thoughts and prayers wrote:
Shelby is a convicted doper serving a 4 year ban for a doping violation.
create your own truth if you like but it doesn’t change reality.
End of thread,should be anyway but Shelbys stalker won't let it go.
thoughts and prayers wrote:
Shelby is a convicted doper serving a 4 year ban for a doping violation.
create your own truth if you like but it doesn’t change reality.
End of thread,should be anyway but Shelbys stalker won't let it go.
the macdaddy og yoo wrote:
thoughts and prayers wrote:
Shelby is a convicted doper serving a 4 year ban for a doping violation.
create your own truth if you like but it doesn’t change reality.
Facts.
+1
Facts, not wishful thinking.
Banned for four years for intentional possession and (attempted use or) use of a banned steroid, namely nandrolone.
Case closed.
Drug cheats out!
say it again. wrote:
thoughts and prayers wrote:
Shelby is a convicted doper serving a 4 year ban for a doping violation.
create your own truth if you like but it doesn’t change reality.
End of thread,should be anyway but Shelbys stalker won't let it go.
Hahaha, yes. But what would actually be interesting: why did CAS give her credit for her provisional suspension, although she was apparently still training with the team? Did they not know?
See WA's 10.14 "Status during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension", and the explaining comment:
Ineligible Athletes cannot participate in a training camp, exhibition or practice organised by their Member or a club that is a member of that Member or that is funded by a governmental agency.
And 10.14.3:
An Athlete or other Person who violates the prohibition against participation during a Provisional Suspension described in Rule 10.14.1 will receive no credit for any period of Provisional Suspension served
Maybe JG will investigate!
She’s going to extend her ban by doing what she’s doing.
She’s pretty much proving she has no regard for the rules of the sport and is will to risk extending her ban by competing in time trials and posting results, participating in organized training and training at track facilities.
She and her club, sponsor and coach are willing to flaunt drug sanctions reveals they have no regard for the rules of our sport and are trying to operate in contradiction to established rules.
banned means banned 1 wrote:
She’s going to extend her ban by doing what she’s doing.
She’s pretty much proving she has no regard for the rules of the sport and is will to risk extending her ban by competing in time trials and posting results, participating in organized training and training at track facilities.
She and her club, sponsor and coach are willing to flaunt drug sanctions reveals they have no regard for the rules of our sport and are trying to operate in contradiction to established rules.
I see much that supports that her ban get turned back to the start again.
But she can train at many tracks and gyms esp commercial ones ; she can do time trials and a good few other things.The problem is that there are not the fully established rules that one might assume esp for a distance runner.
On a previous thread it was argued that she would have got ruling from USADA but such , like much in all this is not clear.
casual obsever wrote:
the macdaddy og yoo wrote:
Facts.
+1
Facts, not wishful thinking.
Banned for four years for intentional possession and (attempted use or) use of a banned steroid, namely nandrolone.
Case closed.
Drug cheats out!
Possession ?!
You really must stop inventing stuff; you have just proved beyond doubt that you are incompetent or a liar.
Case closed.
Incompetent cheats out!
say it again. wrote:
thoughts and prayers wrote:
Shelby is a convicted doper serving a 4 year ban for a doping violation.
create your own truth if you like but it doesn’t change reality.
End of thread,should be anyway but Shelbys stalker won't let it go.
This is not about SH but the rules.
The area she’s in right now is so gray.
What is the current evidence that she is training with the team? That she is in the same location?
Ok yes that’s sketchy as hell. But if she’s not at their official practices, staying with them in their camp houses and there is (currently) no actual evidence (texts/emails/etc) that she is having correspondence about training……can they do anything about it?
I don’t know who would exactly extend her ban(wada? Usada?) but can they use “saw her on an easy run with _bowerman_athlete_” as a legitimate reason?
I’m not saying it can or can’t be, but I’m actually curious if any hard evidence has been found or if it’s just speculation because she’s there and she’s training.
casual obsever wrote:
say it again. wrote:
End of thread,should be anyway but Shelbys stalker won't let it go.
Hahaha, yes. But what would actually be interesting: why did CAS give her credit for her provisional suspension, although she was apparently still training with the team? Did they not know?
See WA's 10.14 "Status during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension", and the explaining comment:
Ineligible Athletes cannot participate in a training camp, exhibition or practice organised by their Member or a club that is a member of that Member or that is funded by a governmental agency.
And 10.14.3:
An Athlete or other Person who violates the prohibition against participation during a Provisional Suspension described in Rule 10.14.1 will receive no credit for any period of Provisional Suspension served
Maybe JG will investigate!
Credit were due!
Excellent point.
Perhaps by prior dispensation ?
But great point.
Hey let's be real if she created an OnlyFans she's have 300k raised pretty quick. Sometimes you gotta swallow your pride. Admitting to taking PEDs would also accomplish that.
Looks look her stupid/cheater coach who got her into this mess in the first place due to incompetence or cheating is too stupid or wants to continue breaking WADA sanctions with SH.
original liar soorer wrote:
thoughts and prayers wrote:
Shelby is a convicted doper serving a 4 year ban for a doping violation.
create your own truth if you like but it doesn’t change reality.
But not determined as a cheat.
Can’t change reality can you.
A doper is a cheat. Just like you are undoubtedly a moran.
original liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
I have never said there is a racial difference in intelligence. Your race is not the reason for your stupidity, or for the fact that you are a liar.
Anti-doping is not a health measure. It is aimed at preventing cheating - doping to gain unfair advantage - some effects of which can be physically harmful. Most doping does not harm health, particularly when it is administered by medical professionals. It is still banned. But there are any number of practices that are harmful to health - like smoking and drinking alcohol (which is a poison) - that aren't banned.
Like you never made Monkey taints or banana like taunts. Really !
Read the early history of doping control.Oh you refuse to read…. sorry!
Monkey "taints"?
"T'ain't necessarily so", as Gershwin said. You need to stop drinking before you post.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Accidental doping is an offense when it is decided that athlete failed to act with due care and responsibility for observing the anti-doping rules. So there is a determination that the athlete was at fault.
CAS does not have to completely rule out accidental doping - and that isn't what I said - because, as you know, the finding that it wasn't accidental is according to the balance of probabilities. That is how most inquiries work.
The motivation of the athlete who dopes is irrelevant, because the act is itself a form of cheating - even if the athlete thinks they are justified in doing it or even think they are allowed to. The taking of a banned drug is banned - end of argument. The reason for that is that it can illicitly provide performance advantage, quite apart from being harmful to health (although many substances and activities harmful to health - smoking and alcohol - are not banned).
The analogy that might apply is that of stealing; if someone takes what isn't theirs it is stealing even if they felt entitled to or weren't aware it is against the law. For the same reason we don't need to know what Houlihan was thinking; like someone stealing she broke the rules. Someone who steals we call a thief and someone who commits a doping violation we call a doper. Doping is a violation because it is cheating.
It's not that simple, and still quite technically incorrect.
What is simple is this: if you want to justifiably call her a cheat, it is necessary to show that she acted "dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage". The CAS did not do this, nor did they presume it.
Doping is by definition dishonest and unfair. Hence it is banned and the doper penalized. As Houlihan was. So when is doping honest and fair?
Armstronglivs wrote:
original liar soorer wrote:
But not determined as a cheat.
Can’t change reality can you.
A doper is a cheat. Just like you are undoubtedly a moran.
Insults, yet again, but well done on no racial abuse this time.
Why do you try and re invent twenty years of WADA and a further 20 years plus before that with your own version of the rules?
Is this a version of your racial superiority views?
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Evidence of "a positive test result"? Isn't that a doping violation. So what was the missing evidence? Oh, right - her excuse.
It could be an ATF or an AAF.
What I said was missing was evidence "of her motivation", which becomes relevant if you want to call her a cheat.
No, it doesn't. Doping is by its nature cheating. There isn't any legitimate doping.
original liar soorer wrote:
done and done wrote:
They found nandrolone in her sample and the panel determined her excuse was not credible.
BANNED FOR FOUR YEARS for doping.
Stop trying to sugar coat a turd.
Obviously the whole concept of strict liability is beyond you.
As it is for you.
original liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
A doper is a cheat. Just like you are undoubtedly a moran.
Insults, yet again, but well done on no racial abuse this time.
Why do you try and re invent twenty years of WADA and a further 20 years plus before that with your own version of the rules?
Is this a version of your racial superiority views?
You are still drinking, I see.
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
It's not that simple, and still quite technically incorrect.
What is simple is this: if you want to justifiably call her a cheat, it is necessary to show that she acted "dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage". The CAS did not do this, nor did they presume it.
Doping is by definition dishonest and unfair. Hence it is banned and the doper penalized. As Houlihan was. So when is doping honest and fair?
You keep inventing your own definitions and they are riddled with tautologies.
Most doping actually is allowed and is defined as fair and honest.See I have broken your tautology😀. Not had for someone you say is a moron and racially abuse with monkey food taunts.
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
It could be an ATF or an AAF.
What I said was missing was evidence "of her motivation", which becomes relevant if you want to call her a cheat.
No, it doesn't. Doping is by its nature cheating. There isn't any legitimate doping.
Most doping is legitimate.
Broken your tautology again😅