Jamaican Star Briana Williams Bad news.

It is implicit in the violation that there can be no reasonable justification for any of the missed tests; obviously, if an athlete can provide such justification there is no violation. But if they cannot prove that then they incur a doping violation - as they should. It doesn't require "proof" of doping, but evading doping control is taken seriously - and, we might infer, is only wilfully done so by dopers trying to avoid detection. Being careless is not accepted as an excuse.

Again, excuses may be offered for positive tests as well, but if these, too, are not accepted as legitimate then the violation stands - same as the 3 missed tests.

She should receive a 4 year ban. Coach should also receive a lifetime ban.

Are you arguing just to argue? I said the same thing. If a reason that is given for the missed test is justifiable, then there is no violation, etc. Obviously, rollins's excuse was somewhat justifiable, and her band was reduced.

So we shall see. CC's hearing is on Sept 4th.

Also, Ajee Wilson is a prime example. Her reason was for testing positive was deemed acceptable, so she didn't incur a ban. It was proven that the meat she ingested was contaminated due to no fault or negligence of her own.

If Brianna Rollins can get her ban reduced after dodging her tester twice in one day( at her house and at the airport), then CC's chances are beyond great, and he was trying to get to his test.

I'm not so sure we are saying the same thing. You seem to think Coleman has reasonable grounds for getting off, before the facts get argued at a hearing. A denial of liability - which is what he is saying - is pretty standard. My point relates to the seriousness of the violation generally, and not the specific facts of his case.

Armstronglivs wrote:

I'm not so sure we are saying the same thing. You seem to think Coleman has reasonable grounds for getting off, before the facts get argued at a hearing. A denial of liability - which is what he is saying - is pretty standard. My point relates to the seriousness of the violation generally, and not the specific facts of his case.

Yes, based on the information that was already released by his coach ( Drummond) to why his test was marked as a missed test.

You are basically stating the letter of the law, the penalty for such an infraction. I'm merely stating, based on his reasons, and the reasons of others in regards to the same infraction, that, more than likely, there will be no ban or a reduced ban.

You idiots do realise this is a thread about Briana Williams don't you?

Being idiots you probably don't. wrote:

This is a song about a whale.

No! This is a song about being happy!

Shocking news. All the Jamaicans are dirty.

drugs ("medicine") are power-ful wrote:

Speak Up wrote:

What is more interesting is the fact she had the flu and was still able to run 10.94.

This alone raised my suspicion .

How many did Jordan score when he had the flu?

No one was cleaner than Jordan, particularly when he had the flu.

Scorpion_runner wrote:

There is a huge difference between missing drug tests and testing positive.

If you miss a bunch of mandatory tests, there's no way to test positive.

This does suck but why do you think they chose for her to run for Jamaica instead of USA? Because it's a hell of a lot easier to skirt the rukesb I like Ato but it's a horrible look because the girl is only going to be a senior in high school. Not even the fastest girl in Florida. Tamari Davis is Next!....not to get popped but to dominate.

I wish SAFP would get tested like everyone else. She's swolled up bigger than anyone else anymore. Make Jeter in her prime look little. Her core looks like an NFL runningback. Oh and she just had a kid and is above 30. It's a joke and I even like SAVP.

In the end they just need to make some sit legal and you'll watch the sport get better.

Another idiot. wrote:

gfgfgfd wrote:

????????? The medication she took didn't have the substance on the label and has been independently verified to have been contaminated with it. It as no performance enhancing effect. Why in hell should she be banned?

A simple Google search would have answered that for you.

"Diuretics: Not performance-enhancing drugs on their own, but used to get rid of the traces of other drugs. Diuretics increase the production of urine, and some athletes use them to try to flush out residue from steroids."

What part of substance not on the label don't you understand???

who's the idiot wrote:

Another idiot. wrote:

A simple Google search would have answered that for you.

"Diuretics: Not performance-enhancing drugs on their own, but used to get rid of the traces of other drugs. Diuretics increase the production of urine, and some athletes use them to try to flush out residue from steroids."

What part of substance not on the label don't you understand???

You do realise that just about every doper has a clever story as to how it got into their system?

The crazy thing is that people still lap it up like what they're saying is actually true.

It's not the clever story that's the problem, it's the idiot officials believing them.

trollism wrote:

who's the idiot wrote:

What part of substance not on the label don't you understand???

You do realise that just about every doper has a clever story as to how it got into their system?

The crazy thing is that people still lap it up like what they're saying is actually true.

But how would they know the cold meds contained a diuretic if it wasn't on the ingredients? The story must be true.

Subway Surfers wrote:

It's not the clever story that's the problem, it's the idiot officials believing them.

Has nothing to do with idiocy. Its just corruption letting athletes of the hook. This is especially the case with national anti doping agencies letting their own countrymen compete

asdasdsa wrote:

trollism wrote:

You do realise that just about every doper has a clever story as to how it got into their system?

The crazy thing is that people still lap it up like what they're saying is actually true.

But how would they know the cold meds contained a diuretic if it wasn't on the ingredients? The story must be true.

Of course, the old "I didn't know what I was taking defence". Dopers never intentionally dope - it was all a mistake, "a misunderstanding, You Honour".

Armstronglivs wrote:

asdasdsa wrote:

But how would they know the cold meds contained a diuretic if it wasn't on the ingredients? The story must be true.

Of course, the old "I didn't know what I was taking defence". Dopers never intentionally dope - it was all a mistake, "a misunderstanding, You Honour".

You're missing the point mate...