Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Aziz Zakari

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Aziz Zakari

    This enigmatic Ghanaian, with a 9.99 best who has run 10.02 and faster on eight occasions, is back! 10.19 so far this year. He struggled in Beijing at the quarter final stage but had only just returned from his suspension. With a year under his belt, will we see him up to his old tricks, trailing in last in the 100m final in Berlin?

    Zakari got busted in 2006, around the same time as Gatlin, but I guess he doesn't have a learning disability, so he's good to compete.

  • #2
    Re: Aziz Zakari

    Originally posted by dakota
    With a year under his belt, will we see him up to his old tricks?
    You mean like making the Olympic final but not finishing? He's good at doing that.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Aziz Zakari

      Originally posted by dakota
      Zakari got busted in 2006, around the same time as Gatlin, but I guess he doesn't have a learning disability, so he's good to compete.
      To the best of my knowledge, Zakari's positive result for Stanzanol was his first, hence the two year sentence.
      Regards,
      toyracer

      Comment


      • #4
        Keep taking the ritalin toyracer!

        Comment


        • #5
          Low blow dakota, the Gatlin reference.
          on the road

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Speedfirst
            Low blow dakota, the Gatlin reference.
            Why? Gatlin's decision was a crying shame.
            "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
            by Thomas Henry Huxley

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Pego
              Originally posted by Speedfirst
              Low blow dakota, the Gatlin reference.
              Why? Gatlin's decision was a crying shame.
              Has nothing to do with the decision, the fact it was even brought up. Justin didn't make the decision. But since the decision has been brought up, again.

              Why can't those who were responsible to make that decision, be given enough credit of having made the decision, based upon the information they had. It is possible that they had the information available to them, to make the type of decision they made?
              on the road

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by dakota
                Keep taking the ritalin toyracer!
                Care to expound? Are you saying that I missed another positive test from Zakari?

                http://www.iaaf.org/news/Kind=131072/newsId=35234.html
                Regards,
                toyracer

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by toyracer
                  Originally posted by dakota
                  Keep taking the ritalin toyracer!
                  Care to expound? Are you saying that I missed another positive test from Zakari?

                  http://www.iaaf.org/news/Kind=131072/newsId=35234.html
                  I was trying to avoid spelling it out in so many words but I'm saying you're a bit slow witted and don't read very well.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Speedfirst
                    Originally posted by Pego
                    Originally posted by Speedfirst
                    Low blow dakota, the Gatlin reference.
                    Why? Gatlin's decision was a crying shame.
                    Has nothing to do with the decision, the fact it was even brought up. Justin didn't make the decision. But since the decision has been brought up, again.

                    Why can't those who were responsible to make that decision, be given enough credit of having made the decision, based upon the information they had. It is possible that they had the information available to them, to make the type of decision they made?
                    I respectfully disagree. They stuck to the rigid interpretation of the protocol without allowing for a most unusual circumstance. This was thoroughly debated here on at least one thread (possibly more). Gatlin did not get a fair shake.
                    "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                    by Thomas Henry Huxley

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by dakota
                      Originally posted by toyracer
                      Originally posted by dakota
                      Keep taking the ritalin toyracer!
                      Care to expound? Are you saying that I missed another positive test from Zakari?

                      http://www.iaaf.org/news/Kind=131072/newsId=35234.html
                      I was trying to avoid spelling it out in so many words but I'm saying you're a bit slow witted and don't read very well.
                      Why, because I didn't entertain your Gatlin remark?
                      Regards,
                      toyracer

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Pego
                        Originally posted by Speedfirst
                        Originally posted by Pego
                        Originally posted by Speedfirst
                        Low blow dakota, the Gatlin reference.
                        Why? Gatlin's decision was a crying shame.
                        Has nothing to do with the decision, the fact it was even brought up. Justin didn't make the decision. But since the decision has been brought up, again.

                        Why can't those who were responsible to make that decision, be given enough credit of having made the decision, based upon the information they had. It is possible that they had the information available to them, to make the type of decision they made?
                        I respectfully disagree. They stuck to the rigid interpretation of the protocol without allowing for a most unusual circumstance. This was thoroughly debated here on at least one thread (possibly more). Gatlin did not get a fair shake.
                        I think we are on the same page, but it appears some how, it got crossed up here. My stating low blow was in reference again to Justin even being brought up here. I'm speaking about those who oppose Justin bringing up his defense about the medicine.
                        on the road

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Speedfirst
                          Originally posted by Pego
                          Originally posted by Speedfirst
                          Originally posted by Pego
                          Originally posted by Speedfirst
                          Low blow dakota, the Gatlin reference.
                          Why? Gatlin's decision was a crying shame.
                          Has nothing to do with the decision, the fact it was even brought up. Justin didn't make the decision. But since the decision has been brought up, again.

                          Why can't those who were responsible to make that decision, be given enough credit of having made the decision, based upon the information they had. It is possible that they had the information available to them, to make the type of decision they made?
                          I respectfully disagree. They stuck to the rigid interpretation of the protocol without allowing for a most unusual circumstance. This was thoroughly debated here on at least one thread (possibly more). Gatlin did not get a fair shake.
                          I think we are on the same page, but it appears some how, it got crossed up here. My stating low blow was in reference again to Justin even being brought up here. I'm speaking about those who oppose Justin bringing up his defense about the medicine.
                          8-)
                          "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                          by Thomas Henry Huxley

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X