing Failures and Missed Tests), 10.3.4 (Prohibited Association), 10.4 (Specified Substances), or 10.5.2 (No Significant Fault or Negligence), and Article 10.5.3 (Substantial Assistance) is not applicable, then, as an additional sanction, the athlete or other person shall be ineligible to participate in the next Summer Olympic Games and the next Winter Olympic Games taking place after the end of the period of ineligibility otherwise imposed."

bbc.com

World Anti Doping Agency to add 'Olympic ban' to code

https://www.facebook.com/BBCSport/

Serious drugs cheats are more likely to miss an Olympic Games under new World Anti Doping Agency rules.

Link:www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/18303702

A later version of the draft for the rule change shared in November 2012 removed the Olympic clause and instead stipulated a 4-year ban, due to concerns about legal challenges. As reported by Inside the Games:

“The move to double the length of bans for dopers was made in the latest draft World Anti-Doping Code while the controversial "Osaka Rule", which bans athletes convicted of serious doping offences from competing in the next Olympic Games, has been dropped.

Rule 45 - or the Osaka Rule - was removed amid fears that such a rule could be challenged legally after the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) successfully argued on behalf of Beijing 2008 400 metres champion LaShawn Merritt at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) that it was unfair because it was a second punishment for the same offence.”

insidethegames.biz

Four-year ban will survive legal challenges says WADA President

@insidethegames

BY TOM DEGUN NOVEMBER 19 - WORLD ANTI-DOPING AGENCY (WADA) PRESIDENT JOHN FAHEY IS CONFIDENT THAT THE PLAN TO INCREASE THE LENGTH OF BANS FOR SERIOUS...

Link:www.insidethegames.biz/articles/101174...

As reported by Sports Illustrated: WADA President John Fahey said Monday there is "an overwhelming amount of support for the sanction to be strengthened" for use of steroids, human growth hormone and other serious doping substances and methods.“

"Four years will invariably take out someone competing in the next Olympics," Fahey said.

si.com

WADA's new four-year doping ban would keep offenders out of Olympics

SI Staff

LONDON (AP) -- Drug cheats will be kept out at least one Olympics under the World Anti-Doping Agency's proposal to increase the suspension for serious

Link:www.si.com/more-sports/2012/11/19/wada...

The 4-year ban was seen by the IOC as a satisfactory way of meeting their goal to keep suspended athletes out of the next Olympics, and doing it in a way that would withstand legal challenges. As reported by Al Jazeera:

“IOC President Jacques Rogge supports proposals to double the length of doping bans to four years as a way of keeping drug cheats out of the Olympics.

He said the change would be in line with the International Olympic Committee’s previous failed attempt to bar any athlete slapped with a ban of more than six months from competing in the subsequent Olympics.

The so-called “Osaka Rule” was thrown out last year by the Court of Arbitration for Sport on grounds that the sanction represented a second penalty for the same offence and did not comply with the WADA code.

WADA’s proposed four-year bans should serve the same purpose as the IOC rule.
“This is something that is completely in line with the Osaka Rule, because the Osaka Rule was to stop the athletes to participate in the next games if their penalty was higher than six months,” Rogge said.

“Now with this high penalty of four years, automatically you don’t participate in the next games.”

aljazeera.com

Rogge backs four-year doping ban

International Olympic Committee head in favour of doubling the length of doping bans to keep cheats out of the Games.

Link:www.aljazeera.com/amp/sports/2012/11/2...

Where can I buy nandrolone?

The pharmacy in Eldoret? 🤣

Convinced scumbag loser lowlife pathetic cheater gargage person Shelby Houlihan's medicine chest.

Send Shelbs a DM.

#NiceGirlsDontDope

Lol. Amazon of course. See Shelburrito's CAS report for details.

What a load of pointless waffle. An athlete can be taken out of contention for the Olympics if the ban is the same year or they are only 1, 2, or 3 years away from the Olympics and they have a ban of less than 4 years.

None of this is relevant to Houlihan, whose violation is incontestable and the penalty reflected the seriousness of the offence. That is why it is 4 years. The penalty needs to be more than a slap on the wrist.

Nah. It would have been only 3 years had she chosen it to be.

Awesome, much appreciated. I was not aware of that history/motivation.

Gosh, do you not ever admit when you’re wrong? It’s not pointless waffle. The point is Shelby’s ban is draconian because it covers two Olympics, and the spirit of the standard 4-year suspension is to cause athletes to miss one Olympic year (plus everything else that happens in a typical four-year span) not two. You challenged me on my assertion regarding the spirit of the penalty being related to the Olympics, and I have provided incontrovertible evidence that I am correct. You can at least have the decency to concede that point.

It seems like you being a fan is swaying your perception of her ban. If this was a Russian athlete would you be arguing the same point?

Waffle, piffle, flannel. Your vocabulary is extremely limited.