Printable View
Is the IOC wrong to leave individual sports to decide on who can represent Russia in Rio? Doping was clearly rife across the board and it seems a farce that these cheats can put forward competitors who have managed to 'get clean' in time for the games. Should it not have been a blanket bann?
I don't think a blanket ban is fair. That would mean there could be those who, although they've never cheated in their lives, could miss out on the chance at competing at the Olympics.
Unless there is evidence you've cheated you should be allowed to compete.
Were the IOC not saying Russians were guilty unless proven innocent?
I doubt many of them would've taken a blanket to Rio! ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by easty
The IOC had a chance to show they are serious about stamping out doping by banking an organisation found to be involved in organised wide ranging doping and then covering up any signs of it through any means necessary. They bottled it IMHO. The Russian federations who were involved in it have had no punishments but the athletes who were likely under a lot of pressure from their team mates and coaches and officials to dope have both the whole brunt of punishment. The whole ruling was a farce.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
They've banned any Russian who's previously served a doping ban from the Olympics, yet if you've doped but are from another country it is OK. Because of this, the whistle blower, who came forward at the risk of her life and livelihood in Russia isn't allowed to compete yet someone like Gatlin is. How does that encourage other whistleblowers?
If have felt sorry for the innocent athletes who were caught up in it, but the IOC could have allowed them to compete yet the IOC banner rather than Russians.
By leaving it up to the individual sports bodies, they don't really have much time to consider each and every Russian athlete competing in their sport.
They should have taken control of the situation and banned them altogether. The doping was sponsored by the Russian state and that cannot be ignored when considering a suitable punishment.
And now the precedent has been set they've basically said state sponsored doping will go unpunished.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
did anyone else watch that panorama programme a few weeks back about that slippery crooked ******* 'sir' seb ******* coe !!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/36541301
absolutely stinks what goes on
Any Russian female athlete that has the balls to compete should be banned.
Aren't at least some of these people the victims of pressure and coercion on the part of their governments and their sports' national governing bodies? I don't imagine 5-year-old Olga Korbut made a conscious decision to go on an elaborate program of drugs to restrict her growth and postpone the onset of puberty (and do a lot of other things besides) just so she could become the world's top gymnast?
Initially the IOC simply didn't want to know, even when it was obvious that something very strange was going on, especially among the Eastern European Warsaw Pact nations. Those folks wouldn't have had a choice - totalitarian systems don't give you one. Many of them bought into the system, I'm sure, only to have regrets later. Others, I'm equally sure, were pressured in all sorts of ways, some subtle, some not at all subtle, to fall in line.
And there were PLENTY cheats among the free-enterprise nations as well, I'm sure.
Remember David Jenkins? Ben Johnson? and lots and lots of others.
We don't worry too much how "Team GB" wins medals - sports fans rarely look at things more deeply than the colour and design of the gear their heroes are wearing. Drugs? Just don't get caught. Ted Bloggs was born Feodor Steroidski, somewhere in Kirghizstan, and he's only had a UK passport since last Tuesday? He's a political refugee and as such welcome to our great country. His family (who can't run as fast as Ted can) can get lost, though. They're economic migrants.
This decision means that unscrupulous sports bodies (are there any other kinds) will feel free to continue to provide pharmaceutical expertise to their athletes while making sure they cover their tracks much more efficiently in the future, and wee girls in gymnastics and swimming will continue to be given pills to swallow - "This injection'll make you swim faster/bounce higher, dear. Just hold still."
I really don't like the Olympics.
I'm determined to try and enjoy the Olympics despite the drugs. There's certainly plenty on the TV.
I just assume they're all at it but appreciate the beauty of it all.
Lizzie Armistead. Misses three drugs tests in a year, she'll still be there trying to win GB a gold though. Admits 2 of the missed tests were her fault, but it "wasnae my fault" for the other. Her lawyers managed to stop her being banned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doddie
Imagine one of the GB athletes was just beaten to gold by someone in those circumstances? If it was a Russian then we'd call it cheating.
I watched her interview on SSN and couldnae help thinking " You're at it hen"!Quote:
Originally Posted by easty
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by HUTCHYHIBBY
I don't think anyone could argue with any conviction that Armistead isn't one lucky lady especially taking what happened to someone like Rio Ferdinand as a comparison.
However in every sport at every level in every country someone is 'at it'. There are undoubtedly British sportspeople who are cheats, as there will be Jamaicans, Americans, Spaniards etc etc etc. That's a different kettle of fish from a coordinated, sophisticated and ratified doping programme that was carried out by the Russians or the US Postal Service cycling team or, allegedly, the Nike Oregon Project.
I think a blanket ban isn't in keeping with the Olympic spirit. There's plenty events were performance enhancing drugs would be of no use, why should these contenders be excluded? State sponsored doping has now reached new levels with genetically formed athletes coming out of countries like china. That's where the real challenge lies, blanket bans are not the answer, technology to catch the cheats and when necessary, punish them retrospivley is the only way.