Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What happens with Caster Semenya and the medal?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Pego
    Originally posted by Smoke
    Chuene made a judgement call and it was a bad call.
    This is it. Everything beyond this statement would be a spin of some kind. I'd hold Chuene fully personally responsible for the entire mess.
    I agree. This fiasco rests on the shoulders of ASA and Cheune. I think "smoke" just has it in for the IAAF. A lot of the examples he gives don't match up to the facts that are being reported almost daily.

    Smoke,
    - which "iffy decisions" are you talking about; this "denial in the face of truth" by the IAAF?
    -The IAAF had a hand in this? Smoke, please show where, because from what I have read, the IAAF asked ASA not to allow her to compete.
    -the IAAF is "scapegoating ASA"?
    - have you been following the Semanya case?

    I don't think any of us mind a good rant about the privacy issues, but you have to put some meat behind your evidence as far as some of your other charges go; TWM (typing while mad) won't cut it.

    Comment


    • #17
      It's unbelievable that a Federation would allow this possible/probable predicament for CS to occur, and yet it seems that is what happened.
      Shame !!!

      Comment


      • #18
        I fail to see how she keeps her medal if she was ineligible to compete.

        Why would anyone even bring up the fact that it was not a "doping matter"?

        Comment


        • #19
          With the admission of Guilt on the part of South Africa, several questions come to my mind:

          Is it an indication that Semenya knew about her status before entry to the event?

          Is it an indication that her agent knew?

          Is it clear that the agent must have known?

          Isn't it clear that someone should be punished heavily?

          Should she now still be allowed to keep the medal?

          Doesn't the south Africa and ASA humbly owe the IAAF and the rest od the world a big apology (well there was a press conference but didn't get any remorse out of it)?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Dutra
            I fail to see how she keeps her medal if she was ineligible to compete.
            Why would anyone even bring up the fact that it was not a "doping matter"?
            I'd like the fact that there was no INTENT to cheat to weigh in the decision. Dopers intend to cheat; she didn't.

            Comment


            • #21
              Well then let's give Dieter Baumann back his career. He didn't intend for his toothpaste to be spiked!

              [insert whatever smiley you see fit, were they available]

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Pelpa
                With the admission of Guilt on the part of South Africa, several questions come to my mind:

                Is it an indication that Semenya knew about her status before entry to the event?

                Is it an indication that her agent knew?

                Is it clear that the agent must have known?

                Isn't it clear that someone should be punished heavily?

                Should she now still be allowed to keep the medal?

                Doesn't the south Africa and ASA humbly owe the IAAF and the rest od the world a big apology (well there was a press conference but didn't get any remorse out of it)?
                Here are your answers.

                Yes.
                Yes.
                Yes.
                Yes.
                No.
                Yes.
                "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                by Thomas Henry Huxley

                Comment


                • #23
                  under what basis could IAAF award a duplicate gold medal in this event? that's weird. how could they award 2 gold medals in this event? there was no tie.

                  i thought there were reports before that the IAAF had asked the ASA to withdraw CS before. chuene is now confirming that request then.

                  nature is mysterious. apparently it's not just humans where this happens:

                  martha maxine

                  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/sports/19racing.html

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I have to agree that it's confusing why the IAAF would let the result/medal allocation stand. Like rasb, I don't understand the significance of bringing up that it wasn't a doping matter. It's also not a murder investigation, a basketball tournament, or a ham sandwich.

                    There are two ways I look at it:

                    1. It's likely CS benefited from her abnormal anatomy/physiology. This kind of physical benefit was not available to others, and placed her outside the realm of what qualified for participation (this is a loose interpretation of the guidelines, as I guess there aren't technically IAAF rules in place that strictly define "woman").

                    Result: DQ

                    2. NCAA teams get DQ'd for playing team members who it is later discovered were ineligible for whatever reasons - bureaucratic or otherwise. It has apparently been admitted that, based on what was known by ASA at the time, CS should not have been eligible to compete in Berlin.

                    Result: DQ



                    Maybe I'm suffering from a case of legal and moral relativism, but I just don't see how this can be spun in a way that makes me feel like CS keeping her gold medal is "right."

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Here's my bottom line: do we really need to punish Semenya more than she already has been? Enough is enough. She keeps the gold as a memento of the end of a promising career and probably the low-point of her life. The next three get their medals too. I am convinced that she had no intent to cheat. She was just born that way, had no external male genitalia, was raised as a girl, and then BAM!
                      Let her be.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Marlow
                        Here's my bottom line: do we really need to punish Semenya more than she already has been? Enough is enough. She keeps the gold as a memento of the end of a promising career and probably the low-point of her life. The next three get their medals too. I am convinced that she had no intent to cheat. She was just born that way, had no external male genitalia, was raised as a girl, and then BAM!
                        Let her be.
                        No Marlow, unfortunately its not as simple as that. These revelations have shown a different face on the story that poses some questions here. Also remember that there were people who unwveringly defended her and her team now a lot of them are being made to eat their words, they deserve answers.

                        I see the point of protecting the person's personal affairs but it could turn out that she had some idea of the her status at some point (not trying to be the villain), and its not impossible that she naively thought it could have blown over, which in my opinion seems to be where it is heading. In any case, there should be some responsibility.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Pelpa
                          I see the point of protecting the person's personal affairs . . . (not trying to be the villain), and its not impossible that she naively thought it could have blown over, . . . In any case, there should be some responsibility.
                          She's an 18-year-old girl (at least she believed she was - she certainly did not think she was male), who was not advised well. Do you really think she believed she was 'cheating'? The 'responsibility' rests with others.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Marlow
                            Originally posted by Pelpa
                            I see the point of protecting the person's personal affairs . . . (not trying to be the villain), and its not impossible that she naively thought it could have blown over, . . . In any case, there should be some responsibility.
                            She's an 18-year-old girl (at least she believed she was - she certainly did not think she was male), who was not advised well. Do you really think she believed she was 'cheating'? The 'responsibility' rests with others.
                            If it turns out that she was competing in a category which she was not eligible for, then the medal is not hers. If she chooses not to return it, I wouldn't make a big deal of it. Nor would I make a big deal about calling her either a male or a female. She is a human being, who may have too many
                            "male" characteristics to be allowed to compete fairly against other women.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Marlow
                              Originally posted by Pelpa
                              I see the point of protecting the person's personal affairs . . . (not trying to be the villain), and its not impossible that she naively thought it could have blown over, . . . In any case, there should be some responsibility.
                              She's an 18-year-old girl (at least she believed she was - she certainly did not think she was male), who was not advised well. Do you really think she believed she was 'cheating'? The 'responsibility' rests with others.
                              For awhile, I thought likewise. Reports coming out indicate otherwise. Those physicians examining her must have told her a thing or two. I also don't see how this would be the first time she was likewise examined. She might be young and inexperienced, but nowhere have I seen an indication that she is stupid. She knew a lot more about herself than you allow.
                              "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                              by Thomas Henry Huxley

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Pego
                                She knew a lot more about herself than you allow.
                                I also assume she knew she was not 'normal'. But I don't think she thought she was cheating. Do you think that in HER mind there was the intent to 'win by unfair means'?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X