The return of Cathal Lombard

Sorry to go off topic, but since Marius chimed in.... I'll be in Norway for a couple of weeks between 18 August and 2 September (Oslo mostly). Do you know of any low key track meets or road races during that period? Low key meaning suitable for a ~ 16:00 master - not looking for high level meets, but something that would have decent competition for me. Thanks.

Back on topic, I tend to agree with the idea of lifetime bans for doping. But I remain very impressed with Lombard's response to his positive test, if not impressed with the fact of the positive test.

Pete, every Wednesday you have low key races around the Sognsvann Lake here in Oslo (take subway line 3 from central Oslo). About 50-100 participants.It starts at 6 pm and you can go there up until half an hour before to register. You have the choice between one lap (3.3 km), two or three. Level of the runners from about 9 min 3000 meter up to 13-14 min.

If you are looking for a 1500 or 10.000 meter on the track you have a local meeting the 23.8 at the Bislett Stadium. In the 10k probably not that many attending, but you can email

dagkjetil.hartberg@kfuk-kfum.no

to check it out.

Marius

The suggestion that leaving a race before the start where you see a known or convicted cheater would be something that anyone would rationally choose. You probably just suggested it to construct a straw man.

As for your alleged puzzlement, I was right there with the same attitude when threads popped up about Hellebuyck, Youngquist, Asmae Leghzaoui, and others. There's nothing personal with respect to Lombard about this, it's about dopers and most of the other posters who aren't engaging in any apologia on this thread appear to feel the same.

Pointing to his future, he said: "As unbelievable and ironic as it may seem, I am strongly against doping in sport. It would be my greatest wish now to join the fight against doping and work in the anti-doping area."

Lombard concluded: "People make mistakes in life. There are few who will stand up and acknowledge their mistakes. I made a grave error and will pay a very heavy price. I hope that in time you will afford me the opportunity to earn some semblance of respect again."

Yes. It was a straw man. I would have loved it if half the field at the Yankee Homecoming race had walked away because Reta was there, but that sort of thing doesn't happen.

I don't know if I qualify as an apologist for Lombard or not. I did find his confession a refreshing change from the usual stuff.

HRE wrote:

I did find his confession a refreshing change from the usual stuff.

Isn't that just another symptom of the dumbing down of standards for basic human behaviour?

Instead of expecting, at a minimum, that someone caught doing something they KNOW is wrong confess and 'come clean', we are instead being pleasantly surprised when this actually happens and praising the miscreant for being 'honest'.

Yes, sad.

Asterix,

whether you think it's "dumbing down" our expectations for basic human behaviour to think the guilty party will always come clean, the fact is, it's extremely rare for somebody to nut up and take responsibility like that. Personally, I don't hold the guy in high regard, since he did cheat. But he has fewer character flaws than most cheats, in that he owned up to it, right away and fairly vocally.

This is ridiculus. This guy KNOWINGLY DOPED. HE DOPED FOR A LONG TIME. HE SET IRISH RECORDS WHILE DOPING. HE WON MAJOR RACES WHILE DOPING. I don't care if he came clean after being caught or not. The point is he was cheating, and would have continued to cheat if he hadn't been caught. I have absolutely no sympathy or respect for a person like this. I don't understand how people on this board profess to respect the sport of running on this message board, yet can also wish a cheater luck in the future or say one cheater is better than another. He knew what he was doing and knew the consequences. Fewer character flaws? I don't think with these types of people (cheaters) you can say, "oh one has less character flaws than the other because he came clean after being caught". It just doesn't work that way. All cheaters are just that, cheaters. They've labelled themselves as that and nothing they can say or do will make me think any better of them.

Pete wrote:

the fact is, it's extremely rare for somebody to nut up and take responsibility like that.

Yes, that's my point. The basic expectations of society have been reduced such that we don't even expect someone caught redhanded to 'nut up and take responsibility'.

Instead of being a minimum standard, it's raised as something noteworthy.

It's like praising a school kid just for showing up for class instead of actually performing well academically - our standards have been 'dumbed down'.

Asterix wrote: It's like praising a school kid just for showing up for class instead of actually performing well academically ...

No, I think it's more like praising the kid who is suspected of vandalizing the bathroom stall for owning up to it - and then going ahead and suspending him anyway.

I would expect the school kid who takes responsibility for his actions (as we're all taught to do, but most refuse to do) is far more likely to NOT repeat the crime than the kid who weasels and lies and squirms to get off.

I'm not an apologist for Lombard's behaviour. He deserved his suspension, and I would prefer his ban to have been for life.

But, I suspect it's far less likely for a guy like Lombard to reoffend than a guy like Ben Johnson, who wheedled and avoided responsibility (to this day).

Everybody makes mistakes and breaks the rules some of the time - even you. For some, breaking rules is a sign of a complete lack of character. For others, it's simply poor judgement.

A mistake is when you order ham on rye and get ham on wheat. What Lombard did was not "a mistake". It was a deliberate, repeated deception, as it is with virtually every drug cheat. It did not show "poor judgement". It showed poor character

It astonishes me every time I can't get people to agree with me. :-)

I've been cursed with the inability to look at the world in black and white. For you guys, this (his cheating) is black, regardless of the context. For me, the situation is very nearly black, but the admission and acceptance of responsibility puts a little bit of white to it. A little bit.... I don't really want to see the guy in track, but I would probably be better prepared to interact with him on a professional basis (should the opportunity ever arise) than Ben Johnson, Floyd Landis or any of the other deniers.

I've been cursed with the inability to see every single issue as shades of grey. Sometimes there really is black and white.

(Perhaps it sounds like I'm trying to piss you off, but I swear I'm not.)

I guess to you what you're saying sounds like a reasonable answer. To me it sounds like an apology for Cathal Lombard. Look, you either want to see him in track and field or you do not. If you don't then why are you talking about his admission after being caught and "interacting with him on a professional basis"? What is the point of your "bit of white". Nobody is talking about ostracizing the man, just keeping him out of competitive running.

The fact that someone admits it AFTER they are caught should be irrelevant, shouldn't it? I can't understand how people can look at that and try to put some sort of "good" spin on it. The guy realizes he's caught and not having the energy or wherewithal to try to hold up the lie in the face of damning evidence, he takes the easy road out. It's the maintaining the lie part that's hard. Besides, admitting it also happens to currently be the fastest road to serving his suspension and getting back into the sport.

To me, it's the doing drugs part that should matter, not the admitting/denying after the fact. Because it's a slippery slope from that to welcoming him back with open arms.

Look at the cyclist David Millar. This guy is now treated like some sort of "moral authority" on doping. Can you believe that? Every article on the current tour scandal features a quote from this guy talking about how "sad" he is. In one they spoke about him "crying" about it. Ridiculous. This guy IS a cheat. He should be the last person we're asking for the "moral" side of the story.

Every time someone tries to "look on the bright side" for one of these guys, every time someone refers to deliberate deception as "a mistake" (like he was just walking along one day and, whoops! some drugs fell into his system), it really riles me up. It is a deliberate attempt to weaken the language to disguise the fact that a guy tried to cheat other people.

Did you ever notice how sometimes when someone is caught like this, they'll often say something like how they regret that "mistakes were made". Not, "I cheated other people". No that would be too direct. Instead they are "mistakes" and they "were made". Made by whom? The person speaking, of course, but listen to the quote and you might think they were talking about someone else.

Sigh. I'ms orry. I guess I've gone off on a rant here (several on this thread actually). But I hate cheats. I HATE them. I could not possibly care less whether or not they admit it, give the money back or how "sorry" they are. That interview (linked in this thread, I think) in which Lombard tells all the changes he made in his "training" to get better results just makes the deception all that more infurating.

I'm going to let this thread go now because otherwise I'll never get any work done. I've said my piece. Sorry for the rant.

A-J,

do you have kids? When you catch them doing something, does it make a difference to you whether they own up to it or continue to lie and evade? For me, I get over the disappointment (or anger) with my son fairly quickly when he takes responsibility, and stay upset for an interminably long time when he insists on trying to evade responsibility.

Don't worry, you couldn't possibly piss me off by expressing your opinion. I never get bothered about other people holding a different opinion than me. I might like to debate their opinion, but I don't take it personally. I think this is related to the black/white vs. grey thing. Maybe I am overgeneralizing, but I find that people who do see only black and white tend to take opinions personally, and take offense when someone engages in debate with them. Not saying you were taking offense - I don't know - and maybe I'm completely out to lunch.

(Only replying because you asked me a direct question. Really I do want to let this go)

I do not have kids. Lots of nieces and nephews but no children of my own.

But if I did... well they would be children. Not grown adults. When a child lacks the maturity to own up to something, they're a child and so I would let it go. When an adult does it it's a different thing altogether.

Either way, with children I would not get (or at least remain) upset one way or the other. If there's one thing I've from my parents and watching by brothers and sisters with their kids it's that you need to be the adult.

And whether they own up to it or not, they would most definitely be punished. Most importantly I would not trust (in the near future) to avoid that "bad behavior" again. I would hope that as they grew up, they would learn right from wrong.

But that's how they differ from adults. Since Cathal Lombard knew right and wrong, for thim the "not trusting" period is pretty much permanent.

On the question of how much is EPO worth over 10k these are my guesses:

For a 26.30 runner, 15 seconds

28 minute runner,30 seconds

30 minute runner 45 seconds

33 minute runner 60 seconds

I think he has raced in Ireland this summer, forget where.

I think Lombard being caught whipped people into a frenzy of finding injusties in what he did. The biggest injusties is he gave false hope to people as to what can be achieved.

Asumming he was not doping for his whole career and it was only the last year before he was caught.

He didn't stop anyone going to any champs. Only three people had the A standard for the 5000m, Mark Carroll only had the B Standard for the Olympics and the OCI was only sending people with the A standard. He declined his place in the team for the world cross.

Funding is based on standards achieved and not on the top 5 or 10 athletes. If someone else met the standard they would have been funded.

Ok, the medal thing is correct regarding his 5000m title the year before he was caught. He didn't run the national XC the year he was caught.

A great deal of Cathal's improvement (clean part) has be be attributed to the coaching of Joe Doolen, who does not want to coach anymore, that is the biggest loss.

I think he has raced in Ireland this summer, forget where.

[quote]koroibos wrote:

Mark Carroll only had the B Standard for the Olympics and the OCI was only sending people with the A standard. quote]

That refers to the 10000m standard.