Marchand making comeback?

call her out wrote:

Avocado's Number wrote:

As far as I am aware, the IAAF rules do not prohibit her from competing in "any competition of any capacity." Rather, they prohibit her from participating in any capacity in certain competitions, including those that are organized or authorized by IAAF or any of its various member organizations.

I have no idea whether her participation in these particular races violates any IAAF rules.

Did you not read the link? This is the IAAFs words, not mine.

Yes, I did read the link -- specifically, Rule 40 para. 11(a) on page 79. You did not quote, paraphrase, or interpret the rule accurately. It doesn't prohibit a suspended athlete from competing in "any competition of any capacity." Rather, it prohibits the athlete from participating in any capacity in certain specified classes of competitions, including those that are organized or authorized by IAAF, its various member organizations, various national and international organizations, and various professional sports leagues.

Avocado's Number wrote:

call her out wrote:

Did you not read the link? This is the IAAFs words, not mine.

Yes, I did read the link -- specifically, Rule 40 para. 11(a) on page 79. You did not quote, paraphrase, or interpret the rule accurately. It doesn't prohibit a suspended athlete from competing in "any competition of any capacity." Rather, it prohibits the athlete from participating in any capacity in certain specified classes of competitions, including those that are organized or authorized by IAAF, its various member organizations, various national and international organizations, and various professional sports leagues.

So she can run anything short of national champs & Diamond League. She could run Chicago Marathon.

What kind of weak sauce ban is that?

She could but a race director of a major race like Chicago would not let her. This all falls on the race directors, if they are ok with having her race then as crappy as it is there is nothing that can be done from my understanding of the rules.

Is it possible that Marchand has been taking drugs since high school?

From my understanding, her father is a cardiologist, and is willing to do anything to win.

By Marchand continuing to race while her ban is still active, shows her poor character.

It is wrong for her to be taking away awards from the other women (regardless of how important the event is).

Avocado's Number wrote:

You did not quote, paraphrase, or interpret the rule accurately.

Neither did you. Surprising for someone with a degree from MIT. If she could really compete in her local Popcorn run, we would have seen the same from Eddy Hellebuyck, Alene Reta, Liza Hunter-Galvan, Deeja Youngquist, Asmae Leghzaoui, just to name a few prolific road racers who served their 2 years.

call her out wrote:

Avocado's Number wrote:

You did not quote, paraphrase, or interpret the rule accurately.

Neither did you. Surprising for someone with a degree from MIT. If she could really compete in her local Popcorn run, we would have seen the same from Eddy Hellebuyck, Alene Reta, Liza Hunter-Galvan, Deeja Youngquist, Asmae Leghzaoui, just to name a few prolific road racers who served their 2 years.

Actually, I have two degrees from M.I.T., and I'm pretty sure that I did accurately restate the rule. I'm not sure why you're being so obstinate about the matter.

As I said earlier, I have no idea whether her participation in any of those races, including "her local Popcorn run," violated the IAAF rule, because I don't know whether any of those races fell within any of the classes of "Competitions" and "activities" to which the rule applies. I have no opinion about whether Eddy or Deeja missed a golden opportunity to participate in a "local Popcorn run" during their respective suspensions, but it shouldn't be a huge surprise to any thoughtful person that the IAAF rule does not purport to proscribe participation in any competition whatsoever. Such a rule, applicable even to casual competition among training partners and friends, would be wildly overbroad.

I think people are mixing and matching different parts of the IAAF rule 40, 11.(a) to create a meaning that does not exist in that document.

http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/Antidoping/Rules&Regulations/03/30/48/20100113104605_httppostedfile_Chap32010-2011_EN_17816.pdf

The rule states:

no Athlete or other Person who has been declared Ineligible may, during the period of Ineligibility, participate in any capacity in any Competition or activity, other than in authorised anti-doping education or rehabilitation programs, which are authorised...

Nothing after that negates that statement.

The document then goes on to state that for athletes subject to a period of ineligibility of more than four years:

...may after completing four years of the Period of Ineligibility, participate in local sports events in a sport other than Athletics...

Clearly this does not apply here as she was banned for less than four years, she has not completed four years of ineligibility and the sport she is competing in (while Ineligible) is still athletics, but it's worth noting that even local sports events in a sport other than Athletics are not permitted until four years of ineligibility has passed.

I'm not sure how anyone could think that competing in a road race for prize money after only one year of ineligibility would be allowed.

In asserting that "[n]othing after that negates that statement," you appear to be missing the point that the part of the sentence that begins "which are authorised" is a restrictive clause that serves to modify the phrase "any Competition or activity." (I realize, by the way, that the rule incorrectly uses the word "are" instead of "is.")

Regarding the part of the rule that applies to suspensions greater than four years, it is incorrect to suggest that the rule prohibits the athlete from participating in any local sports competition during the first four years. Rather, the rule affirmatively and generally permits participation in local sports events other than in Athletics, with certain specified exceptions, after the first four years. To determine whether participation in a particular local sports event other than in Athletics is proscribed during the first four years, you need to refer back to the first portion of the rule, which prohibits participation in local sports events that are, for example, authorized by Signatories (to the anti-doping code) in sports other than Athletics.

Avocado's Number wrote:

In asserting that "[n]othing after that negates that statement," you appear to be missing the point that the part of the sentence that begins "which are authorised" is a restrictive clause that serves to modify the phrase "any Competition or activity."

You're still mis-reading it, Mr. 2 degrees from MIT. Try again buddy.

By artificially inflating the competition, Marchand ruins the sport for all legitimate athletes.

You are misreading it Avocado.

You initially made a positive contribution to this thread by providing a link to the IAAF rules. You apparently just misread the pertinent rule. It's not a big deal. When I corrected you, I didn't call you names or attack your intellect. I just thought that it would be useful for people to understand what the rule actually said, since it was pertinent to the discussion and the various incorrect assumptions that were being made.

You haven't offered any coherent critique of anything I've said. That's O.K.; I'm not seeking your analysis. It's a little odd that you keep bringing my alma mater into the discussion, but I guess that's O.K., too. I've been called worse things than "Mr. 2 degrees from MIT."

Regarding the original topic of the thread, it might be more fruitful for someone to investigate whether any of the races that this particular athlete has participated in are among the various classes of "Competitions" and "activities" to which the suspension applies. I personally don't have any real interest in doing so, and don't really see it as any of my business.

Athelte is barred from any competition or activity organized by the IAAF or any Area Association or Member or Signatory or in competitions authorized or organized by any professional league or any international or national level organizations.

I actually think she is ok by this definition, USATF sanctioning of the race would be where the issue would arise if there was one. Paraphrased from IAAF Rule 40 11a.

http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/Antidoping/Rules&Regulations/03/30/48/20100113104605_httppostedfile_Chap32010-2011_EN_17816.pdf

I really don't get this post and to have 50 some comments on a low level professional runner like Rachel is kind of a joke. Honestly I think she's not serving her suspension because she doesn't plan on runner professional ever again. So what do you do when you're done running professionally you run for fun in races like the popcorn panic which is a a race that anyone can run even if you're Rachel Marchand. I've only met Rachel a few times we both ran in high school at the same time so I can't comment on her charter, but as a college coach I could never support an athlete that has test positive for anything. But if she wants to race a dumb 5k in her hometown I don't have a problem with it at all. If I was in here situation I would never show my face in my hometown again but that's just me. To have this little road racers complain about missing out on a medal or $250 the only thing I can say is train harder and realize that these events are going towards a charity even the $20 that Rachel Marchand pays to run. IT'S ALL FOR FUN AND FOR A GOOD CAUSE.

Normally I'm not for the conspiratorial "you must be the person in question or her friend" accusation, but it seems likely on this thread. That or you're mentally disabled.

This person is a cheater. A doper. Her winning any prize money, even 10 damn dollars, is fraud. Telling other runners to train harder is knowingly insulting. They might be training as hard as they can, and still lose to someone who is taking PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUGS.

You honestly think that cheating is okay, and shouldn't be criticized, as long as it's done for a $ amount that's less than 300? Or is it just in local events? Or charities? Please, enlighten us with what is an acceptable venue for a doper to steal money and what isn't?

I shouldn't have to spoonfeed someone with two degrees from MIT. I left it up to you to figure it out. Someone above has it right, yet you still continue to think you're right. You should just admit that sometimes people with two degrees from MIT are wrong.

It's funny to think that the only time anybody really pays attention to Rachael Marchand's career is when she gets caught doping and trounces the local road race scene during her drug ban.

Quite frankly, I'm not sure whom (correct use, grammarians? That's an objective use, right?) has the worse character: the doper herself or the anti-doping zealots that venomously insult the doper's character and anybody that shows an inkling of support for her.

crazy person wrote:

It's funny to think that the only time anybody really pays attention to Rachael Marchand's career is when she gets caught doping and trounces the local road race scene during her drug ban.

Quite frankly, I'm not sure whom (correct use, grammarians? That's an objective use, right?) has the worse character: the doper herself or the anti-doping zealots that venomously insult the doper's character and anybody that shows an inkling of support for her.

You're right. I'm really upset at all the bad people who cast aspersions on Bernie Madoff's character too. I mean sure he cheated rampantly, but that doesn't mean you should accuse him of things like...cheating rampantly.

Do you hear yourself? How could saying a convicted doper shouldn't be racing and stealing prize money from other athletes be bad? You think everyone should pat her on the back for using PEDs to improve? If I start entering myself in masters races and winning prize money, will you defend me on the message board?

There would be no attention for her if she weren't actively cheating WHILE BANNED. She deserves any negative publicity she gets.

Edumactor, I agree completely - cheating is bad enough; competing while banned is Racheal giving the finger to WADA imho.

Also, why did she brush off the awards ceremony? If she didn't feel guilty (or furtive) in some way, why didn't Marchand attend the awards ceremony? The newspaper pointedly pointed that out.

Another insult to the race organizers. Seems incredibly selfish to me when you when the race but blow off the awards ceremony. You owe the race director some grace.