Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lysenko out of Euros

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Lysenko out of Euros

    IAAF has revoked his ANA status due to whereabouts failures.

  • #2
    So the failures were not significant enough to warrant an outright ban, but enough to lose him the ANA status? Not sure how that works.

    Men's HJ has now become another event that's a nigthmare to predict in the Dutch contest. Apart from Lysenko, nobody has been jumping consistently high.
    Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Powell View Post
      So the failures were not significant enough to warrant an outright ban, but enough to lose him the ANA status? Not sure how that works.

      Men's HJ has now become another event that's a nigthmare to predict in the Dutch contest. Apart from Lysenko, nobody has been jumping consistently high.
      An athlete is duty bound to provide information of their whereabouts. If they continually fail to provide said details to anti-doping officials, they fail to meet the requirements of being a professional athlete and have no right to compete.

      Some Russian media have also talked about a possibly 12 month ban for missed tests - But I am sure more on that will come out.

      Comment


      • #4
        I know about the whereabouts rules. It just sounds strange that breaking them could result in losing ANA status rather than a ban.
        Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...

        Comment


        • #5
          And yet Meraf Bahta is allowed to compete after 3 whereabouts failures.

          T&F FTW!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Dee95 View Post
            An athlete is duty bound to provide information of their whereabouts. If they continually fail to provide said details to anti-doping officials, they fail to meet the requirements of being a professional athlete and have no right to compete.

            Some Russian media have also talked about a possibly 12 month ban for missed tests - But I am sure more on that will come out.
            Meraf Bahta has three missed tests and will compete, because it will be settled after the Euros and she is not temporarily banned.

            It's possible there's more to the Lysenko story and that it has already been determined he missed his tests without good reason but I still see double standards here. It's possible Russians should be on a shorter leash but on an individual level I don't like it from a credibility standpoint.

            A 24 month ban is in the cards.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Pakilo View Post
              And yet Meraf Bahta is allowed to compete after 3 whereabouts failures.

              T&F FTW!
              This is because only russians are requested to be "perfect". Policy of the IAAF... btw, she shouldn't be allowed to compete as well.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by trackk View Post
                Meraf Bahta has three missed tests and will compete, because it will be settled after the Euros and she is not temporarily banned.

                It's possible there's more to the Lysenko story and that it has already been determined he missed his tests without good reason but I still see double standards here. It's possible Russians should be on a shorter leash but on an individual level I don't like it from a credibility standpoint.

                A 24 month ban is in the cards.
                As per rules, if I read them right, athletes investigated for missed tests may only be suspended by their federation during the legal process. So, IAAF etc, I don't think, have the power to suspend Bahta while the legal process is ongoing, and evidently the Swedish federation have decided not to suspend her.

                As you know, ANA status is very different and essentially have no federation - Thus power falls to the implementation federation, the IAAF.

                It may feel unfair, it may well be unfair, but it would all have been avoid if; 1. Lysenko complied with anti doping rules. 2. Russia didnt syatematically cheat for years.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Sasuke View Post
                  This is because only russians are requested to be "perfect". Policy of the IAAF... btw, she shouldn't be allowed to compete as well.
                  Your anger for Bahta competing should be directed at the Swedish Federation. While the legal process into the case is ongoing, it is the Swedish federation with the power to suspend Bahta.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You're right, that's probably why. But it's still a double standard based on where you come from. Lysenko is a young athlete that should have nothing to do with what his country did prior to 2015. He should only be responsible for his own actions.

                    IAAF should either let Lysenko get the same benefit of a doubt or step in and suspend Bahta, and I say that as a Swede.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Sasuke View Post
                      This is because only russians are requested to be "perfect". Policy of the IAAF... btw, she shouldn't be allowed to compete as well.
                      Originally posted by trackk View Post
                      You're right, that's probably why. But it's still a double standard based on where you come from. Lysenko is a young athlete that should have nothing to do with what his country did prior to 2015. He should only be responsible for his own actions.

                      IAAF should either let Lysenko get the same benefit of a doubt or step in and suspend Bahta, and I say that as a Swede.
                      But they havent committed the same crime (if reports are true). Bahta missed three tests, potentially over a long period. Lysenko repeatedly failed to provide details of his location to anti doping officials over, one would assume, a fairly short time - He hasnt been ANA for long. One carries a legal process - as error may lie with testers, as we have seen before. The other is huge neglect of duties at best and wilful avoidance at worst. They arent the same.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        In short, my point is;

                        In Bahta's case, there is a legal process to establish who is liable for the missed tests. In Lysenko's, liability is established by the fact he failed to provide details of his whereabouts.

                        The only reason Bahta is free to compete is because liability hasnt been established, and her federation decided not to suspend her.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by trackk View Post
                          Meraf Bahta has three missed tests and will compete, because it will be settled after the Euros and she is not temporarily banned.
                          So it's entirely possible she will win a medal and then lose it shortly after.
                          Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Powell View Post
                            So it's entirely possible she will win a medal and then lose it shortly after.
                            Which I would say is preferable to the opposite scenario where she is suspended for the Champs but then is later cleared of any wrong-doing.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Which I get, but can't help but feel that if you were the woman she kept out of the final or who finished fourth and didn't get to stand on the podium and have your moment in the sun, you might think differently, when/if she later had her results annulled!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X