Manangoi ban - tragic. Was he unjustly convicted?

rule reader wrote:

Nothing changed with the rules ... yes. But if you seek to apply them in a particular way then functionally they have..

What athletes unions?

The PFA in soccer in uk have not.

Nothing has changed in any applying them in a particular way nor functionally either.

It seems like the PFA is onboard with WADA and anti-doping and whereabouts. The PFA website advises their athletes of their responsibilities under anti-doping rules and the consequences of whereabouts failures, both on their website and separately by email.

I'm going to assume again, since you are saying something that sounds like a legal interpretation, and you have provided no link, that what you are saying is just not correct.

rekrunner wrote:

rule reader wrote:

Nothing changed with the rules ... yes. But if you seek to apply them in a particular way then functionally they have..

What athletes unions?

The PFA in soccer in uk have not.

Nothing has changed in any applying them in a particular way nor functionally either.

It seems like the PFA is onboard with WADA and anti-doping and whereabouts. The PFA website advises their athletes of their responsibilities under anti-doping rules and the consequences of whereabouts failures, both on their website and separately by email.

I'm going to assume again, since you are saying something that sounds like a legal interpretation, and you have provided no link, that what you are saying is just not correct.

Yes , PFA advise compliance etc but they will not allow non work time testing and the DCO’s have a different set of procedures for out of comp tests for football.

It is clear that whereabouts offences are now being more strickly applied. We have been advised such.

Thus functionally the rules have changed.

My wider point is that Wada have set a parallel system of justice but one day real normal rules will bring it to a halt.It will be the multimillion sports that will do it. That is why I have pointed to the £13 million court case against wada by a footballer funded by the PFA.

rule reader wrote:

Yes , PFA advise compliance etc but they will not allow non work time testing and the DCO’s have a different set of procedures for out of comp tests for football.

It is clear that whereabouts offences are now being more strickly applied. We have been advised such.

Thus functionally the rules have changed.

My wider point is that Wada have set a parallel system of justice but one day real normal rules will bring it to a halt.It will be the multimillion sports that will do it. That is why I have pointed to the £13 million court case against wada by a footballer funded by the PFA.

Anti-doping is generally managed by the sports federations. It's within WADA's rules that these federations come up with its own process and implementation.

The AIU is just enforcing what was already enforceable. This is not a functional change in the rules.

Your wider point has already failed, and there doesn't seem to be much chance of success in the future.

Your "£13 million court case against wada by a footballer" had nothing to do with whereabouts. It was a case against WADA for a false accusation of doping from a substance not on the banned list.

AK (Athletics Kenya) are 'not rushing to further sanction Manangoi'. I remember that recently they made a big thing of announcing that any athlete receiving an anti-doping suspension would never represent Kenya again. Now it seems they are already backtracking on that for Manangoi. Also, somewhat disturbing is the vice-president of AK saying that even if Manangoi is banned from representing Kenya, he would be able to 'transition' into a road runner. Recall that Manangoi made the bizarre claim (reported on this forum) in an interview early last season that he was considering moving up to the marathon.

Should Manang'oi be barred, Mutwii added, the 2018 1,500m African champion can transition into road races as an individual competitor.

Coevett wrote:

AK (Athletics Kenya) are 'not rushing to further sanction Manangoi'.

I remember that recently they made a big thing of announcing that any athlete receiving an anti-doping suspension would never represent Kenya again. Now it seems they are already backtracking on that for Manangoi.

Also, somewhat disturbing is the vice-president of AK saying that even if Manangoi is banned from representing Kenya, he would be able to 'transition' into a road runner. Recall that Manangoi made the bizarre claim (reported on this forum) in an interview early last season that he was considering moving up to the marathon.

Should Manang'oi be barred, Mutwii added, the 2018 1,500m African champion can transition into road races as an individual competitor.

It might be a temporary public relations win, but it doesn't seem very intelligent committing to harsher sanctions than what is allowed by WADA.

They tried to do something similar in UK, when the British Olympic Association banned Dwain Chambers. CAS ruled it was not compatible with WADA, and unenforceable. They ruled it wasn't fair to be banned twice for the same offense.

Even if AK wanted to penalize dopers, and it was permitted, it would be appropriate to distinguish doping with a banned substance or method, and committing whereabouts failures, which does not involve banned doping substances or methods.

I think you have to presume that if an athlete is dodging testers left, right and centre, their offence does involve 'banned doping substances or methods'.

trollism wrote:

I think you have to presume that if an athlete is dodging testers left, right and centre, their offence does involve 'banned doping substances or methods'.

I think we should presume that different offenses requires different thinking.

I think this line of bad faith thinking that assumes the worst and blurs details and applies zero mentality and zero critical thinking just guarantees maximum damage to the reputation of the sport. This seems to me like an undesirable goal.

WADA treats them as different offenses, with a shorter ban for whereabouts failures than for bona fide doping.

Strikes me that one failure should be an eight month pan and 16 for a second .

To answer the original question(s)

Is it tragic? Depends on what your definition of tragic is and how you apply it in context. For me it kind of is tragic. But tied to that, is the cold hard reality that it is not unjust in any way that he was convicted.

Thinking this "invasion of privacy" "we are being targeted" "we don't do things this way in Kenya" narrative is in any way legitimate is what is tragic.

Welcome to the 2020 guys. Of course Kenyan athletes have had no issues winning races and cashing checks under the conditions of the times. Maybe these guys who are so religious about training, diet and sleep need to start being religious about their whereabouts with respect to doping controls.

And that's the f---ing end of it, this needs no further discussion.

I hope y’all realize that just like in the case of Christian Coleman, if a runner was not where they said they were on three separate occasions when the testers came, they probably were also not present where they said they were for a lot more then just three times which indicate possible doping. There is a very small statistical chance that the only three times when they were not where they said would be were the only three times when the testers come. If these guys are getting tested 5-15 times a year out of competition they are probably avoiding tests a whole lot more...just food for thought

Was it unjust? No but it is stupid. Another example of tracki eating its own. Stupid.

rudisha 2.0 wrote:

I hope y’all realize that just like in the case of Christian Coleman, if a runner was not where they said they were on three separate occasions when the testers came, they probably were also not present where they said they were for a lot more then just three times which indicate possible doping. There is a very small statistical chance that the only three times when they were not where they said would be were the only three times when the testers come. If these guys are getting tested 5-15 times a year out of competition they are probably avoiding tests a whole lot more...just food for thought

+1

And we know how little Kenyans get tested, and are often told in advance for tea money when they are.

It sounds to me like Manangoi developed a real fear of testers, perhaps after Kiprop's bust.

Take the case of the 4 am 'traffic jam' (and it would have been 4 am if he was travelling - out of Nairobi - to get to a 5 am training session).

As Rekrunner points out, the AIU didn't actually accuse him of lying about this, and presumably they made some attempt to check the traffic reports at that time on the date in question.

Why did he choose that slot in the first place if he's working for the police on night shift before? Perhaps when he's taking the juice, he's deliberately putting down available slots where he knows he can provide an 'excuse' for missing them (and gambling at the testers wont show up). A little bit of traffic on the right road, and he's prepared to give that as a half-believable reason for missing the test. Perhaps the training session didn't even start until 6.30 am and he never gets there before 6.

Similarly with the time slot for the morning after a late flight. Transcontinental flights do get delayed quite often.

And as for him not knowing how to update a slot for later in the day after missing one - as has been pointed out, the guy has multiple social media accounts which he updates frequently (showing off his latest bling usually).

I'm pretty among all the 'doping awareness' courses that elite Kenyan athletes are required to go on these days, he was taught how to use the whereabouts app. Rekrunner fails to point out that the AIU stated clearly in their verdict that he was a mature, experienced, world champion, not a teenage kid. In other words, they did not believe his excuses regarding not updating the time slots.

Manangoi also claimed in his defence that his injury had caused memory black outs and the like, lol.

As they did not prosecute for a lie or tampering the traffic jam has never been tested.

They should have prosecuted for tampering.

My take is that the whole of whereabouts controls have been a joke until recently perhaps with the Kenyan s evaluating breaches themselves.

The new rigour will have come as a shock and we await more and more bad publicity bans to follow.

As for Adams being easy ; well perhaps; but if you talk to employers they will all tell you that trying to get staff to fill forms and paperwork in with any consistency with IQ levels of sub 100 is a nightmare.

rekrunner wrote:

trollism wrote:

I think you have to presume that if an athlete is dodging testers left, right and centre, their offence does involve 'banned doping substances or methods'.

I think we should presume that different offenses requires different thinking.

I think this line of bad faith thinking that assumes the worst and blurs details and applies zero mentality and zero critical thinking just guarantees maximum damage to the reputation of the sport. This seems to me like an undesirable goal.

WADA treats them as different offenses, with a shorter ban for whereabouts failures than for bona fide doping.

Maybe.

But in this day and age, anyone to have got a whereabouts ban has to be presumed doping.

He wasn't just where he wasn't supposed to be 3 times, it has to be many many more times than that.

The only way anyone gets a whereabouts ban is incredible stupidity and arrogance (no leniency should be given) or they're dodging testers (no leniency should be given).

I don't believe I pointed out anything about the verdict in this thread -- but in another Manangoi thread.

There I pointed everyone to the verdict, which contains all of the details, and in my opinion the decision was correct, in line with the rules.

I'll point out that not only me, but everyone "fails to point out that the AIU stated clearly in their verdict that he was a mature, experienced, world champion, not a teenage kid."

Yet I still pointed you to the verdict.

Getting back to this sentiment that whereabouts failures must mean the athlete is evading tests and hiding doping -- these ideas are a reflection of your character and inner thoughts. You believe athletes are doing this because that is what you would do in that situation.

Some whereabouts failures will be athletes like Lance Armstrong and US Postal, hiding from testers while glowing. And some will be non-tech savvy athletes, with poor organization skills, and a lack of appreciation for the importance of whereabouts and being available for testing even after two missed tests.

If your default position is to risk condemning and smearing innocent athletes for offenses they didn't commit -- this only makes me question your character and morality and ethics.

Interview with Manangoi for Kenyan news site. Claims he lost the equivalent of half-a-million USD during his enforced time off.

kenyans.co.ke

How 29-Yr-Old Kenyan Athlete Missed Out on Ksh60 Million Deal

@Kenyans

The ban led to Elijah Manangoi missing out on international events such as the 2020 Tokyo Olympics and Diamond League seasons

Link:www.kenyans.co.ke/news/74880-how-29-yr...

I was reading today that the princely sum of $60,000 USD is enough to get you into the wealthiest 0.1% of Kenyans. A top Kenyan runner like Manangoi can earn over 3 times that in a single year. Feed the village? More like feed an entire Nairobi traffic jam.

There was practically zero testing in kenya up until the last decade or so. If you were anywhere near to being a world class runner, you would have to be practically insane not to dope as a Kenyan during that time.

knightfrank.com

How deep do your pockets need to be to get in you in the top 0.1% of the world's wealthiest?

We discuss what the 1% looks like, but how about the 0.1%? Using the Knight Frank Wealth Sizing Model, we reveal how deep your pockets need to be to join the wealthiest 0.1% in selected countries and territories.

Link:www.knightfrank.com/research/article/2...

Ghost1 is the problem with track and field relevant to drug cheating. He's a coach/agent/pimp who encourages it so his athletes make more money and thus pay him more money as their pimp.

Managoi was busted for missing three appointments.

Any ideas beyond that is pure speculation.

He was busted for breaking anti-doping rules that are there to prevent dopers escaping testing. I'm sure Manangoi's bank balance can take comfort from that 'pure speculation'.

BTW, my point was about the astonishing sums top Kenyan runners (even track athletes) can earn. You need to have $25 million in the USA to get into the top 0.1%. In Kenya you only need $60,000. So Manangoi earning $600,000 in 3 years is the relative equivalent of Cole Hocker earning $250 million in 3 years. If Western athletes were earning those relative sums, I have no illusions that doping would be near universal.

It also relates to your and other doping apologist arguments that Kenyan track performances have declined because 'they have gone to the roads'. So if Manangoi had been born a few years later, he would have decided that earning $10K for winning the Ostrava half marathon in complete anonymity is much better than earning $600k and famous for being a top track star. Sure.

Funnily enough though, shortly before his bust, Manangoi did talk about moving to the roads. No doubt to escape the testing he was so afraid of failing, like his mentor and best friend Asbel Kiprop did.