Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chernova and Zaripova banned for doping by RUSADA

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by polevaultpower View Post
    Letting an athlete in your Trials is a different thing than letting them in Worlds or the Olympics if they have not properly qualified.
    No it's not, it's EXACTLY the same !!
    i deserve extra credit

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by norunner View Post
      A two year ban is random? I am much more curious why Zaripovas results were anulled for very specific periods only, June 20 to August 20, 2011 and July 3 to September 3, 2012. Were those the only periods where she actually ran?
      That's what i meant
      i deserve extra credit

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by gh View Post
        Still not quite right. As the '09 World Champ, the IAAF gave USATF the right to name Merritt to the '11 team no matter what (in addition to antoher 3). No Q time is required.

        Same right is given to all federations in all events, should they choose to use it. It's up to their discretion.

        In Merritt's case, USATF has a "rule" (which is actually an "operating guideline") that to be put on the team you need to compete in the Nationals. Don't have to do well, or even run more than a heat, but need to be there. When USATF meet rolled around, Merritt was still under suspension, so couldn't satisfy that requirement and petitioned Indy under an unusual-circustamces role.

        USATF said OK, and he was on the team.

        He was not, I would note, the first to get such an exemption. Anjanette Kirkland got one a few years earlier because of a pregnany issue.

        Chernova is not the defender so she does not have a Wild Card to Beijing. Therefore, between July 23 and August 9 (the day Q closes) she has to get a score for the Russians to be able to put her on their team.
        Pregancy is a rather different situation isn't it. I don't know why rules or 'operating guidelines' should be bend to allow drug cheats to return early.
        i deserve extra credit

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by mump boy View Post
          No it's not, it's EXACTLY the same !!
          Have to disagree with you mump boy. Every country has the right to set their own standards for entry and to give exemptions of they so decide.

          Comment


          • #50
            But isn't the point that she wouldn't have any qualifying mark before the cut off date? Not whether her federation require her to attend the nationals or not.

            Comment


            • #51
              They're talking about Merritt.

              Comment


              • #52
                who didn't need to qualify (as champ). Chernova did (and was retrospectively DQed when she set her qualifying marks).

                Comment


                • #53
                  Despite being champ Merritt needed to compete in the US champs in order to take up his place.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Tuariki View Post
                    Have to disagree with you mump boy. Every country has the right to set their own standards for entry and to give exemptions of they so decide.
                    Of course they do but they shouldn't over ride those standards to accommodate someone coming back from a ban
                    i deserve extra credit

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Flumpy View Post
                      Despite being champ Merritt needed to compete in the US champs in order to take up his place.
                      USATF rules clearly allowed an athlete to request a waiver though. Merritt requested a waiver and his request was granted. Whether you agree with the decision or not, USATF didn't change or ignore any rules to allow Merritt to compete.


                      “USATF decided to approve Mr. Merritt’s request for several reasons,” noted USATF Chief of Sport Performance Benita Fitzgerald Mosley. “Since he is a defending world champion, placing him on the roster will not deny a roster position to any other athlete. That fact, as well as the clear message sent by the American Arbitration Association regarding his intent and conduct, resulted in our recommendation to place him on the roster.”

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        mump boy is completely unwilling to accept that Merritt failed a test but was not out to cheat is opponents. He is fairly convinced that TBO also was not out to cheat and bears absolutely no animus towards her. Until those two disparate opinions from basically the same facts gets reconciled coherently, I do not place nearly as much stock in mump's opinion in this regard as I otherwise would.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Blues View Post
                          USATF rules clearly allowed an athlete to request a waiver though. Merritt requested a waiver and his request was granted. Whether you agree with the decision or not, USATF didn't change or ignore any rules to allow Merritt to compete.
                          I wasn't making any comment in the decision, simply explaining the conversation that was being had to andyjgt.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            The article on the Home Page has this http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2...an-doping-case

                            "If the sanction concerns the period of the Olympic Games or if the sanctions concern the time of the qualification event, the IOC will take all the necessary steps."
                            [italics added]

                            This would seem to take Chernova out; any comments?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by 26mi235 View Post
                              mump boy is completely unwilling to accept that Merritt failed a test but was not out to cheat is opponents. He is fairly convinced that TBO also was not out to cheat and bears absolutely no animus towards her. Until those two disparate opinions from basically the same facts gets reconciled coherently, I do not place nearly as much stock in mump's opinion in this regard as I otherwise would.
                              TBO was rightly banned and served her time. Had returned too late to take her place in Osaka and UKA had waived their guidelines to let her in, I would have been equally aggrieved.

                              The same as i was to see Teddy Tamgho swanning around with accreditation in Zurich while serving a ban for missing tests.
                              mump boy
                              Senior Member
                              Last edited by mump boy; 02-05-2015, 09:59 AM.
                              i deserve extra credit

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                I agree she deserved a ban, but think it should have been halved because she didn't know of her 2nd missed test before missing her 3rd.

                                Also, why were/are passed tests not considered to annul missed tests? I think they should if there are enough (and there certainly were in her case, while there were NONE for Kenderis/Thanou!) And thirdly, if she'd switched to Nigeria as a result of the ban (of course she didn't), would she have still been banned? If the tests were UKA rather than IAAF I'm not sure they should be relevant if she chose to run for NGR.

                                Do you think Tamgho had something to hide then, Mump?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X