Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"If you can't trust UK Anti-doping...."

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • "If you can't trust UK Anti-doping...."

    A very pointed piece now on the front page in the wake of the apparent exposure of a British doping doctor.

  • #2
    Everyone cheats. See Mossack Fonseca.

    Comment


    • #3
      This is all the NCAA's fault for not passing all of the British collegians who turned up positive to the British doping authorities.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by NotDutra5 View Post
        This is all the NCAA's fault for not passing all of the British collegians who turned up positive to the British doping authorities.
        I am pretty sure the NCAA has no authority to provide positive results to other organizations due to HiPAA regulations. I'd love to hear someone more knowledgeable weigh in.

        Comment


        • #5
          Dutra's comment is a jab at the people currently trashing the NCAA's testing system in a thread on the Things Not Track forum.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by gh View Post
            Dutra's comment is a jab at the people currently trashing the NCAA's testing system in a thread on the Things Not Track forum.
            You think??

            In all seriousness if there were British (or Kiwi) athletes tested positive for PEDs by NCAA I would want that information to be passed on to the respective country anti-drug regulators. However, I accept that in the current environment that is not going to happen.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Tuariki View Post
              You think??

              In all seriousness if there were British (or Kiwi) athletes tested positive for PEDs by NCAA I would want that information to be passed on to the respective country anti-drug regulators. However, I accept that in the current environment that is not going to happen.
              In the case of the LSU athlete mentioned earlier, the information was passed on to the national governing body when they contacted the school about it.

              http://www.trinidadexpress.com/sport...180715561.html

              Comment


              • #8
                However, if a top athlete suddenly gets removed for the entire year, it raises a red flag that the USADA/NZADA, etc. can use to track the athlete. In fact, it is likely the case that NZ could tell the athlete that either NZ gets access to those records or they cannot compete for NZ internationally. It is not anywhere near as big a hole as everyone is making it out to be. Yes, some of the specifics are not known, but the removal from competition is and that can be used be the federation.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by 26mi235 View Post
                  However, if a top athlete suddenly gets removed for the entire year, it raises a red flag that the USADA/NZADA, etc. can use to track the athlete. In fact, it is likely the case that NZ could tell the athlete that either NZ gets access to those records or they cannot compete for NZ internationally. It is not anywhere near as big a hole as everyone is making it out to be. Yes, some of the specifics are not known, but the removal from competition is and that can be used be the federation.
                  I know of one high profile NCAA athlete who's gone absent in recent weeks, including this past weekend when his/her school competed at one of the big relay meets, but I won't say the name so as not to start any rumors. Since this athlete is expected to compete for a spot on his/her nation's Olympic team, it would wise for his/her governing body to do some investigative work at this point.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    But athletes do pull muscles, catch pneumonia, get into academic difficulties, and have all sorts of other reasons for being absent from competition for a few weeks or more. Do we have to be suspicious every time an athlete doesn't show up at a meet where you or I might expect them to be?

                    Honestly, when I see an athlete disappearing from the radar screen (and it happens all the time), my first guess is academic ineligibility or (especially this early in the season) a previously unannounced decision to redshirt.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      As I indicated, the governing body can make it a condition for inclusion on the national team that the information from the NCAA be shared with them. They can also implement their own testing at that point as well (i.e., unannounced OOC test). This is really not nearly so difficult as people are making it out to be. Of course, if the home country (including the US, if that is the home country) does not want to know then it is easier to bury the test, but I think that there were a few of those some years ago and the results came out after a bit.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by 26mi235 View Post
                        However, if a top athlete suddenly gets removed for the entire year, it raises a red flag that the USADA/NZADA, etc. can use to track the athlete. In fact, it is likely the case that NZ could tell the athlete that either NZ gets access to those records or they cannot compete for NZ internationally. It is not anywhere near as big a hole as everyone is making it out to be. Yes, some of the specifics are not known, but the removal from competition is and that can be used be the federation.
                        NZADA are not going to take action unless they have the records. A red flag it may well be but red for what reason? Breaching curfew? Doing a Jameis on a female student? Shoplifting? NZADA have no right to make unfounded threats. The onus here goes back to the NCAA and its moral obligation to turn over all positive results to the athletes respective anti drug body

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by tandfman View Post
                          But athletes do pull muscles, catch pneumonia, get into academic difficulties, and have all sorts of other reasons for being absent from competition for a few weeks or more. Do we have to be suspicious every time an athlete doesn't show up at a meet where you or I might expect them to be?

                          Honestly, when I see an athlete disappearing from the radar screen (and it happens all the time), my first guess is academic ineligibility or (especially this early in the season) a previously unannounced decision to redshirt.
                          My guess is injury. There are plenty of minor injuries which may keep an athlete on the sidelines and, for an NCAA athlete, the big prize is the NCAA meet, not a relay meet. But we'll see.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Tuariki View Post
                            The onus here goes back to the NCAA and its moral obligation to turn over all positive results to the athletes respective anti drug body
                            I think we have a fundamental disagreement on what the NCAA's responsibilities are.

                            By the way, USADA has never tested Cindy Ofili according to the link booond provided. Can our friends across the pond confirm that UKADA has been testing her?
                            Last edited by jazzcyclist; 04-05-2016, 03:11 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Jazz, I read the website and it only declares US athletes, but it may well have carried out tests on non-US athletes - so the chances are she has been tested by USADA, but won't show on their site, given it would be easier to get them to do it than UKAD

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X