Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

IAAF should consider a zero tolerance rule on Drug Cheats!

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by TrackDaddy
    Originally posted by Pego
    Zero tolerance equates a police state, simple as that. Nobody will argue that it has benefits as far as governance goes, but the price is enormous.
    What price?

    The one the cheater pays?
    Look up the quality of life under a police (totalitarian) state.
    "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
    by Thomas Henry Huxley

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by toyracer
      Originally posted by AthleticsInBritain
      Everyone deserves a second chance.
      Do they really? Some would say once a cheat, always a cheat. There is always more than one side of any argument.
      How many people in the world have never cheated? Not very many. I remember the first time I was caught (taking a toy soldier from a store, maybe 7 years old); the event had a big effect on me and I never stole anything again. I did cheat at least once after that, though.

      Comment


      • #18
        The way I see it the dilemna is this: If testing was errorless then you could feel good about a life time ban...but, unfortunately, testing will never be errorless.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by gh
          why would they want to shed fans/credibility like we are?
          Exactly. If we had the same wink-wink testing the pros use then we would not be the whipping-boy dirty sport we are when the general public wants to discuss PEDs. And once every in a while a moron T&F athlete (think Manny Ramirez) would get caught, we'd suspend him for two months, and the same general public would congratulate us for taking the tough stand.

          But no, we play the tough guys, we treat all of our athletes from high school up as guilty criminals, the public turns its back on our sport, our sport is still dirty and the only folks who show up at meets are old farts and the athletes' family & friends.

          It's a great system . . .

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Pego
            Originally posted by TrackDaddy
            Originally posted by Pego
            Zero tolerance equates a police state, simple as that. Nobody will argue that it has benefits as far as governance goes, but the price is enormous.
            What price?

            The one the cheater pays?
            Look up the quality of life under a police (totalitarian) state.
            I see your point.

            But its a drug policy not a government.

            The only thing being governed is the policy.

            No?
            The fool has said...there is no God. Psa 14

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by bad hammy
              Originally posted by gh
              why would they want to shed fans/credibility like we are?
              Exactly. If we had the same wink-wink testing the pros use then we would not be the whipping-boy dirty sport we are when the general public wants to discuss PEDs. And once every in a while a moron T&F athlete (think Manny Ramirez) would get caught, we'd suspend him for two months, and the same general public would congratulate us for taking the tough stand.

              But no, we play the tough guys, we treat all of our athletes from high school up as guilty criminals, the public turns its back on our sport, our sport is still dirty and the only folks who show up at meets are old farts and the athletes' family & friends.

              It's a great system . . .
              Exactly. Heck, even the ad in the NYTimes showing their 2040 edition took a shot at PEDs in T&F.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by TrackDaddy
                Where I work we had a period where 7 people tested positive for drugs over the course of 2 months.

                We then went to zero tolerance which meant one strike and you're fired.
                Were those people where you work banned from employment in the entire industry for life after getting caught? No.

                The existing policy already is more severe than where you work; they "fire" athletes who are caught and suspend them from all employment in the industry for a few weeks to a few years.

                Testing is too imperfect, and the list of banned substances and the ways how they can be taken inadvertently too great (vitamin supplements, over-the-counter medicines, etc.), to impose a lifetime for one offense.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Don't Ask, Don't Tell

                  Don't ask; don't tell. That'd work.

                  Quick Silver
                  Hong Kong

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by sprintblox
                    Originally posted by TrackDaddy
                    Where I work we had a period where 7 people tested positive for drugs over the course of 2 months.

                    We then went to zero tolerance which meant one strike and you're fired.
                    Were those people where you work banned from employment in the entire industry for life after getting caught? No.

                    The existing policy already is more severe than where you work; they "fire" athletes who are caught and suspend them from all employment in the industry for a few weeks to a few years.

                    Testing is too imperfect, and the list of banned substances and the ways how they can be taken inadvertently too great (vitamin supplements, over-the-counter medicines, etc.), to impose a lifetime for one offense.
                    Actually our current policy terminates immediately for one positive.

                    So its tougher.

                    But because its zero tolerance, its very rare for anyone to violate it.
                    The fool has said...there is no God. Psa 14

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by TrackDaddy
                      Actually our current policy terminates immediately for one positive.

                      So its tougher.
                      The IAAF also terminates for one positive. A single positive results in a DQ and a ban.

                      The IAAF penalty is tougher because it imposes a worldwide ban on the athlete's employment for weeks or months or years, whereas your workplace policy doesn't stop anybody from getting another job in the same industry tomorrow.

                      I'm also sure your workplace also doesn't test for the dozens of substances in nonprescription drugs and supplements. Do they have a zero tolerance policy for Vitamin Water?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by TrackDaddy
                        Originally posted by Pego
                        Originally posted by TrackDaddy
                        Originally posted by Pego
                        Zero tolerance equates a police state, simple as that. Nobody will argue that it has benefits as far as governance goes, but the price is enormous.
                        What price?

                        The one the cheater pays?
                        Look up the quality of life under a police (totalitarian) state.
                        I see your point.

                        But its a drug policy not a government.

                        The only thing being governed is the policy.

                        No?
                        Not quite. They control people's livelihood. Gatlin was left with 4 years of not being able to work in his chosen profession. There is more. With the worldwide "war on drugs", the borders between PED's and "recreational" drugs have become less distinct. Sport alphabet soup bodies punish "recreational drugs" users, governments are making PED's use a felony.

                        You mentioned your company and their "zero tolerance" policy. May I ask you two questions?
                        1. What is the nature of business of your company?
                        2. What drugs are prohibited?
                        "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                        by Thomas Henry Huxley

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: IAAF should consider a zero tolerance rule on Drug Chea

                          Originally posted by Conor Dary
                          Originally posted by Sportsfanx1
                          After, surfing various website and seeing previous drug cheat(s) is already taking part in competitions and some is about to pop up again in Track and Field, I feel sick to my stomach. Track and field doesn't need those cheats back into the sport. IAAF/WADA need to take a tougher stand on their drug policy and make it ZERO TOLERANCE. No more second and third chances. ONE POSITIVE and you out for good no matter what country he/she is from/representing. Doing this will go a long way in helping clean up the sport get rid of cheats for good. Maybe they will think twice about cheating when they know there will be no SECOND CHANCE.
                          This wonderful utopian attitude would be great if testing had no cockups in it. But, unfortunately the testing procedure still has many flaws.

                          That's why tests are continuous. When an athlete is confirm positive, that should be the end of the line for that person. No More Second Chance

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by TrakFan
                            I think a lot of individuals that call for a zero tolerance policy within a sport aren't willing to apply that same rule to themselves in other (non-track) aspects of their lives. If that same individual conveniently forgets to claim a monetary gift or donation on their taxes, are they willing to accept some form of LIFETIME punishment from the IRS? If those same individuals were to "float" a check just before payday - are they willing to be banned from using any bank for the rest of their lives it clears early and bounces, or would they rather pay the fee and promise to never let it happen again? If those same individuals knowingly broke speeding laws (and were caught), are they willing to forego driving privileges for the rest of your lives? If their HS freshman were caught cheating on a math test, would they think it was overly harsh to ban that kid from attending any type of public or private school for the next 4 years? Or would they prefer to see him or her fail the class, and make it up over the summer?
                            Interesting. In the workplace majority of the employers if not all have a zero drug tolerance policy. Before you are employ they test for drugs and also do random tests. Gone are the days if you test positive while on the job, you get to go to rehap, now it's a positive= marching papers. News will spread that you test positive. This is very embarassing for individual, but it is effective. Atleast workplace won't be harboring drug doers. Also, many will think twice about doing drugs, because they now they don't have a chance at that job. And even though maybe some may find other work if they don't use former employer as reference, the cycle will be the same at next employer etc.

                            "Conveniently forget", there punishment for every thing in a society (some small some large) we all know what is the consequences for not paying IRS, writing a check and don't have the money available the time (a federal crime) some banks will cover up to a certain amount of overdraft....which the information is given to you when you join the bank.. list goes on etc.


                            Bottomline, if athletes feel they need to take drug enhancement to compete they don't need to be doing track and field at all. And, to present a clean sports to the audience/consumers, implementing the ZERO DRUG TOLERANCE will go a long way in helping move in that direction. Move forward with the ones that are competing clean and leave the Drug Cheats behind. I sure won't miss them as a consumer, and I doubt they will be miss by their fellow athletes.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              A zero tolerance policy would be appropriate if testing and case processing methods are infallible. Are they? That would be good news.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X