No doubt that Paula is the British athlete with the suspect values who has taken out a super-injunction to stop anyone in the UK reporting on her blood data or even mentioning that there is such an injunction. However, I think she has been badly advised with this course of action. We’re beginning to see the results of this here on this message board with the almost universal belief that she doped. I also think we’re seeing in her interview how uncomfortable she is with this approach.
I can, however, understand why she took the non-transparency route (which obviously grates against everything she has said in the past). Up until these recent events she had to deal with a huge whispering campaign claiming she doped solely because she ran 2:15. How much worse would this be if she let information open to interpretation out into the public domain? But far better for her, assuming that she is clean, would have been to release her blood data and let an open debate on her blood scores take place. She can say, look I’ve always been open and honest, I really don’t understand how it can show this, but let’s let the scientists figure this whole odd thing out.
I used to believe 100% that Paula was clean, now I’m less sure, but still think she was likely clean. The marathon was her perfect distance and it is an event that you can nail given a perfect storm, and I think male pacemakers, good weather and being in the zone was that perfect storm and hey voila - 2:15!
I really wish Paula had taken the transparency approach and I really think that would have turned out better for her.