Tweet
Various news sources are reporting that Dwain will be cleared to compete in London. This is a good, fair decision in my opinion.
-
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
Curious to see how the British press responds, and/or if Dai Greene comments on this one. -
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
story now posted on front page says decision won't be announced until next week, but the BOA is apparently feeling it has lost.Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
That was as clear as daylight since Lashawn Merritt won his case last autumn, don't get why all this seeming surprise or wonder at the potential verdict of CAS - would be a real surprise if it came the other way.
Personally, I'm so glad that Dwain is about to re-engage the Olympic scene again and I feel he was sure of it all along, thus his late training spell in Jamaica and in South Africa during the winter.Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
I hope this means he's now added to the GB 4x100m team, they will need all the speed they can get to try and grab a medal.Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
Even AW, that took a particularly strong anti-Dwain stance has become more supportive of him. (When I say, AW, I got the impression that the views published a few years back who those of the Editor and not necessarily arepresentative of all the staff.Originally posted by gktrack
In Dai Greene's mind I suspect there is a clear difference between the two cases. He believes (wrongly, in my opinion) that Merritt cheated, was treated leninetly and has failed to admit his guilt. Dwain on the other hand has paid the price (many times over) for crimes he has admitted too and shown remorse for.
Anyway - I'll be over the moon if DC lines up in London.Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
Yessss! Fair decision and I totally don't care what David Greene will have to say about it!
I am sick of Seb Coe's views on this and especially Euro meets directors with their ban on Chambers while at the very same meets we saw so many ex-suspended athletes competing and even winning (PUKING)
Hope to see Chambers in Helsinki too.Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
Why? It's not their job to be fair. He brought bad press with him wherever he went, and any press about a major meet would turn towards doping every time, while that wasn't the case with someone like Maurren Maggi (who didn't write a book on it).Originally posted by pakillo
If someone's going to negatively affect the tone of how your meet is going to be perceived, don't extend the invitation.Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
Exactly! I don't get why everyone is so happy that the decision will go his way! While I agree he has been treated worse than other positively tested athletes, he still cheated. I'd rather they were all banned for good, or perhaps 4 years for first offences. The sport has become a joke. 2 years is nothing these days, especially as World Champs occur every 2 years. The longer we support such leniency with punishments the quicker the sport will decline in following and media attention.Why? It's not their job to be fair. He brought bad press with him wherever he went, and any press about a major meet would turn towards doping every time, while that wasn't the case with someone like Maurren Maggi (who didn't write a book on it).
If he runs in London I certainly won't be supporting him. He will be taking the place of perhaps a younger inexperienced athlete who has been training just as hard for years and doing it the fair way. What sort of message does losing out to a former drug cheat send to that athlete!?Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
Unfortunately, you've got it backwards there, as well-meaning as you are. As FIFA discovered early in the going (as did all the American pro-ball sports), you don't eat your own children.Originally posted by deanouk
With every high-profile drug case that comes down, yes the worse it gets for track. But if the penalties were stricter, the bad press would only be worse. Meanwhile, the real pros do everything that can to mitigate the damage, unlike track.
We can claim the moral high ground, which is a wonderful thing, but as you note, fewer and fewer people care. They want sport free of distraction, not sport free of drugs.Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
Just to note that if Chambers were caught now he would receive a 4 year ban for his first offence as he was taking more than one banned substance and this is deemed aggravating circumstances. He was caught in 2003 some 9 years ago and has missed two Olympic Games which exceeds what the IOC wanted.Originally posted by deanouk
I am sure there wouldn't be the present media coverage if it only concerned someone like Myerscough. There are many issues surrounding the Chambers' case that contribute to the current media frenzy and it's not all of his own making!Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
How many times have athletes (especially Europeans) received a four-year ban on their first offense? Remember, what I think was the last ruling in this regard was that in Europe, a four-year ban was considered a violation of European law (labor laws). I would not be surprised if such a ban without somewhat extenuating circumstances would be tossed. Besides, what do you mean about multiple substances, since it is not atypical for PEDs to be combined? Do you have to test positive for both of them, do you just have to admit to using more than one? If the latter, then it would certainly work against anyone being forthcoming and seems like a particularly poor incentive mechanism (of course, I am an economist and pay more attention to such incentives).Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
[quote="deanouk"][quote]I'd rather they were all banned for good, or perhaps 4 years for first offences. The sport has become a joke. quote]
I share your sentiment but if 4 year bans were legally enforceable we'd still have them. That's not the fault of 'the sport'.
For all it's failings, T&F is doing more to combat PEDs than at any time before. Sure, more could be done but we'll something closer to a level playing field in London than at any OG of the 70s, 80s or 90s.Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
WADA rules stipulate additional time on the normal 2 year suspension for aggravating circumstances and deem taking more than one susbstance as aggravating. Several European athletes have received 3 or 4 year bans in recent months including 3 Brits (although one was deemed for supplying). Lack of cooperation is now deemed an aggravating circumstance and liable to an additional period of suspension. Chambers did, though, cooperate so he may possibly have received a 3 year ban but other factors may stretched this back up to 4 years.
I can't say whether these will be challenged but I assume WADA believe they are legally enforcible. It does seem the consensus is towards a 4 year ban.Comment
-
Re: Dwain Chambers Wins
What's so hilarious about the CAS/WADA/BOA case is that this big-mouthed "Lord" Moynihan character, trying to prove that he has the biggest swinging ******, actually forced the WADA head into a "I bet mine is bigger..." contest that didn't need to happen. WADA head then proves to Moynihan just how inadequate his is by taking the case directly to CAS without an athlete pushing it - which is unprecedented, I think. WADA head says to BOA and Moynihan, laughingly, "that's not a ******." before showing what he has and saying, "That's a ******!" Now the Olympics will have Dwain Chambers running if he gets selected and it couldn't have happened any other way. The BOA and British "purists" have Moynihan to thank for that.
****** - feel free to fill in the asterisks with Crocodile Dundee's "knife"
Now, the IOC needs to tell NBC, Boldon and Collingsworth and the rest of big-mouths NOT TO MENTION IT. IT'S OVER, LET'S MOVE ON!Comment
Comment