Mope Dealer wrote:
kimani wrote:What were the politics behind protecting Lagat? Or Dibaba? I can understand Farah, Rupp, Centro, Radcliffe (most US and UK runners), Geb, Bolt, maybe El G--these guys were too popular, and too important for T&F's popularity, to fail. Lagat was good and had his US ties, but he wasn't transcendent, especially at the time of the infamous A sample ('07 he was surely more popular due to his accomplishments in the red white and blue uniform). Dibaba is a famous sister and has some incredible accomplishments on her resume, but I don't see either of these two being too far above Gatlin, Ramzi, Merritt, Gay, Marion Jones (!), etc.
Back in 2003 there was some irregular behavior (or behaviour) in Lagat's samples, someone on here can explain it better, but he failed one but the B (or A) was proved inconclusive, some will say it was tampered with, there might be some truth to this as it was sent to a dodgy Swiss lab know to cover up for cyclists like Lance Armstrong.
Yes, I am aware of the history. My question is why Lagat or Dibaba would warrant a coverup, while arguably higher profile runners (a double Olympic champion, US sprinters, etc.) were not aided by higher-ups. Lance was the biggest thing in cycling (akin to Bolt now) and went down, eventually. My claim is that '03 Lagat and '15/'16 Dibaba are not on the same level of popularity as Bolt, Mo, Lance, Marion, Radcliffe, Rupp, Centro, or even '97-'04 El G. I understand the IAAF covering up damning evidence against Mo (barely--Bolt is the only truly untouchable T&F athlete in my mind), but not against a defending Kenyan OG 1500m bronze medallist who competed at WSU and wasn't known to be pursuing US citizenship.