ALBERTO SALAZAR BANNED FROM ATHLETICS FOR FOUR YEARS FOR DOPING VIOLATIONS

Now JS takes over wrote:

Now the time has come for Coach JS to take over the scene! The running world just hunger for clean coaches in world top!

Yep. The great JS will save running. 13+ international wins and counting...

density wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

I'm surprised you haven't argued the "Coleman defence", that Alberto should have been let off on a technicality. What was the USADA thinking? That he was actually promoting doping amongst his athletes! Er - yes.

Legal PED use =/= doping. Get over it. And maybe read the damn report.

A 4-year ban for doping violations is no triviality and can't be simply explained away. Nothing in the report changes that. Apologists like you make me puke.

Armstronglivs wrote:

density wrote:

Legal PED use =/= doping. Get over it. And maybe read the damn report.

A 4-year ban for doping violations is no triviality and can't be simply explained away. Nothing in the report changes that. Apologists like you make me puke.

Fully agreed.

It is amusing how worked up people are getting about this. I've not read anything yet in the detailed findings which didn't tell me things that were already in the public domain. The difference is that now USADA has determined these things to be doping violations.

You can infer whatever the hell you want into Salazar and NOP, but the outcome documents tell the only definitive factual position that we have - and after all this time, the outcome appears to be that no athletes were doped. Or at least, after an enormous investigation, no evidence has been produced that any athletes were doped.

Don't get me wrong, the outcome is enormously damaging to Salazar and athletics as a whole.

But get a sense of proportion in terms of what the outcome actually is and the findings in the report.

NOP fan wrote:

This whole thing has gotten blown way out of proportion.

Hey dumbo, here's a question for you, why do you think "This whole thing has gotten blown way out of proportion" as you put and being reported all around the world?

It's not because "None of this is new information" or "nobody has bothered to actually read the AAA's report", it's because USADA have investigated for four years and banned a highly successful coach and a shonky doctor.

That's big news all around the world whether you like it or not.

And if you're pissed off "NOP athletes get needlessly dragged through the mud" they and you have got one person to blame for that, well one main one and quite a few enablers.

LetsRun.com wrote:

Here's our first take on it:

https://www.letsrun.com/news/2019/10/nike-oregon-project-coach-alberto-salazar-gets-four-year-doping-ban-from-usada/

Here's a tip: "begs the question" does not mean "prompts the question" but rather the obverse.

Suggest some editing.

nothing new wrote:

fortherecord wrote:

The craziest thing about this “bombshell” news is that absolutely no new information or accusations have been made. All this is doing is revealing everyone’s true colors. Nick Willis on Twitter is a prime example: “Justice. I’m tired of having to hide my thoughts.....”

You have a bunch of people who either read it and understand it’s all years in the past, and then the ones who think everybody is a doper, already hate Salazar, and just want to be justified in their terribly cynical outlook on life.

+1

Oh, right - the USADA, which went after and nailed Lance when no one else could or would, has been picking on the wrong guy with poor old Albert. But how were they able to find he was guilty of promoting doping amongst his athletes and impose a significant penalty of a 4-year ban unless their case stacked up? I'll go with the USADA on this one and not the Salazar toadies and apologists.

This thread is a complete sh1t show. Most people don't seem to understand the charges at all (or that all of this information is several years old), and the few that do are immediately labeled shills, trolls, etc. for not immediately jumping on the hate train.

I think the majority just see the charges and then make assumptions about what happened instead of examining the material for themselves. I would bet less than 10% of the posters in this thread have actually read any of the documents from USADA and AAA.

larkimm wrote:

It is amusing how worked up people are getting about this. I've not read anything yet in the detailed findings which didn't tell me things that were already in the public domain. The difference is that now USADA has determined these things to be doping violations.

You can infer whatever the hell you want into Salazar and NOP, but the outcome documents tell the only definitive factual position that we have - and after all this time, the outcome appears to be that no athletes were doped. Or at least, after an enormous investigation, no evidence has been produced that any athletes were doped.

Don't get me wrong, the outcome is enormously damaging to Salazar and athletics as a whole.

But get a sense of proportion in terms of what the outcome actually is and the findings in the report.

So how do you get a ban for "promoting doping" amongst athletes if no athletes were doping? No one was buying what Alberto was peddling? Give me a break?

larkimm wrote:

appears to be that no athletes were doped. Or at least, after an enormous investigation, no evidence has been produced that any athletes were doped.

It ain't over yet pal.

confused canadian wrote:

This thread is a complete sh1t show. Most people don't seem to understand the charges at all (or that all of this information is several years old), and the few that do are immediately labeled shills, trolls, etc. for not immediately jumping on the hate train.

I think the majority just see the charges and then make assumptions about what happened instead of examining the material for themselves. I would bet less than 10% of the posters in this thread have actually read any of the documents from USADA and AAA.

Who cares, USADA understand and have banned him for four years, that's good enough for me.

You truly are clueless. I don't know where you got the notion that this ban is for promoting doping. Have you considered reading the report?

Wetmore sent athletes too

over-limit infusion, tampering, testosterone trafficking wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

So how do you get a ban for "promoting doping" amongst athletes if no athletes were doping? No one was buying what Alberto was peddling? Give me a break?

You truly are clueless. I don't know where you got the notion that this ban is for promoting doping. Have you considered reading the report?

The US Anti-Doping Agency found that Salazar had been “orchestrating and facilitating prohibited doping conduct” while head coach of the Nike Oregon Project.

So "orchestrating and facilitating prohibited doping conduct" doesn't amount to "promoting doping" in your books? I'm not surprised you don't get it if that is the level of your comprehension skills.

Will America be banned like Russia is?

Yeah, right.

Armstronglivs wrote:

over-limit infusion, tampering, testosterone trafficking wrote:

You truly are clueless. I don't know where you got the notion that this ban is for promoting doping. Have you considered reading the report?

The US Anti-Doping Agency found that Salazar had been “orchestrating and facilitating prohibited doping conduct” while head coach of the Nike Oregon Project.

So "orchestrating and facilitating prohibited doping conduct" doesn't amount to "promoting doping" in your books? I'm not surprised you don't get it if that is the level of your comprehension skills.

https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/sport/2019/oct/01/athletics-coach-alberto-salazar-receives-four-year-ban-for-doping-violations

Wait, your entire understanding of this issue is based on a single vague quotation from a Guardian article? You are one stupid sonofabitch. If you pull your head out of your azz and read the official AAA report, you'll find out what "orchestrating and facilitating prohibited doping conduct" actually means. Until then, kindly stop posting on this thread. You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.

I am saddened to hear the results of this case (finally). I started running just as a kid back in 1980 and Salazar's debut and followup NYC marathon wins were a big inspiration to me, as was seeing him run at the World XC in 1983 in Gateshead.

I see Hassan has just put out a statement pointing out that for her in particular the timing is very bad. It seems though that he is not proven to have actually doped any of his athletes and therefore I conclude that this:

"This is one of the biggest doping stories in years."

from LR is nonsense and typical of their obsession with the case. No doubt it will continue to be hyped up often by unregistered sockpuppet accounts the true ownership of which we can only speculate on.

Well Al wasn't running in any races himself so the dope must be for his athletes..

Prevalent doping culture at Nike's training facilities means that ALL of his athletes must be in on it.

No way would Salazar accept natural athletes for fear of whistle-blowers.

Given that Coe was on the Nike payroll to the tune of a million a year (and even had a Nike building named after him), are there any questions that need to be asked of him in the wake of the Salazar news?

larkimm wrote:

It is amusing how worked up people are getting about this.

I am amused how the PR shills are already out, desperately trying some damage control, and especially you Brits acting as if only Salazar was dirty, not his athletes, meaning Farah.

Farah should have been banned for blatant test evasion in 2011! Test evasion, likely doping, lost injection paperwork, jump from also-ran to invincible for years, dirty stopwatch holder, and now: documented, banned dirty coach.

But no worries, Lord Nike will protect Sir Mo, like he did Lady Radcliffe.