Eric Jenkins on Salazar: "I totally understand why he’d get banned...(He) pushed the line and clearly he pushed it too far."

rekrunner wrote:

To make the point more clear, suppose hypothetically that Dr. Brown or Dr. Myhre obtained and supplied the testosterone for the experiment, and gave it to the two sons. Then the trafficking occurs between parties not subject to USADA or the WADA Code, and there is no finding of an Article 2.7 rule violation by anyone, and there was no other rule violation found relating to the testosterone experiment.

Yes exactly! You are just joking again, right?

Salazar got banned because he gave out the testosterone - no matter where he got it from. That's why I wrote "personal supply or not doesn't matter".

For example, suppose hypothetically that Dr. Brown or Dr. Myhre obtained and supplied the testosterone for the experiment, and gave it to Salazar, who gave it to the two sons. Then Salazar would've gotten banned too.

Or suppose hypothetically that Salazar's neighbor helped Salazar out with his personal supply, gave it to Salazar, who gave it to the two sons. Then Salazar would've gotten banned too.

bleu wrote:

Exactly what I posted! It’s bizarre! The only Americans he coached were Rupp and Hasay.

Would Hasay have been the first American in NYC today?

So you’re just ignoring Murphy?

I do not recall all the details. The info is out there, go read it. No one asked him, I think it was in a mix zone after the race. A sometimes crowded place. Sal supposedly wanted to know how much cream you’d need to trigger a positive and if it’d be noticeable. Ie someone could rub a small amount on someone without them really noticing but I think he said in his email to Parker that it needed to be a pretty large amount they found.

I don't see a way that CAS could decide against ""organizing and facilitating" Magness' excessive infusion ADRV"" which Salazar actually admitted to. (That Magness was a competing athlete, I humbly pointed out to you years ago, remember?)

Let's not forget that on appeal, USADA might be able convince CAS that the evidence suffices to also ban Salazar for the large injections for Ritz and Rupp. Note that they convinced 1 of the 3 AAA panel members (point 234 and previous). Then in turn Rupp would lose his Olympic Silver, among others, with a four year ban starting early 2012.

Finally, they might consider the three violations separately, which would extend the ban from four to 8 - 10 years. In conclusion, I bet Nike won't support an appeal - they can only lose. Note that NOP is gone already, because of Nike's choice.

Ok. I didn't realize you were keying on "personal supply". You are right -- that doesn't matter.

"personal supply" is not relevant to the ban, but just a detail that more accurately describes what happened in this instance.

Point 458 includes the same descriptive detail "(i.e. his personal testosterone)", but the ban is "because he “gave” a Prohibited Substance ... to a third party".

That was merely a supposition to show that even with favorable appeal reversals, the 4-year ban is the minimum for "trafficking" alone. Despite your tendencies to hope for the worst, I think we can safely forget CAS reversing the finding for large injections for Ritz and Rupp, given the contemporaneous emails. I also doubt CAS would consider the three violations separately, given the longstanding precedence of combining multiple violations being adjudicated in the same trial, out of fairness to the accused with respect to due process.

rekrunner wrote:

Despite your tendencies to hope for the worst, I think we can safely forget CAS reversing the finding for large injections for Ritz and Rupp, given the contemporaneous emails.

Ignoring your attempt to make this personal again,

the panel's decisions were as follows:

1) 3 : 0 in favor of banning Salazar for giving a too large injection to Magness;

2) 3 : 0 in favor of banning Salazar for giving testosterone to his sons;

3) 2 : 1 in favor of banning Salazar for trying to cover up the injections;

4) 2 : 1 against banning Salazar for giving a too large injection to NOP athletes.

The numbers imply that 3 and 4 are the disputable points. So much for "we can safely forget...".

If 3 gets overturned by CAS, the four year ban remains.

If 4 gets overturned by CAS, all hell breaks lose.

Conclusion: USADA should be appealing, not Salazar.

on par for LR doping apologists/doping deniers...sir gary claims al sal didnt do anything wrong lolz

As long as you don't call Jordan a doper you're not going to get banned. However, criticizing Jordan is considered "bullying," "jealousy," and "politically incorrect." LOL!

Truely wrote:

Actually, Mr. Rupp is the one who had a meteoric trajectory from his middle school soccer field to high school sub 13:40 5k at some podunk Oregon school. He got Salazar as a coach at a young age, with access to better facilities, training partners, coaching and support only to get caught up in Salazar's NOP web.

If a Catholic high school in a big city is podunk.