Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The problem with the ridiculous over the top Pound rhetoric

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • EPelle
    replied
    Pound said: “I think if you read it carefully, you’ll see that maybe some of the early stages of this thing were not as precise and crisp as they could have been. What they found is synthetic testosterone. You can run, but can’t hide.”
    http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html? ... andis.html

    Wrong sport. "You can cycle, but _______ _______ ."

    Leave a comment:


  • MJD
    replied
    "Calls to Pound for comment on the Landis case were not immediately returned, but WADA said in a statement it will ''thoroughly review the panel's decision.''"

    http://www.tsn.ca/mlb/news_story/?ID=218813&hubname=mlb

    Leave a comment:


  • Swoosher
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Hitler couldn't kill the thread, but Swoosher and his facts can! :twisted:
    wow - I must be more insane than I thought then :?

    I am surprised their hasn't been a Pound quote on the Landis case which could sparke the debate again

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Hitler couldn't kill the thread, but Swoosher and his facts can! :twisted:

    Leave a comment:


  • Swoosher
    replied
    oops sorry - continue ops:

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by MJD
    Please don't confuse the issue by bringing up facts.
    Yeah, way to suck the fun out of a thread!

    Leave a comment:


  • MJD
    replied
    Please don't confuse the issue by bringing up facts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Swoosher
    replied
    Just my two cents worth...not sure it actually adds anything to the debate

    Under the WADA Code (which all sports adopt) - positive test results only have to remain confidential until the athlete has been informed of the A sample result (not until after the B). So theoretically a sport could legaly announce a positive test straight after they inform the athlete of an A. Probably not the best approach which would be to wait for the B...but not illegal. Just thought I would state that as noone seems to have mentioned it. Perhaps that rule needs to be changed!

    Therefore a real "leak" is when someone other than the athlete or the sport confirm the positve at ANY stage in the process (even after the B they are still not allowed to - that is the Sports or athletes responsibility).

    The hard thing is how do you ever get to the bottom of who leaked the result when it could have been the athlete, could have been anyone the athlete told, or could have been someone else (lab for example providing the basic details and a journalist doing the rest of the work to match the name)? Not sure you can ever really find out - but there definitely needs to be sanctions against it !!!! monetery fines seems appropriate even as a deterrent.

    I think on the basis of a a few past cases, it seems at least one lab has a problem in this regard. Even if they don't have all the info - the journalists can do the rest. And action needs to be taken.

    Regarding Pound - sounds like everyone is divided which is natural. I think on weighing all factors up he has been good for promoting the cause and really got some action that may not otherwise have happened, but that tactic can only work for so long - it will be good to have a different approach (maybe we shouldn't speak to soon?)

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    [quote=bad hammy]Now you are exhibiting (selectively) MJDs comprehension skills!

    Originally posted by "bad hammy":r2sdqzjm
    Another suggestion would be that since WADA has the jurisdictional authority to interrupt and/or end the career of athletes, maybe they have or should seek the same for folks working for the various components (NGB, labs, etc.) and then vigorously investigate and prosecute these leaks.
    [/quote:r2sdqzjm]
    On what authority? WADA:s jurisdiction is not broad. They report in to IOC to impose certain sanctions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Smoke
    replied
    Originally posted by tafnut
    I'm on board with Pound's agenda: "I'm the big, bad Sheriff in town and you bad guys better fear me and stay outta town." My problem is that he goes a step further and says, "Hey, look at me - I'm the biggest baddest MF west of the Mississippi, and I make the Law 'round these here parts."

    It was his self-aggrandizement and brusque bravado that made him a detriment to his own cause. I do want a strong arm on my side, but not an egomaniacal bully, who thinks he's above the law.
    Agreed, but this is not Pound and that is my point. he is not the person you want. He is the worst of what you want.

    Leave a comment:


  • Quick Silver
    replied
    Back to Basics

    The fight against drugs should never trump human rights. If fighting drugs requires self-incrimination, then the drug war should be abandoned.

    The Pounder has shown a consistent willingness to subordinate human rights concerns to his anti-drugs objectives.

    Quick Silver
    Hong Kong

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235
    There are steps between termination and doing nothing.
    There aren't for the athletes!! :P (Well, OK, one step: a two year termination prior to the lifetime one.)

    But that aside, your post is an excellent example of thinking this thing through and coming up with useful suggestions to improve the system. And I definitely agree with your closing statement.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by EPelle
    The paradox of your statement in relation to this thread is that WADA is cited as being an entity which appears to yield power, but they have not the powers you purport them to hold to enable them to "vigorously investigate and prosecute these leaks."
    Now you are exhibiting (selectively) MJDs comprehension skills!

    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Another suggestion would be that since WADA has the jurisdictional authority to interrupt and/or end the career of athletes, maybe they have or should seek the same for folks working for the various components (NGB, labs, etc.) and then vigorously investigate and prosecute these leaks.

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Originally posted by MJD
    But if he, as you suggest, starts to decertify labs that are leaking, isn't that throwing out the baby with the bath water? What should he do(serious question)?
    That was just a suggestion, and in the case of the French lab maybe not a bad one.

    Another suggestion would be that since WADA has the jurisdictional authority to interrupt and/or end the career of athletes, maybe they have or should seek the same for folks working for the various components (NGB, labs, etc.) and then vigorously investigate and prosecute these leaks. Basically establish that only the athlete can divulge a failed A test and anyone else is subject to sanction.
    There are steps between termination and doing nothing. Some possible steps.

    1) fine them 1000 Euros/day between the time that the information was leaked and when they admitted the leak. This gives the lab supervisor an incentive to out the leaking event. If it is 6 months later that the leaking is identified, that is 180,000 Euros.

    2) The prices paid for tests for results that are leaked are set at zero, including any additional testing that is necessary. The organization gets paid x% less for test for a period of time. For a second leak, it is 2x% or more. For an athlete, the loss from doping is 2 years and then lifetime.

    3) The leaker gets fined X Euros per day and the athlete involved gets Y% of that fine.

    4) Any renumeration received for leaking is confiscated.

    5) Employees involved in the leaking cannot participate in any testing and must remain behind some sort of 'Chinese Wall' and will not have access to data on testing. The prohibition lasts x1 months for the first instance, x2 for the second, and is permanent thereafter. Since this is medical information, the organization and the individual would likely be subject to HIPA sanctions, but I am not sure there are examples out there of leaks from the UCLA lab.

    6) The leaker might be liable for attorneys costs from the leaked athlete in the case where the B sample does not confirm the A sample. They might specifically be liable for damages as well. Since the leak is usually intentional, treble damages might apply.

    7) The lab is on probation after the first event, and loses certification for a period of time for the second. There is a roll-over provision on leaks more than several years old.

    Anyone that does not think that leaking of results undermines the authority of the testing body is probably guilty of wishful thinking.

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    The paradox of your statement in relation to this thread is that WADA is cited as being an entity which appears to yield power, but they have not the powers you purport them to hold to enable them to "vigorously investigate and prosecute these leaks."

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X