I know. I'm speculating. Just like everyone else in this thread.
Doclove wrote:
redux wrote:Maybe he's annoyed that people are assuming/announcing her guilt prior to her B sample results? Until that comes out her A sample is just circumstantial and doesn't condemn her. I know we aren't talking about a "legal" issue, but don't we assume her innocence until her guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
He didn't mention that.
NiKe is about one thing only - $$$$$$ Money.
They don't care if an athlete is a cheater, if the athlete is high profile they will have millions idolizing them and wanting to be like them, and as a result buying the nike clothing and shoes to Be Like Mike. or be like Lance, or be like whoever.
He sounds like a total idiot.
redux wrote:
Maybe he's annoyed that people are assuming/announcing her guilt prior to her B sample results? Until that comes out her A sample is just circumstantial and doesn't condemn her. I know we aren't talking about a "legal" issue, but don't we assume her innocence until her guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
No, because the A-sample testing positive means it's beyond reasonable doubt, that's why it's positive.
The B-Sample is only a thing so that the athlete and/or representatives can be there to oversee the process of testing as a legal backup to the original positive.
The fact that B-Samples have been used as a get-out for the authorities in order to give a big star a reprieve in the past, doesn't mean it's a thing that actually happens without corruption.
trollism wrote:
redux wrote:Maybe he's annoyed that people are assuming/announcing her guilt prior to her B sample results? Until that comes out her A sample is just circumstantial and doesn't condemn her. I know we aren't talking about a "legal" issue, but don't we assume her innocence until her guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
No, because the A-sample testing positive means it's beyond reasonable doubt, that's why it's positive.
The B-Sample is only a thing so that the athlete and/or representatives can be there to oversee the process of testing as a legal backup to the original positive.
The fact that B-Samples have been used as a get-out for the authorities in order to give a big star a reprieve in the past, doesn't mean it's a thing that actually happens without corruption.
Not sure I agree with this assessment. Most of the time the A sample is correct. But false positives do happen and that's an important reason for the B sample. It's also the reason results shouldn't be leaked until both samples have been tested.
Tribe wrote:
trollism wrote:No, because the A-sample testing positive means it's beyond reasonable doubt, that's why it's positive.
The B-Sample is only a thing so that the athlete and/or representatives can be there to oversee the process of testing as a legal backup to the original positive.
The fact that B-Samples have been used as a get-out for the authorities in order to give a big star a reprieve in the past, doesn't mean it's a thing that actually happens without corruption.
Not sure I agree with this assessment. Most of the time the A sample is correct. But false positives do happen and that's an important reason for the B sample. It's also the reason results shouldn't be leaked until both samples have been tested.
If a false positive happens with the A-sample, the same will happen with the B sample cause it's the same sample split in half.
If the A sample comes back positive, they'll run the test again with more from the A sample.
B sample is simply a legal necessity so that athletes can't claim that there's corruption or negligence within the testing system, so they're invited to watch the process themselves. It was never anything to do with false positives.
I actually had the same reaction that Ciarin did to this news.
Some people care about policing "clean sport" more than actually following it and making it more popular.
You just know people were so excited to hear about a positive test, because that's the only "newsworthy" thing our sport can produce.
I know I am not alone in being done with all the are they/aren't they doing talk.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
I actually had the same reaction that Ciarin did to this news.
Some people care about policing "clean sport" more than actually following it and making it more popular.
You just know people were so excited to hear about a positive test, because that's the only "newsworthy" thing our sport can produce.
I know I am not alone in being done with all the are they/aren't they doing talk.
It's a very 'head in the sand' attitude.
For those of us who KNOW the sport is filthy, a positive test is a small step in the right direction.
If nobody was getting busted, it wouldn't mean a clean sport, it would just mean there wasn't any effort in catching cheats.
But if you choose to pretend there isn't a problem, that's your perogative. It means you're an idiot, but that's no skin off my nose.
I can offer a bit of perspective on this strange discourse from O'Lionaird. As an Irishman, I can say it's a nation that is in many ways progressive, but there is also a strain of conservatism that is anti-free-press. O'Lionaird is a young man who for some reason buys into that old-school attitude. Being a generation older than him, I see this regrettable neo-reactionary approach to politics and business and social life among his generation and it's entirely depressing to me. This is not what those of us who lived through the 60s wanted for our youth--the old top-down, chauvinistic, corporate-think sort of crap.
I actually totally agree w/ the above post. I live in Dublin and the 'ah sure it's grand' attitude is quite normal. COL also seems to have a problem w/ outstanding Irish muchraking journalists like Kimmage and Ewan Mckenna.
Ireland is a constantly evolving place and COL seems to have taken the 'brown envelope' approach in his unbowed loyalty to Nike (a clearly corrupt company)
By all accounts a decent enough lad but never as great an athlete as he thought he was
Sndndnndh wrote:
He sounds like a total idiot.
Looks like one, too, with the tats and the wacky Mohawk over the years, and he's bounced around from Michigan to Fla., to Oregon and back to Cork.
Who's his coach now, Cathal Lombard?
Doping bans on the way to beaverton b4 Patriots Day.
Sounds like C. O'L knows what looms, maybe a ban for him?
Thanks for the perspective, but I don't know that it is correct based on a personal experience. I have had an "A" blood sample come back as positive then the more in-depth test on the "B" sample came back as negative. These were two separate vials taken at the same time. The "A" had a general test and the "B" had a specific test run on it. Same "sample" different results.I guess I'd like to know if the athletes have the exact same test run on both of their samples for doping controls.
trollism wrote:
Tribe wrote:Not sure I agree with this assessment. Most of the time the A sample is correct. But false positives do happen and that's an important reason for the B sample. It's also the reason results shouldn't be leaked until both samples have been tested.
If a false positive happens with the A-sample, the same will happen with the B sample cause it's the same sample split in half.
If the A sample comes back positive, they'll run the test again with more from the A sample.
B sample is simply a legal necessity so that athletes can't claim that there's corruption or negligence within the testing system, so they're invited to watch the process themselves. It was never anything to do with false positives.
He's always been the guy trying to sound smart/interesting in interviews and failing. He's just trying to get attention.
redux wrote:
Thanks for the perspective, but I don't know that it is correct based on a personal experience. I have had an "A" blood sample come back as positive then the more in-depth test on the "B" sample came back as negative. These were two separate vials taken at the same time. The "A" had a general test and the "B" had a specific test run on it. Same "sample" different results.
I guess I'd like to know if the athletes have the exact same test run on both of their samples for doping controls.
trollism wrote:If a false positive happens with the A-sample, the same will happen with the B sample cause it's the same sample split in half.
If the A sample comes back positive, they'll run the test again with more from the A sample.
B sample is simply a legal necessity so that athletes can't claim that there's corruption or negligence within the testing system, so they're invited to watch the process themselves. It was never anything to do with false positives.
A false positive can also be the result of a lab processing error, faulty assay etc. Even if the test is run on the exact same blood sample it doesn't guarantee the same result with the B sample.
pointer to the obvious wrote:
Time waster wrote:Let's deconstruct the Queen of Innuendo's response, the tranny that makes a living brandishing his cornell connection and slandering people. Is he still on top of his shameless game?
Putz
In the Harry Potter world there was a time when the big media was sold out to the govt and the powerful and the tabloid called "the Quibbler" was the only pace where one could find the truth.
Where would this sport be without Letsrun and the Guardian and a few others? No one else cares about the truth or honesty of fair play.
The Guardian is fake news.
trollism wrote:
Lenny Leonard wrote:I actually had the same reaction that Ciarin did to this news.
Some people care about policing "clean sport" more than actually following it and making it more popular.
You just know people were so excited to hear about a positive test, because that's the only "newsworthy" thing our sport can produce.
I know I am not alone in being done with all the are they/aren't they doing talk.
It's a very 'head in the sand' attitude.
For those of us who KNOW the sport is filthy, a positive test is a small step in the right direction.
If nobody was getting busted, it wouldn't mean a clean sport, it would just mean there wasn't any effort in catching cheats.
But if you choose to pretend there isn't a problem, that's your perogative. It means you're an idiot, but that's no skin off my nose.
+1
Putting bad news out there is a good thing (most don't realise this). Actually these athletes maybe able to sue in 20-30 years time for allowing them to get away with doping and jeopardizing their longer term health much like the NFL.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
I know I am not alone in being done with all the are they/aren't they doing talk.
Next time you're at a meet, look around, yes you are practically alone. No big crowds for dopers, other than the dwindling geriatric one at Historic Hayward.
Yerrah, he's always been a moany f0ck€r