Breaking: Telegraph Exclusive: FBI joins probe into Mo Farah coach Alberto Salazar

Nothing is going to happen to any of these people. It's either a Machiavellian whitewash job or the Jerry Springer show of running, but nothing will happen of note.

Irish Lives Matter wrote:

Nothing is going to happen to any of these people. It's either a Machiavellian whitewash job or the Jerry Springer show of running, but nothing will happen of note.

I'm shocked, shocked....

Yeah, but only the TVs that are overseas--really, we don't spy on any Americans, ever.By the way, could you please over a little to your left and sit up straight, you aren't centered in front of your screen and we are trying to read your retinas.

what the fff wrote:

really?

we need to bring in the freakin FBI to investigate a known facade of a sport because one set of cheaters happened to more intelligently shoot up some drugs then other sets of cheaters? Shouldn't the bureau be looking into more important things like, I dunno, how the CIA is f*cking turning our T.V.s into spying devices???

Wise One wrote:

What jurisdiction does the US have on a British athlete? None. This is just another example of the US dictating law/"freedom" where it doesn't belong.

Karma comedian wrote:

You do not know that of which you speak. Educate yourself.

I think the Wise One might be right in this case--Eugene is a sanctuary city, no Feds, no way!!!

Sanctuary City wrote:

Eugene is a sanctuary city, no Feds, no way!!!

Eugene? What does Eugene have to do with anything? Or, are they going after Alexi Pappas?

FWIW, NOP's up the road in Portland, which is also a sanctuary city.

reckrunner wrote:

Even the IAAF in form of Lord Coe confirmed this.

Suddenly Coe wakes up with a conscious one day and decides Mo will be positive? No.

Why in the world would he sanction ANY athlete the IAAF views as important to their brand?

The WADA standards give total authority to the sports federation. Remember that to date, Lance Armstrong, and if my recollection is correct, Marion Jones, have both never tested positive.

You just have to be valuable enough in the federation's view. Maybe a bribe helps...

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

reckrunner wrote:

Even the IAAF in form of Lord Coe confirmed this.

Suddenly Coe wakes up with a conscious one day and decides Mo will be positive? No.

Why in the world would he sanction ANY athlete the IAAF views as important to their brand?

The WADA standards give total authority to the sports federation. Remember that to date, Lance Armstrong, and if my recollection is correct, Marion Jones, have both never tested positive.

You just have to be valuable enough in the federation's view. Maybe a bribe helps...

With a "conscious"? Read a fucking book.

rekrunner wrote:

I cannot imagine an organization better qualified than USADA, and a prosecutor more motivated than Tygart, to find, pursue and prosecute any WADA rule violations by Salazar and NOP athletes.

Really? A regional anti-doping organization has no such authority to do this without the sports federation requesting it.

There's no way Reedie is going to let Tygart "thread the needle" one more time.

Where is the update on the most recent hack?

You keep saying things like that. USOC and WADA gives USADA authority over athletes residing in the USA:http://www.usada.org/resources/faq/#authorityJurisdiction aside, this does not alter the fact that USADA is qualified, Tygart is motivated, and yet, after a 4-year investigation with testimony from 19+ witnesses, USADA is still investigating if a rule has been broken. The question of authority is moot.

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

I cannot imagine an organization better qualified than USADA, and a prosecutor more motivated than Tygart, to find, pursue and prosecute any WADA rule violations by Salazar and NOP athletes.

Really? A regional anti-doping organization has no such authority to do this without the sports federation requesting it.

There's no way Reedie is going to let Tygart "thread the needle" one more time.

rekrunner wrote:

after a 4-year investigation with testimony from 19+ witnesses, USADA is still investigating if a rule has been broken. The question of authority is moot.

Right. There is indeed very little authority; all USADA can do is ask the suspects and their coaches etc. whether they or their colleagues doped. And allegedly Salazar asked them to lie to USADA.

Unless we criminalize doping, get the police or FBI involved to secure material such as computer files, the sport stays as dirty as it is.

We might get lucky here, because Salazar is reported to have broken several laws (about prescription drugs and mailing and custom laws), so that the FBI might see a cause to intervene.

rekrunner raises some good points about the use of prescription drug in sport. I think this would be much more better if doping offenses, including use of prescription drugs solely for performance, were criminalized. That would not be straightforward because some runners widely regarded here as clean do have asthma (Haile) or thyroid conditions (Hall).People want to focus on Salazar and he may take the biggest advantage of this but Brown has worked with lots of runners (including Goucher when with Wetmore) and other people in various sports. If people think what he is doing is wrong, the best way to address it is to criminalize the use of performance enhancing drugs systematically. Congress seems unlikely to do that. The best opportunity came after the baseball hearings.When you reference '4 years and 19 people' I read it to imply guilt. I think it can be read the other way too. There could be cheating but, really, all we need is one person to come out and say that they cheated or directly saw cheating. These 19 apparently are not saying they cheated but may be providing circumstantial evidence. The closest we have is Goucher saying she might have cheated by taking cytomel to lose weight before Boston.I certainly hope we get a resolution or further description soon and not another leaked story about an investigation before Galen's first big race in 2018. By the way, did we ever get the full story on Tyson Gay's case? I never saw a description from usada of what was learned when he cooperated.

casual obsever wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

after a 4-year investigation with testimony from 19+ witnesses, USADA is still investigating if a rule has been broken. The question of authority is moot.

Right. There is indeed very little authority; all USADA can do is ask the suspects and their coaches etc. whether they or their colleagues doped. And allegedly Salazar asked them to lie to USADA.

Unless we criminalize doping, get the police or FBI involved to secure material such as computer files, the sport stays as dirty as it is.

We might get lucky here, because Salazar is reported to have broken several laws (about prescription drugs and mailing and custom laws), so that the FBI might see a cause to intervene.

Fixed some typos. Sorry, I am on a phone.

rekrunner wrote:

You keep saying things like that. USOC and WADA gives USADA authority over athletes residing in the USA:

Wada? No. More disinformation.

Mo does not reside in the U.s. among a host of problems with your claim.

Lsslsndnednd wrote:

I think this would be much more better if doping offenses, including use of prescription drugs solely for performance, were criminalized.

What legislature is going to criminalize the "use of prescription drugs solely for performance" in sports? Even it did pass, such a law would be impossible to enforce. What judge wants to decide whether athletes who train hard are at risk for sub-clinical thyroid problems? It would be far easier and more effective to have WADA put these prescription drugs, and problematic supplements on the "prohibited list." So far, they haven't.

As for the rest, it looks to me as if the situation is the same as it was the last time there was a leak about Salazar and Farah. Despite our outrage, the things Salazar did look pretty minor to law enforcement. Plus, the statute of limitations continues to run; some may have expired.

Despite what happened to Lance, the legal record here is not encouraging. The Feds had much stronger cases against Bonds and Clemons than against Salazar and Rupp. Yet they walked. Look what happened earlier this year when the USADA tried to get a court to compel Dr. Brown to testify under Texas Rule # 202.

I agree that it's hard to come up with a criminal standard.I also think all of this is a rehash of what has been known and I think the odds are low that new info comes out. I could be wrong, I just don't see it being as big a case as the others you mentioned.

Yes, please stop the misinformation. NADOs do not need permission to start an investigation.The WADA code gives USADA not only the authority, but the duty to investigate and requires national and international sports federations to cooperate with investigations of any potential rule violation in the jurisdiction of NADOs."Code Article 5.8 requires Anti-Doping Organizations to obtain, assess and process anti-doping intelligence from all available sources, to be used to help deter and detect doping""5.8.1 Obtain, assess and process anti-doping intelligence from all available sources ...""5.8.3 Investigate any other analytical or non-analytical information or intelligence that indicates a possible anti-doping rule violation(s), in accordance with Articles 7.6 and 7.7, in order either to rule out the possible violation or to develop evidence that would support the initiation of an anti-doping rule violation proceeding."Roles and responsibilities of NADOs:"20.5.1 To be independent in their operational decisions and activities.""20.5.7 To vigorously pursue all potential anti-doping rule violations within its jurisdiction including investigation into whether Athlete Support Personnel or other Persons may have been involved in each case of doping and to ensure proper enforcement of Consequences. ...""20.5.9 To conduct an automatic investigation of Athlete Support Personnel within its jurisdiction in the case of any anti- doping rule violation by a Minor and to conduct an automatic investigation of any Athlete Support Person who has provided support to more than one Athlete found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation."Roles and responsibilities of NOCs:"20.4.4 To require National Federations ... to cooperate with investigations conducted by any Anti-Doping Organization with authority to conduct the investigation. ...""20.4.10 To vigorously pursue all potential anti-doping rule violations within its jurisdiction including investigation into whether Athlete Support Personnel or other Persons may have been involved in each case of doping. ..."Roles and responsibilities of International federations:"20.3.6 To require National Federations ... to cooperate with investigations conducted by any Anti-Doping Organization with authority to conduct the investigation. ...""20.3.10 To vigorously pursue all potential anti-doping rule violations within its jurisdiction including investigation into whether Athlete Support Personnel or other Persons may have been involved in each case of doping, to ensure proper enforcement of Consequences, and to conduct an automatic investigation of Athlete Support Personnel in the case of any anti-doping rule violation involving a Minor or Athlete Support Person who has provided support to more than one Athlete found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation. ..."We were talking about Salazar and NOP athletes, and not just Mo.See:https://www.wada-ama.org/en/what-we-do/the-codewhich incorporates:https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/international-standard-for-testing-and-investigations-isti-0

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

You keep saying things like that. USOC and WADA gives USADA authority over athletes residing in the USA:

Wada? No. More disinformation.

Mo does not reside in the U.s. among a host of problems with your claim.

These 19+ former athletes and employees came forward on their own. They are not hostile witnesses to USADA.Criminalizing doping comes with higher standards of prosecution, and higher burdens of proof (and lengthier trials) -- the police or FBI could not conduct a search lacking probable cause sufficient for a warrant allowing such a search.BBC documentaries, sensational tabloid stories, and public opinion is not strong enough to warrant a fishing expedition.

casual obsever wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

after a 4-year investigation with testimony from 19+ witnesses, USADA is still investigating if a rule has been broken. The question of authority is moot.

Right. There is indeed very little authority; all USADA can do is ask the suspects and their coaches etc. whether they or their colleagues doped. And allegedly Salazar asked them to lie to USADA.

Unless we criminalize doping, get the police or FBI involved to secure material such as computer files, the sport stays as dirty as it is.

We might get lucky here, because Salazar is reported to have broken several laws (about prescription drugs and mailing and custom laws), so that the FBI might see a cause to intervene.