I just saw a tweet from Kara Goucher asking why Alberto can't still coach then, since he's also appealing.
I just saw a tweet from Kara Goucher asking why Alberto can't still coach then, since he's also appealing.
It's possible that USATF is under some sort of gag order if there actually is an injunction and can't say there is an injunction. But assuming they are just allowing this to happen because Shelby's lawyer threatened them a bit, how pathetic.
Wow. She wants him back.
birdbeard2 wrote:
It's possible that USATF is under some sort of gag order if there actually is an injunction and can't say there is an injunction. But assuming they are just allowing this to happen because Shelby's lawyer threatened them a bit, how pathetic.
USATF has never even acknowledged that Shelby is facing a doping ban.
cruncher wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
I stand corrected:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/olympics/story/_/id/31652538/shelby-houlihan-allowed-run-us-track-trials-doping-appeal-pending%3fplatform=ampMakes no sense to me. She will not be running in Tokyo. It will be an unpleasant experience for her as maybe half the people there will be disgusted by her being allowed to run
The article states: "Given there is an active appeal process, USATF will allow any athletes to continue competing until the process is completed,"
What active appeal are they referencing?
Their appeal is with CAS. It's absolutely unacceptable for the USATF to allow her to compete based on an appeal in an international court, that she is likely to lose
This is inexcuasable wrote:
Ghost1 wrote:
Guilty or not, she should be given her day in court just like anyone who faces allegations.
You mean like The Court of Arbitration for Sport?
"The Court of Arbitration for Sport confirmed Tuesday its panel of judges “unanimously determined that Shelby Houlihan had failed” to prove how the anabolic steroid nandrolone got into her system."
No, not that BS court, but an actual real American court that has actual real jurisdiction in our country. That court, our court, said Houlihan must be allowed to race this weekend.
Why is that so hard to figure out? We live in a nation of laws. Sorry, WADA.
Larry Dickman wrote:
This is inexcuasable wrote:
You mean like The Court of Arbitration for Sport?
"The Court of Arbitration for Sport confirmed Tuesday its panel of judges “unanimously determined that Shelby Houlihan had failed” to prove how the anabolic steroid nandrolone got into her system."
No, not that BS court, but an actual real American court that has actual real jurisdiction in our country. That court, our court, said Houlihan must be allowed to race this weekend.
Why is that so hard to figure out? We live in a nation of laws. Sorry, WADA.
Court of Arbitration for Sport is literally the only court that has jurisdiction at the Olympics or over international athletics events. US courts have no jurisdiction here.
So wait -- Kara is going to commentate during the 1500m rounds? Oh this is going to special. People, tune TF in.
Right now Christian Coleman is probably sitting at home thinking, "You can get suspended and STILL compete in the Olympic Trials? Why didn't anyone tell me?"
HappyJack wrote:
All major American sports leagues allow players who were served a banning notice, are allowed to continue competing until their appeal was heard and upheld or denied.
I'm not quite sure how this case is any different. I'd be happy to learn why she is not entitled to due process. Again, I'm not taking anyone's side. I have no dog in this fight. And I want to see justice served. If your guilty your guilt. If your not your not.
First of all, there is no real "appeals process" left. That's a misleading statement. CAS is an appellate body, and it's a form of binding arbitration (i.e., private dispute resolution). Courts have very limited authority to review arbitration awards. Basically your only grounds to get an arbitration award overturned is misconduct on the part the the arbitrator. You can't get it overturned just because the decision was wrong.
As for American sports leagues, I'm not sure why one governing body should be required to follow the process of another, but I don't think you're right anyway. I'm not aware of any athletes getting to compete after exhausting the league's disciplinary process AND THEN challenging the league's decision in court.
As for due process, she had PLENTY of due process. She elected to expedite and go directly to CAS (which cost her a level of review), she was represented by experienced counsel, and she was entitled to present any evidence and testimony she could muster. She lost because her evidence was unpersuasive, and by far the most likely explanation for her test is that she doped. (Incidentally, if you appeal a criminal conviction, you don't get to avoid going to jail until the appeal is decided.)
The USATF is acting as though there are no rules in place. If the rules were silent, it might be reasonable to adopt a policy that athletes are allowed to compete while litigation is pending. But even then, you still have to draw the line somewhere because there is always another long-shot legal challenge you can file. If she loses before the Swiss court, what if she filed a new case in a U.S. district court? Would that still be an "active appeals process"? In any event, there are rules. She's ineligible, period. The USATF doesn't get to just decide to ignore the rules. Our governing body is so freaking third-world--half corrupt, half incompetent.
Des has just been goated by me...love the comment!
Larry Dickman wrote:
This is inexcuasable wrote:
You mean like The Court of Arbitration for Sport?
"The Court of Arbitration for Sport confirmed Tuesday its panel of judges “unanimously determined that Shelby Houlihan had failed” to prove how the anabolic steroid nandrolone got into her system."
No, not that BS court, but an actual real American court that has actual real jurisdiction in our country. That court, our court, said Houlihan must be allowed to race this weekend.
Why is that so hard to figure out? We live in a nation of laws. Sorry, WADA.
What court? Where is the injunction? Are you just assuming this happened without evidence? That a federal or state court heard the case without it being listed on any docket, and issued a secret ruling? Do you have ANY idea how courts work?
She is entitled to an appeal through due process. Let the process play itself out.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
cruncher wrote:
The article states: "Given there is an active appeal process, USATF will allow any athletes to continue competing until the process is completed,"
What active appeal are they referencing?
Their appeal is with CAS. It's absolutely unacceptable for the USATF to allow her to compete based on an appeal in an international court, that she is likely to lose
Unless I missed something she already lost the CAS appeal. Is there another appeal that is still pending or in process?
Larry Dickman wrote:
No, not that BS court, but an actual real American court that has actual real jurisdiction in our country. That court, our court, said Houlihan must be allowed to race this weekend.
Why is that so hard to figure out? We live in a nation of laws. Sorry, WADA.
Nobody has said that there's a TRO or preliminary injunction from a US court forcing USATF to let Houlihan compete. If there were, it would be an idiotic ruling on the merits, but nobody would fault USATF for following it because it has to.
What's happening instead is that USATF has just decided that it doesn't want to follow the rules.
Barry Badrinath wrote:
Larry Dickman wrote:
No, not that BS court, but an actual real American court that has actual real jurisdiction in our country. That court, our court, said Houlihan must be allowed to race this weekend.
Why is that so hard to figure out? We live in a nation of laws. Sorry, WADA.
Court of Arbitration for Sport is literally the only court that has jurisdiction at the Olympics or over international athletics events. US courts have no jurisdiction here.
Yes, CAS does have jurisdiction at the Olympics, and a US court doesn't . But this is the US Olympic Trials, not the Olympics. And since this involves a US citizen who is competing in an event in the US, then a US court could also get involved.
800 dude wrote:
Larry Dickman wrote:
No, not that BS court, but an actual real American court that has actual real jurisdiction in our country. That court, our court, said Houlihan must be allowed to race this weekend.
Why is that so hard to figure out? We live in a nation of laws. Sorry, WADA.
Nobody has said that there's a TRO or preliminary injunction from a US court forcing USATF to let Houlihan compete. If there were, it would be an idiotic ruling on the merits, but nobody would fault USATF for following it because it has to.
What's happening instead is that USATF has just decided that it doesn't want to follow the rules.
Yup, USATF clearly doesn't care.
This whole situation is weird. I hope they allowed the first runner out into the next round or something to make it fair because it isn't fair to the athlete who would have made it to the next round if it comes out she is 100% guilty. She and Purrier are the only US women with legitimate chances of medalling in the 1500. Unless someone like Maclean drops a huge pr.
cruncher wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Their appeal is with CAS. It's absolutely unacceptable for the USATF to allow her to compete based on an appeal in an international court, that she is likely to lose
Unless I missed something she already lost the CAS appeal. Is there another appeal that is still pending or in process?
Yes, a lawsuit in Swiss Court is her last chance. Nice of the USATF to be so cognizant of the broad jurisdiction of Swiss Court.
Wow! How can they not see the numbers and eating even a contaminated burrito does not add up? Epic fail! Disappointed in jerry, shalane as well.