Originally posted by 18.99s
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
What's going on with Shelby Houlihan? [can run in OT... back out]
Collapse
Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
X
-
It's become clear that Houlihan and her team erred greatly in getting her case expedited through CAS. As the McNeal case shows she would have at least been able to run the Trials, likely make the team, and depending on the timing of a CAS decision perhaps even run the Games. Also with the extra time to collect evidence it's quite possible there may have been a different outcome.There are no strings on me
Comment
-
Originally posted by guru View PostIt's become clear that Houlihan and her team erred greatly in getting her case expedited through CAS. As the McNeal case shows she would have at least been able to run the Trials, likely make the team, and depending on the timing of a CAS decision perhaps even run the Games. Also with the extra time to collect evidence it's quite possible there may have been a different outcome.Last edited by Conor Dary; 06-21-2021, 06:32 PM.
Comment
-
Great article by Robert Johnson of Let's Run (available on L-R) asking "16 Questions that Need to be Answered in the Shelby Houlihan Case".
He doesn't answer them, but they're directed at various people, including Shelby, Schumacher, her lawyer Greene, and various others!
And he doesn't conclude anything!
Based on these questions, and his stated doubts about her guilt, I remain strongly believing she'll be vindicated, and soon!
She won't be serving a 4 year ban!
I hope she sues the bastards who have ruined her career and her life---even if temporarily!
Comment
-
Originally posted by aaronk View PostGreat article by Robert Johnson of Let's Run (available on L-R) asking "16 Questions that Need to be Answered in the Shelby Houlihan Case".
He doesn't answer them, but they're directed at various people, including Shelby, Schumacher, her lawyer Greene, and various others!
And he doesn't conclude anything!
Based on these questions, and his stated doubts about her guilt, I remain strongly believing she'll be vindicated, and soon!
She won't be serving a 4 year ban!
I hope she sues the bastards who have ruined her career and her life---even if temporarily!Last edited by odelltrclan; 06-23-2021, 03:18 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by aaronk View PostGreat article by Robert Johnson of Let's Run (available on L-R) asking "16 Questions that Need to be Answered in the Shelby Houlihan Case".
He doesn't answer them, but they're directed at various people, including Shelby, Schumacher, her lawyer Greene, and various others!
And he doesn't conclude anything!
Based on these questions, and his stated doubts about her guilt, I remain strongly believing she'll be vindicated, and soon!
She won't be serving a 4 year ban!
I hope she sues the bastards who have ruined her career and her life---even if temporarily!
Did she have Nandrolone over the allowable limit? The answer is yes.
Did she present evidence conclusive to any thinking human as to an alternative source of the Nandrolone? The answer is no.
That is all.
Comment
-
Originally posted by guru View PostIt's become clear that Houlihan and her team erred greatly in getting her case expedited through CAS. As the McNeal case shows she would have at least been able to run the Trials, likely make the team, and depending on the timing of a CAS decision perhaps even run the Games. Also with the extra time to collect evidence it's quite possible there may have been a different outcome.
McNeal's case involves a tampering charge, resulting from a "he said, she said" regarding a missed drug test in January, 2020. Missing a drug test, even while doing whatever exactly they consider "tampering" to be, still isn't the same as a confirmed positive drug test.
Houlihan had already been suspended since January, 2021. How many runners in history have been allowed to continue competing in events like the Olympic Trials and the Olympics after they have recently tested positive for a banned substance? Can't be many.
Even if Houlihan hadn't decided to skip the middle appeal step (the step before CAS), why would that organization in the middle give Houlihan a temporary injunction (basically suspending her suspension) in order for her to run in the Olympic Trials knowing that she had tested positive for a banned substance? Houlihan doesn't even have any evidence to support her, just a lot of maybe this happened, maybe that happened.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RunningInCircles View Post
I don't think that the McNeal case shows that at all. McNeal did NOT test positive for a banned substance, Houlihan did. So that's a very different situation.
McNeal's case involves a tampering charge, resulting from a "he said, she said" regarding a missed drug test in January, 2020. Missing a drug test, even while doing whatever exactly they consider "tampering" to be, still isn't the same as a confirmed positive drug test.
As pointed out, McNeal did not have an adverse analytical finding, so is not automatically guilty like Houlihan. In McNeal's case, the onus remains on the testing agency to prove the case at each stage of the process.
As said, two very different situations.
Comment
-
Comment