Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

IAAF - European domination

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: IAAF - European domination

    Michael,

    Re: Issajenko, Dubin (1990), and the penalties
    you mentioned...

    I'm not up to speed on the particulars of this case. Is it possible that the "5-Year" rule was enacted after she was assessed the penalty?

    If so, then the rule probably didn't apply.

    If not, then, yes, there would appear to be a double standard.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: IAAF - European domination

      Apparently it's not only possible, but might be the absurd truth. Absurd? Why? Because leaders are be definition supposed to lead (by example among other things) and if they punish someone who testifies for something they did 2 or 3 yrs prior, then turn around and tell everyone else they get 5 or 6 years to keep their trap shut b4 confession becomes unpunishable, what message does that send? That the IAAF applies the principles behind its rules consistently?

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: IAAF - European domination

        by definition

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: IAAF - European domination

          IAAF Rule 55.8 (the statue of imitations) first appears in the IAAF Rulebook, far as I can find, in the 1990-91 edition as rule 55.6, same wording as now. There was a major reorganiztion of that book, as the 1988-89 version had doping under 144.

          Ruth Fuchs last competed in 1980. She was therefore a decade outside the SOL when the rule came into being.

          Comment

          Working...
          X