Weak, Gary.
Weak, Gary.
After his accident, he was readmitted to hospital with blood clots and this is why there's been no statement from Kipsang. He's 'stable' now.
The German is in Kenya - with the withheld list...
The Stablemaster wrote:
After his accident, he was readmitted to hospital with blood clots and this is why there's been no statement from Kipsang. He's 'stable' now.
The German is in Kenya - with the withheld list...
Any time frame as to when this list will be released?
a lot of talkings but nothing more.... What was published in Spain (link to article)? Why are the Germans in Kenya (what information do they have)? If this Germans had information about athletes what is stopping them to tell us? Last time they made a movie with cheating athletes from the Kenyan team, untill now not even a single name published!
Do your homework.
Nothing was coming, now is yesterday..
your name was: Clutching at straws? nonsense link…. https://www.naiz.eus/en/hemeroteca/7k/editions/7k_2020-01-12-06-00/hemeroteca_articles/gatazka-sozialak-bizi-dituen-herriak-asko-dauka-eskaintzeko-oso-bizirik-dagoelako-bere-minetan-bere-zorionetan?&slug=gatazka-sozialak-bizi-dituen-herriak-asko-dauka-eskaintzeko-oso-bizirik-dagoelako-bere-minetan-bere-zorionetan
The Stablemaster wrote:
Do your homework.
So, months later, another week threat...
Yawn
Yes, part of your repeated obfuscation tricks: the provisionally banned cheat got banned because of three whereabouts failures, so obviously I used - neutrally and correctly - the plural, while you tried to downplay it, when you "wrote "a whereabouts failure" (singular)".
Of course you would prefer the wording of the PR note of the cheat's management team. On the other side, I went with the exact wording of the rule broken, namely "fraudulent information", again neutrally and correctly.
Nothing new here, just once more (actually three times now in the last 1 - 2 days) your ongoing attempts to make PR for cheats, whether accused, provisionally banned, or ultimately banned ones, downplaying their cheating.
That's rich, coming from you. Keep trolling! I'll let you rekrunner this thread now.
You are fabricating obfuscation where there is none.
Let's have it your way, and I will re-express my thoughts more accurately using the words of his accuser:
My thoughts are that "the AIU confirms a provisional suspension against Wilson Kipsang Kiprotich of Kenya for whereabouts failures & tampering".
Note, like me, they did not say "fraudulent", nor give the wording of the rules. I guess they are downplaying, and obfuscating too.
And the words of WADA: "Whereabouts Failure (a filing failure or a missed test)" -- seems to directly confirm my statement "According to the rules, a whereabouts failure can be a missed test or a filing failure", which points out an option of "missed tests", up to 3, that you failed to mention to El Keniano, I guess in your effort to remain "neutral".
If we want to reject the words of Voltare, then all we have is the AIUs word of "tampering", which could be fraudulent information, but can also be witness intimidation, or interfering with a Doping Control official, or altering ID numbers, or breaking the "B" bottle, or altering a sample by the addition of a foreign substance, or many other things that you left out, in your effort to "neutrally" include the word "fraudulent":
"Conduct which subverts the Doping Control process but which would not otherwise be included in the definition of Prohibited Methods. Tampering shall include, without limitation, intentionally interfering or attempting to interfere with a Doping Control official, providing fraudulent information to an Anti-Doping Organization or intimidating or attempting to intimidate a potential witness."
"For example, this Article would prohibit altering identification numbers on a Doping Control form during Testing, breaking the B bottle at the time of B Sample analysis, or altering a Sample by the addition of a foreign substance."
Note this list is not exhaustive, and can include other conduct not explicitly listed.
In my constant effort to remain "neutral", I have seen no allegation from the AIU that he possessed or used banned substances, either now or before.
rekrunner wrote:
My thoughts are that he was provisionally suspended for a whereabouts failure, and tampering, which appears to be related to information provided about the whereabouts failure.
I didn't see a charge of possession or use of any banned substance or method.
I stand corrected. I should have said:
My thoughts are that he was provisionally suspended for whereabouts failures, and tampering, which, according to his agency, "concerns an explanation that was given in the results management process regarding a possible Whereabouts Failure and does not concern tampering with a doping test itself."
As usual rekrunner, you set about constructing a defence for anyone accused or found guilty of violations of anti-doping rules. But just as they can't prove their innocence neither can you - so you seek to somehow diminish the seriousness of their infractions. It won't work; there is no middle ground - the rules are either broken or they aren't. If Kipsang's violations are confirmed that is the end of it.
I'm starting to think that rekrunner is an A.I. bot, rather than a flesh and blood person.
Pity his wife if he is real. Imagine trying to argue with rekrunner over things like whose turn it is to do the dishes, or the weekly budget? I can't imagine the monologue he delivers either when asked something simple like - 'does my bum look big in this dress?'
Armstronglivs wrote:
As usual rekrunner, you set about constructing a defence for anyone accused or found guilty of violations of anti-doping rules. But just as they can't prove their innocence neither can you - so you seek to somehow diminish the seriousness of their infractions. It won't work; there is no middle ground - the rules are either broken or they aren't. If Kipsang's violations are confirmed that is the end of it.
I've constructed nothing but simply acknowledged what has been made public, and provided one clarification which is also public.
I've provided two corrections to my initial expression of my thoughts, which I hope should have ended the discussion.
Coevett wrote:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/is-it-time-for-disgraced-kenya-to-follow-russia-into-exile-39g88jpcsI think we all know the answer to the question. Well everybody here except Cleo.
Behind a paywall - maybe somebody with a Times subscription could copy and paste the entire article for us?
Too cheap to pay for a subscription? Wouldn't pay for a U.K. paper myself, but fortunately, I have many acquaintances that do. It's a clickbait headline, with an article that highlights the severity of the doping problem in Kenya, as well as effectively explain why Kenya can't be banned because it isn't state-sponsored.
No, unlike you I don't live in the UK and you can only visit the Telegraph site 5 times before all articles are put behind the paywall.
You just outed yourself as a fake Kenyan living in Britain.
The Stablemaster wrote:
After his accident, he was readmitted to hospital with blood clots and this is why there's been no statement from Kipsang. He's 'stable' now.
The German is in Kenya - with the withheld list...
It’s already “next week” Stablemaster, and you’re still giving us nothing. Withheld by whom? AK? ADAK? WADA, AIU? Only one of these bodies is in a position to withhold.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
As usual rekrunner, you set about constructing a defence for anyone accused or found guilty of violations of anti-doping rules. But just as they can't prove their innocence neither can you - so you seek to somehow diminish the seriousness of their infractions. It won't work; there is no middle ground - the rules are either broken or they aren't. If Kipsang's violations are confirmed that is the end of it.
I've constructed nothing but simply acknowledged what has been made public, and provided one clarification which is also public.
I've provided two corrections to my initial expression of my thoughts, which I hope should have ended the discussion.
Why bother to do it if it doesn't change anything? I doubt that anyone cares if you "correct" yourself.
Armstronglivs wrote:
If Kipsang's violations are confirmed that is the end of it.
Well he is currently banned, so it's already past the first state - contrary to the Voltare PR ("At this point it is only an accusation") cited on letsrun's home page. The AIU has a pretty good track record of getting their provisionally bans confirmed and extended.
At this point, we watched about 60 banned Kenyan cheats in the last five years, including:
Olympic Champion and multiple World Champion Kiprop
Former World Record holder Kiptum (actually banned as reigning World Record holder)
Former World Record holder and multiple Majors winner Kipsang
Olympic Champion Sumgong
Multiple Majors winner Jeptoo
…
While the doping apologists can argue all they want about whereabout failures being different from missed tests being different from positive tests, and downplay the violation of 2.5 ("information provided" according to rek and "an explanation that was given" according to Voltare), Kipsang has just joined the growing list of banned Kenyan superstars.
physics defiant wrote:
Drug Religion wrote:
Physics doesn't apply to running does it? You would know wouldn't you?
Yup, no such thing as thermoregulation. It's just something some weirdos made up, right?
It does but you don’t understand physiology. Which I why you have zero qualifications in the subject.
I do understand physiology, you don't. But why are you posting under the name Physics defiant. Just to be a dick?
That’s why you’ve never progressed beyond these plaintive whining posts repeated endlessly.