IAAF former head charged with corruption relating to anti-doping??!?!

I'm just sick of the crap. The doping has got to stop. The very people who are supposed to be monitoring this are just as crooked! WTF????

malmo wrote:

I'm shocked!...shocked....

_______________________

Good one!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME

sebcoecrook wrote:

Let's face it, these guys are all crooks and so is Coe. He knows the whole organization is a fraud and hes continuing the tradition. Coe won't be stupid like these fools and actually get caught. He will manipulate the system to no end and keep that cheater Radcliffe safe too. Its sad a bunch of criminals run our sport that's full of grey-area criminals (dopers).

This. Absolutely

Would someone with knowledge of the system walk us through how a positive drug finding is covered up by a bribed IAAF official.

Thanks

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Anyway, I wonder what the "journalists" who run this site might find if they were more committed to actual reporting.

Meh. They'll never do enough to satisfy some people.

But you obviously know what they are and are not doing, so maybe you can give some specifics on how much more commitment is required.

how does it work 101 wrote:

Would someone with knowledge of the system walk us through how a positive drug finding is covered up by a bribed IAAF official.

Thanks

I started a stand alone thread

Nike Beaverton Campus wrote:

Is John Capriotti involved?

Do you want a broken face, punk?

pathfinder wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Anyway, I wonder what the "journalists" who run this site might find if they were more committed to actual reporting.

Meh. They'll never do enough to satisfy some people.

But you obviously know what they are and are not doing, so maybe you can give some specifics on how much more commitment is required.

I only know about there results, which consist of posting whining threads about how athletes won't talk to them, because all they do is ask "when did you stop beating your wife" questions. They certainly aren't doing any real reporting or developing any sources. If they were then they would be publishing their own stories instead of merely posting and commenting on stories of other people, who are actually journalists.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

pathfinder wrote:

Meh. They'll never do enough to satisfy some people.

But you obviously know what they are and are not doing, so maybe you can give some specifics on how much more commitment is required.

I only know about there results, which consist of posting whining threads about how athletes won't talk to them, because all they do is ask "when did you stop beating your wife" questions. They certainly aren't doing any real reporting or developing any sources. If they were then they would be publishing their own stories instead of merely posting and commenting on stories of other people, who are actually journalists.

Maybe you can point me to the place where they call themselves "investigative journalists".

I've yet to see where they have proclaimed they will break stories or do "real" reporting. The description for this site is that they'll cover running. That means they post links and offer opinions, and maybe they'll try to ask some questions at press conferences or get insight from other experts.

Of course, I could be wrong, and I'll admit it, if that's the case.

how does it work 101 wrote:

Would someone with knowledge of the system walk us through how a positive drug finding is covered up by a bribed IAAF official.

Thanks

TL;DR Because so much of the testing is handled in house, there is no accountability. IAAF does not need to report itself to anyone, and individuals can intervene easily anywhere during the whole process.

...

To protect the an innocent athlete, there are a lot of steps before a positive result is released:

Reporting of the A sample result (to the athlete and governing body) happens within 10 days.

If it is a positive, the athlete is notified, (and governing bodies). The athlete has 7 days to request a B-sample analysis, or to accept the A-sample result as an adverse finding.

If the athlete opts for a B-sample, and it is also positive, it is an adverse finding.

With an adverse finding comes a provisional and confidential suspension.

Within 10 days of being told about the adverse finding, the athlete can request a hearing.

Hearings happen within 14 days if expedited, or later if not expedited.

After this hearing, NADOs have 20 days to publicly announce adverse finding and sanction (or non-sanction in no-fault/warning situations).

The timeline after the B sample is up to NADOs, and the above is based on UKAD.

So, there are a few entry points for the governing body to make it go away. If it is an IAAF test, then all of the proceedings are done by IAAF. If USADA rant he test, it would be USADA, and so on.

The governing body is notified right away. If someone has enough clout to influence individuals to stop doing their job, that person can end the proceedings there (changing the result would be the easiest. Or, never analyzing a test. Or, analyzing it at a basic level and not opting for EPO, or HGH screening, which can be extras. Or not putting the sample into the biopassport)

The governing body holds the hearing. They could easily be "convinced" of a no-fault situation. Or easily "convinced" that a substance has a valid TUE. Or whatever.

For example, Kenyan athletes have been told after a positive test (and bribe) to say that they were pregnant, as a no-fault out from a sanction. Shobukhova presumably bribed the Russian Federation after a positive test, but before it was reported to media and IAAF. On the other end, Cycling officials threatened riders saying "I can make you test positive". Steve Mulling asserts that JADCO officials (that Herb Elliot was behind) switched samples. Or, athletes have been allowed to file for a TUE after the positive test.

Given the cronyism in the IAAF and other Federations and NADOs, it is easy for the lower-rungs to oblige to a higher-up's wishes. Cultures of corruption are its own sociology, if you really want to dig in.

Oh, and the Treasurer of the IAAF was Valentin Balakhnichev, the still active president of the Russian Federation. He stepped down from treasurer last December. Current treasurer is Jose Maria Odriozola, current president of Spanish Federation.

There are several rumors here in France that Salazar is known to have rubbed Androgel all over Lamine's Di@ckwe'll wait until the evidence surfaces i suppose

larkimm wrote:

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/0f0898b5246a435faf2c09e3f80769de/prosecutors-former-iaaf-president-diack-under-investigation

Perhaps some of the tinhat brigade around here were more perceptive than some of us gave them credit for!

LetsRun.com Update: The IAAF has issued the following statement in response

http://www.letsrun.com/?p=94135

None of this is surprising. Anyone who has lived abroad, knows how rife certain other cultures are with corruption. Greece, Italy. Anyone really expect that Russia, a country long known to run on bribes, wouldn't be offering bribes?

This is probably the tip of the iceberg, and I don't care if it takes down Ceb Soe and the entire IAAF in the process.

Once you've seen them in Monaco...it's an inside network to milk as much from the athletes as they can. Athletes with short careers, little like experience...and NO POWER.

Clerk wrote:

Oh, and the Treasurer of the IAAF was Valentin Balakhnichev, the still active president of the Russian Federation. He stepped down from treasurer last December.

Except he didn't really step down as treasurer last December, it was a sham. He gave the financial report at the IAAF Meeting in August...

Obvious, yet also enlightening in that the direct anti-doping corruption (which was likely the case with Kenya's corrupt federation as well), helps to explain anomalies like the announcement that they would announce many doping positives prior to the World championships and then very few of those were actually ever announced. I'm thinking that the announcement was a kind of plea for bribes in Diack's last acts as head.

polevaultpower wrote:

Clerk wrote:

Oh, and the Treasurer of the IAAF was Valentin Balakhnichev, the still active president of the Russian Federation. He stepped down from treasurer last December.

Except he didn't really step down as treasurer last December, it was a sham. He gave the financial report at the IAAF Meeting in August...

Good find. He pulled a Kansas city shuffle

There's no 'taking down' the IAAF. It is a worldwide monopoly with the backing of the IOC.

It's not going anywhere. Coe and co will still be accepting bribes and permitting doping for the right price. (Kenya). Just like cycling.

I always knew what a POS he is for the way he treated a world champion from SAF running for GB.

Who will be indicted next? Vin Lanana? John Chapiain, Phil Knight? Mike Reilly? Wittenberg? Tom Jordan? Glen Lattimer? Max Siegal? Stepahine Hightower?