UK Athletics FINALLY hand over full review of Sir Mo Farah's relationship with disgraced coach Alberto Salazar to UK Anti-Doping

Pro News/Info/Results

Page 2 of 2

1 2

Next Last

3 years ago 05/01/2020 7:21am EDT

re: casual obsever

casual obsever wrote:
"We learned"? Rather, we heard from UKA...
You can cite UKA all you want, but that doesn't prove that their statements are correct, and UKAD's wrong. Obviously someone here is lying; contrast for example your
"a request had only been made for the review in February" (UKA)
with
"We have repeatedly requested that UK Athletics share this POC review with us in its entirety, as there could be information included that is of interest to us." (UKAD)
Of course you are supporting the accused here. At least you are not doubling down on your false tabloid claim.

I guess in your fair and balanced and neutral world, the accused loses all credibility by virtue of being accused, with no chance to give a second side to an otherwise one-sided account.

I did not find, and you did not provide, and the British newspapers did not provide, a quote from Nicole Sapstead or UKAD using words or phrases like "repeated refusal" or "failing to handover". These extended interpretations apparently originate from the British reporters reading between the lines for the purpose of providing sensational headlines.

Hence "faux-scandal" brought to you by the British "tabloids".

3 years ago 05/01/2020 9:01am EDT

re: tin can man

tin can man wrote:
Summary:
After reviewing all evidence, Farah is CLEAN. Rupp is CLEAN.

Froome is clean. Wiggins is clean. Those Brits know what they're doing. Not like the sloppy Kenyans or Russians who are always getting caught.

3 years ago 05/01/2020 9:10am EDT

re: nojos

nojos wrote:
rojo wrote:
I hope You were just trolling as if not it’s amazing how stupid people are and how they’ll come up with a conspiracy for anything.
This from the massive genius who thinks rush limbaugh is God. Learn how to spell "cat" and then get back to us.

*proper names are always capitalized

3 years ago 05/01/2020 9:23am EDT

re: rekrunner

rekrunner wrote:
I guess in your fair and balanced and neutral world, the accused loses all credibility by virtue of being accused, with no chance to give a second side to an otherwise one-sided account.

LOL - no, I am not the counterpart to your extremism.

This here is a good example; I compared accuser and accused, and concluded "Obviously someone here is lying", while you only listened to the accused, and concluded based on their statement "we learned", as if the accused told the truth by default, like all the other accused.

Note that I did not conclude that the accuser was right, and the accused wrong.

And no, again, that story is not just in tabloids. You had to double down on that of course, to no one's surprise.

3 years ago 05/01/2020 11:47am EDT

re: rojo

rojo wrote:
Asami from 'Audition' wrote:
The IAAF has understood for decades that the sport is a dud for ratings because it is dominated by East African villagers.
Nobody cares about them.
So what to do?
Well you find a non-African and boost him.
Mo Farah was unique because even though he is also from East Africa (Somalia), he grew up in Great Britain so the IAAF looked at him as a potential marketing tool.
He could be promoted as a British athlete or even a European athlete. This would result in much better ratings and interest around the world . . . and it did.
This 'protected status' was given to him in 2010 and the very next year he was world champion in the 5000m. Then one year later Olympic Champion in the 5000m and 10000m in his home country of Great Britain.
The IAAF succeeded.
But he was juiced to the max courtesy of his now banned coach Alberto Salazar.
So under your theory that the IAAF was looking to protect Western distance stars, can you tell me why they’d pop Salazar and hound Rupp for years?
I hope You were just trolling as if not it’s amazing how stupid people are and how they’ll come up with a conspiracy for anything.

Because the IAAF were not the ones doing the "hounding." It was USADA under direction of Travis Tygart, who hounded Salazar/NOP/Rupp. Really, Rojo?

3 years ago 05/01/2020 12:36pm EDT

re: casual obsever

casual obsever wrote:
LOL - no, I am not the counterpart to your extremism.
This here is a good example; I compared accuser and accused, and concluded "Obviously someone here is lying", while you only listened to the accused, and concluded based on their statement "we learned", as if the accused told the truth by default, like all the other accused.
Note that I did not conclude that the accuser was right, and the accused wrong.
And no, again, that story is not just in tabloids. You had to double down on that of course, to no one's surprise.

I listened to both accuser and accused, and then criticized the British journalism, for trying to turn this into something bigger, by adding new phrases like "repeated refusal", not justified by UKAD's statement, and sensational headlines, that were not justified by the reporting.

You called it a real scandal.

Page 2 of 2

1 2

Next Last

Reply Replying to

Username

Password

Leave the password field blank to post anonymously.

Post Preview

By posting you acknowledge that you have read and abide by our Terms and Conditions.

Remember me on this device.

UK Athletics FINALLY hand over full review of Sir Mo Farah's relationship with disgraced coach Alberto Salazar to UK Anti-Doping

Hot Now

Of General Interest

This thread has already been deleted.

You have been subscribed.

UK Athletics FINALLY hand over full review of Sir Mo Farah's relationship with disgraced coach Alberto Salazar to UK Anti-Doping

Follow rekrunner

Block rekrunner

Follow casual obsever

Block casual obsever

Follow rekrunner

Block rekrunner

Hot Now

Of General Interest

This thread has already been deleted.

Reply Replying to

You have been subscribed.