Full Shelby Houlihan Report is Out from CAS

potato_salad wrote:

Shelby has more beauty and grace in her little finger than your whole family has had in generations.

She also has nandrolone in her little finger, which I don't have.

Does she, though?

Adam Smith, Communist wrote:

sanootage wrote:

Seems a good time to remind that being responsible for what is in your body does not make you a cheat.

Apologise at once for knowingly telling a lie.

As a penalty; read the WADA Code.

One might argue that drug cheat Shelby Houlihan was irresponsible with what was in her body, hence her positive drug test and the ban for doping. But wordplay with an opponent who reads and writes at a 5th grade level is pointless.

And no, sorry, I'm a credible witness who believes my own schtick. Apologize for calling me a liar. As a penalty, stop your inane drivel in this thread.

Clearly not read the rules.

Too frightened to do so ?

Armstronglivs wrote:

sanootage wrote:

Engage brain prior to posting.

If she had lied then they would have done her for tampering as well.

Oh ; do some reading.

You are a complete moron. Tampering is not the same as not telling the truth.

Read the Dry case and the US female hurdler.

Then you will realise that telling a lie is included within tampering.

But asking you to read stuff is foolish and a waste of time.

Now apologise for saying something untrue as that makes you a liar and a cheat.

sanootage wrote:

Adam Smith, Communist wrote:

One might argue that drug cheat Shelby Houlihan was irresponsible with what was in her body, hence her positive drug test and the ban for doping. But wordplay with an opponent who reads and writes at a 5th grade level is pointless.

And no, sorry, I'm a credible witness who believes my own schtick. Apologize for calling me a liar. As a penalty, stop your inane drivel in this thread.

Clearly not read the rules.

Too frightened to do so ?

Oh no, I have. Please apologize for your lie.

Adam Smith, Communist wrote:

sanootage wrote:

Clearly not read the rules.

Too frightened to do so ?

Oh no, I have. Please apologize for your lie.

No evidence of having done so; failed to discharge the burden; and thus a lie and thus a cheat.

Own petard!

sanootage wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You are a complete moron. Tampering is not the same as not telling the truth.

Read the Dry case and the US female hurdler.

Then you will realise that telling a lie is included within tampering.

But asking you to read stuff is foolish and a waste of time.

Now apologise for saying something untrue as that makes you a liar and a cheat.

Read the Dry case yet?

Adam Smith, Communist wrote:

Seems like a good time to remind everyone that drug cheat Shelby Houlihan is serving a 4 year ban for doping.

What do you think of the merits of Tygart's assertion that the WADA code can railroad innocent athletes into 4-year bans, because the WADA code, that led to the CAS ruling, is broken and needs reform?

What do you think of Hajo Seppelt's recent documentary that produced several real world examples highlighting the potential injustice that "strict liability" risks to innocent athletes?

rekrunner wrote:

Adam Smith, Communist wrote:

Seems like a good time to remind everyone that drug cheat Shelby Houlihan is serving a 4 year ban for doping.

What do you think of the merits of Tygart's assertion that the WADA code can railroad innocent athletes into 4-year bans, because the WADA code, that led to the CAS ruling, is broken and needs reform?

What do you think of Hajo Seppelt's recent documentary that produced several real world examples highlighting the potential injustice that "strict liability" risks to innocent athletes?

My response is that they are both correct.

Wada followed on from the IOC medical code and high varied judicial systems.

( for the avoidance of doubt they did a marvellous job of sorting a huge mess out and one that allowed each nation to let of their key athletes, but we are still seeing the way nations can breach wada)

In the Uk, in the 90’s the first hearing was called an appeal as the B test was deemed it.

No challenges could be made to the most iffy chain of custodies or appalling analysis by the labs.

These were deemed sports rules and you liked it or lumped it.

Procedures and IST’s have improved hugely but the core element of “ sports rules “ is still there.

This is a vital matter to grasp.

At each revision of the Code there is more movement to normal type justice and even reference to Human Rights.

However the points raised in your post still remain and will cost a huge amount to deal with.

Strict liability and zero tolerance and levels of detection previously unimaginable will make sports doping control look unreasonable as it is impossible to discharge responsibility in any realistic way.

A big big name with big big money will blow it all apart.

Perhaps a football club or organisation could take preemptive action to do so.

This may well mean that it is only extreme drug use that they will persue.

A bit like drugs in normal life.

sanootage wrote:

sanootage wrote:

Read the Dry case and the US female hurdler.

Then you will realise that telling a lie is included within tampering.

But asking you to read stuff is foolish and a waste of time.

Now apologise for saying something untrue as that makes you a liar and a cheat.

Read the Dry case yet?

Read the Dry case yet?

To afraid as you might feel an utter out of depth inadequate.

Not quite how it works, but good try, chief.

Following the lead of your favorite drug cheat in making up weird things, though.

sanootage wrote:

sanootage wrote:

Read the Dry case yet?

Read the Dry case yet?

To afraid as you might feel an utter out of depth inadequate.

Cone on admit you dare not read it.

sanootage wrote:

sanootage wrote:

Read the Dry case yet?

To afraid as you might feel an utter out of depth inadequate.

Cone on admit you dare not read it.

No reply , one assumes that you have lied and are a cheat.

sanootage wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You are a complete moron. Tampering is not the same as not telling the truth.

Read the Dry case and the US female hurdler.

Then you will realise that telling a lie is included within tampering.

But asking you to read stuff is foolish and a waste of time.

Now apologise for saying something untrue as that makes you a liar and a cheat.

Telling a lie is included in tampering , but tampering isn't necessary to lying (ask Trump - he committed over 20,000 of them in 4 years). Telling a lie is simply saying something other than the truth - and knowing you are doing it. Tampering is directly interfering with the evidential process. Not the same. You are really too illiterate to debate these issues.

Armstronglivs wrote:

sanootage wrote:

Read the Dry case and the US female hurdler.

Then you will realise that telling a lie is included within tampering.

But asking you to read stuff is foolish and a waste of time.

Now apologise for saying something untrue as that makes you a liar and a cheat.

Telling a lie is included in tampering , but tampering isn't necessary to lying (ask Trump - he committed over 20,000 of them in 4 years). Telling a lie is simply saying something other than the truth - and knowing you are doing it. Tampering is directly interfering with the evidential process. Not the same. You are really too illiterate to debate these issues.

Oh dear.So you did lie.

How are your lower ends with your pants on fire

you liar ……..and cheat.

This is clearly a none sense but this is what you twisted out of SH giving her opinion of what she thought caused the positive.

Also shows you don’t bother to read prior opening your gob.

Pathetic attempt to try to involve our most remarkably loved President…. is that a lie, an opinion or a wind up?

sanootage wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Telling a lie is included in tampering , but tampering isn't necessary to lying (ask Trump - he committed over 20,000 of them in 4 years). Telling a lie is simply saying something other than the truth - and knowing you are doing it. Tampering is directly interfering with the evidential process. Not the same. You are really too illiterate to debate these issues.

Oh dear.So you did lie.

How are your lower ends with your pants on fire

you liar ……..and cheat.

This is clearly a none sense but this is what you twisted out of SH giving her opinion of what she thought caused the positive.

Also shows you don’t bother to read prior opening your gob.

Pathetic attempt to try to involve our most remarkably loved President…. is that a lie, an opinion or a wind up?

I never claimed to read anything that you said I should - it would be a complete waste of my time - so I never lied about it. You are beyond stupid. Deranged is more apt.

Armstronglivs wrote:

sanootage wrote:

Oh dear.So you did lie.

How are your lower ends with your pants on fire

you liar ……..and cheat.

This is clearly a none sense but this is what you twisted out of SH giving her opinion of what she thought caused the positive.

Also shows you don’t bother to read prior opening your gob.

Pathetic attempt to try to involve our most remarkably loved President…. is that a lie, an opinion or a wind up?

I never claimed to read anything that you said I should - it would be a complete waste of my time - so I never lied about it. You are beyond stupid. Deranged is more apt.

Only too aware that you won’t read stuff that might cause you to think and reflect.

You lied about something prior to me telling you to read stuff.Gee wizz you do contort, twist and lie.

Following your definition of SH lying you are hoisted by your own petard.

You simply do not know the difference between tampering with evidence and lying. Do witnesses who lie in the stand tamper with the evidence? How so? Your stupidity is Guinness Book of Records level.

Armstronglivs wrote:

You simply do not know the difference between tampering with evidence and lying. Do witnesses who lie in the stand tamper with the evidence? How so? Your stupidity is Guinness Book of Records level.

You are marvellous, thank you.

You have dug an even bigger hole for your limited foolish self.

Read the Dry case and you will see what an utter and complete fool you have made of yourself.

But you refuse to read, so yippee, you will will continue to be a delight with your lies and bile.