bbc.co.uk Navigation


As part of her linguistics degree at University College London, Christine Ohuruogu wrote a thesis on swearwords and swearing.

It might have helped her understand some of the words that were coming out of British supporters' mouths when she came storming past Sanya Richards down the home straight on Tuesday night to win Olympic 400m gold.

What a run. What a final 60 metres. What a 49.62 seconds.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions

There have been some wonderful displays from British athletes at these Games, but for tactical brilliance, mental strength and sheer determination against an opponent some thought couldn't be beaten, Ohuruogu's storming performance on Tuesday takes the Beijing biscuit.

Ohuruogu just doesn't do silver in major finals.

In her big three finals so far, she's won at the Commonwealths in Melbourne, the Worlds in Osaka and now Olympic gold on a balmy night in Beijing.

On the blocks, the stadium hushed, the blue-sleeved Richards was crouched three lanes outside her, stony-faced and focused.

If the thought of the watching world wasn't enough, that sight alone should have scared here. Richards' personal best is almost a second faster than Ohuruogu's.

Instead, it was the world number one who cracked.

What Ohuruogu seems able to do, better than any of her rivals, is execute perfectly the plan her coach Lloyd Cowan sets her, no matter what the circumstances.

Cowan breaks her race down into sections. He tells her the exact splits she needs at each point, at 100m, 200m and 300m.

The strategy here was to run the first 200m about half a second faster than she had in the semi-final, and then run the second half of the race at exactly the same pace as she had previously.

Even in front of 91,000 people in an Olympic final, Ohuruogu ran those splits to perfection.

Richards, by contrast, threw her coach Clyde Hart's tactics out of the window. Instead of running the first 80m hard, throttling back for the next 100, pushing again round the bend and then piling it on to the finish, she went off like a rocket over the first 300m and had nothing left in the final stretch.

A few weeks back, Michael Johnson criticised Ohuruogu for not competing on the Grand Prix circuit against Richards on a regular basis, saying the lack of regular competition would leave her like a "rabbit in the headlights" out here.

For once, the greatest 400m runner of them all got it wrong. As at the world championships last summer, she timed both her season and her biggest race to perfection.

ohuruogu438.jpg

Ohuruogu knew what she was doing, and the delight when it all came together was there for all to see.

When she was called to the medal podium, the former under-17 and under-19 netball international jumped around with arms raised like a goal defence on a trampette.

"You have to believe in yourself," she said afterwards. "It's not about who is the fastest or the strongest, it's the person who can hold it together when it matters.

"You train for these three days - you don't train for the Grand Prix. You work all year for three days.

"It's all about getting to the final, and once you're there, it's all about who has the greatest will to win."

Richards had said in the run-up to this final that Ohuruogu was "lucky" to be here, a reference to the one-year ban the Briton served after missing three out-of-competition drugs tests in 2006.

When the question was asked again in her victory press conference, Ohuruogu reacted with a mix of resignation and anger.

"I don't care what people think or say," she said. "I'm happy, I've won a gold medal, and that's all that matters to me."

It was hard to not to feel a little sympathy. She'd already explained herself a hundred times, not least in the wake of her win in Osaka.

Out in the bright lights of the stadium, jogging slowly round on her victory lap while towing a Union flag and waving wildly to the pockets of British fans dotted around the three tiers, the happy smile had never left her lips.

British women have a long proud tradition in Olympic 400m finals, from the silvers won by Anne Packer and Lillian Board in 1964 and 1968 to the bronzes of Kathy Cook in Los Angeles and Katherine Merry in Sydney.

Ohuruogu has now topped them all. Not since Eric Liddell in Paris in 1924 has a British athlete won an Olympic 400m title.

Merry was just metres away from the finish line in the Bird's Nest as her successor came home, shouting her on in the final few strides.

She believes that the victory had its roots in Ohuruogu's decision to spend the first half of the year working on her one big weakness.

"For a world-class 400m runner, the quicker you can do a one-off 200, the better," said Merry. "For her that means well under 23 seconds.

"Going into this season, Christine didn't have that. Her strength was never in doubt, but her base speed was.

"So this season she's worked more on her short sprints, her 100m and 200m, and got quicker over the shorter distances.

"Therefore, when she comes to run the first 200m of her 400m, she's not wasting as much energy. It actually feels easier for her."

Ohuruogu will return home to London as the poster-girl for the 2012 Games.

Brought up with her seven siblings just a few miles from the Olympic site in Stratford, east London, she will now have to deal with the same sort of expectations and pressures that faced another 400m great, Cathy Freeman, in Sydney.

But that's for another day. Tonight, she has a gold medal in her pocket. Mission accomplished.

Tom Fordyce is a BBC Sport journalist covering a wide range of events in Beijing. Our FAQs should answer any questions you have.


Comments

or register to comment.

  • 1. At 7:57pm on 19 Aug 2008, mauriceponke wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 2. At 8:05pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 3. At 8:05pm on 19 Aug 2008, Moutarde wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 4. At 8:16pm on 19 Aug 2008, NitramNella wrote:

    i'm sorry that people still bring out the same old tripe. Typical british mentality of find a negative wherever you can. I for one am delighted for Christine.

    She has never tested positive for drugs either before or afterwards.

    She is not Linford Christie. She is not Ben Johnson. She is not even a Kenteris or Thanou who deliberately AVOIDED drugs tests. The facts show she didnt avoid it - she wasnt where she was expected to be - particularly when a sports day was happening on her training circuit and she had to go elsewhere.

    the set-up for out-of-competition testing was complicated and blatantly flawed.

    I have inadvertently missed meetings before - diary cock-ups, traffic problems etc - crucial and critical elements of job - does it make me a cheat and malingerer? No it doesnt.

    Let us celebrate her success and be proud of her achievement.

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 8:29pm on 19 Aug 2008, lostinmaine wrote:

    ..these comments suggesting that she is/was a drug cheat are gross and should be removed! The missing of tests has been discussed ad nauseam by many better informed than those posting above. It ALWAYS seems to be forgotten that in the 18 month-period she was tested without any problems a number of times (..i forget how many but it was many more than 3). She was a 21-year-old university student...drug testing is set up at short notice and testers arrive UNANNOUNCED. She missed tests because she wasn't where she thought she would be when they showed up..her schedules...which juggled training and university ..had changed. It is highly probable that she failed to recognise that she was heading into danger by missing a test..after she wasn't a drug cheat and she was passing other tests. AND UK Athletics in its wisdom (..mistaken in my opinion..) do not watch oit for their athletes (..who are incidentally contracted to them) by reminding them and cautioning them when they miss a test.

    Christine OH (aka TBO) is not tainted..she is a great and true Olympic champion!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 8:29pm on 19 Aug 2008, omaghjoe wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 7. At 8:30pm on 19 Aug 2008, worthingwire wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 8. At 8:31pm on 19 Aug 2008, pentonpompey wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 9. At 8:37pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    To all those who say she is just forgetful and has explained her missed drugs tests.

    After every missed test you receive a warning.

    It is inconceivable that after two missed tests she would not have known the gravity of missing a third.

    BUT....consider this

    If you knew you would have tested positive which is the more desirable option - missing a third and getting a 12 month ban or testing positive and getting a longer ban?

    Hmmmm.....

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 8:38pm on 19 Aug 2008, eye360 wrote:

    I agree with NitramNella and lostinmaine, Christine missed three tests due to poor planning on both the testers and her part. I'm sure we've all missed the gas-man coming to check over the house as they specify vague times. These things happen, particularly given the UK's 3rd world transport system where appointments can often slip. The majority of athletes have missed tests in the past, she just happened to tot up three within a year. She's never failed a test, and has been tested many many times. Chambers did fail tests, and has admitted taking drugs, so should be and has been treated differently.

    We should be proud of her achievements, particularly with our gutter press making every opportunity to put her down. Few people would be mentally strong enough to overcome these things to go on to what she has achieved.

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 8:41pm on 19 Aug 2008, eye360 wrote:

    1welshbloke, if she had tested positive and chosen to miss the third test to try and get a short ban, the positive tests would have still been reported. She has never tested positive.

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 8:44pm on 19 Aug 2008, MikeFay wrote:

    She did not *avoid* the tests, she *missed* them. This is not something where she knew when she was going to be tested and ran away (as for example Kenteris and Thanou did in 2004), it is where you have to tell the testers your entire schedule well in advance, and then they show up at a time they choose and *don't tell you about*. And if you miss them - even by a few minutes - it's a "missed test".

    The independent body that looked at this case was convinced that this was a case of carelessness, not deliberate avoidance of testing.

    I have very serious doubts about the intelligence and ability to actually read of some people here. Why do you ignore the fact that there are highly intelligent people who have investigated thoroughly into this case for more than one legal hearing, and always concluded that she was not deliberately avoiding the tests? And yet we have people here arguing based on what - their gut feelings? That someone couldn't possibly make a mistake?

    I hope anyone who thinks she is a drugs cheat who is ever caught on camera speeding, for example, gives up their licence and never drives again. Or does your intolerance for oversight or disorganisation not extend to yourself?

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 8:44pm on 19 Aug 2008, dave_444 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 14. At 8:45pm on 19 Aug 2008, bikerwesty wrote:

    Lots of sportsmen and women have 'never failed a test' - even though many subsequently have gone on to reveal that they did in fact take performance enhancing drugs. There have been several recent high profile examples. Missing 3 tests has to be considered the same as a positive in this regard. I am sorry but I am embarassed by this medal - she should not not even be there.

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 8:46pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    eye360 - your comment doesn't make sense.

    If you have missed two tests but are on steroids/EPO etc....which would you rather do....would you
    a) Take a drugs tests and test positive
    OR
    b) Miss a drugs test which gets a shorter ban?

    Clearly the best option is option b.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 8:48pm on 19 Aug 2008, mxb160 wrote:

    Well, the difference pentonpompey, is that when Dwain was tested, he failed the test. When Christine was tested, she didn't fail the test. On numerous occassions. She was tested many many times during the year, including when she won the Commonwealth Games.

    Lets not also forget that many many athletes at the time had missed 1 or 2 tests due to the same problems. Mark Lewis Francis and Becky Lynne were two I can remember.

    And its not as if she knew the times she was going to be tested anyway. They could turn up at any 5 days during the week, every week.

    I certainly feel that she didn't do herself any favours when she missed the test, and I also think that the one year ban was fair. But I think the benefit of the doubt can be applied here as she was simply a bit foolish. But her performance tonight was incredible and very well deserved.

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 8:49pm on 19 Aug 2008, Esteffect wrote:

    I hope she isn't in SPOTY again because she was a distant last before and I don't think she'll be adhered to more than the others due to the missed tests.

    I hope she isn't the "poster girl" for 2012 either, for the same reason.

    The BBC do seem to like her, though.

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 8:51pm on 19 Aug 2008, MCFireboy wrote:

    Well done Christine - hope you never read all the negative cobblers that gets posted...

    So anyone got any problems with Rio Ferdinand being England Captain?

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 8:52pm on 19 Aug 2008, friendlymrsflip wrote:

    dave-444

    just to argue a small point most people do not KNOW why she didn't turn up everyone has just drawn conclusions as they are entitled to do.

    the only person who KNOWs why is Christine herself.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 8:52pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    oh and post 12

    You tell the testers your movements for the week ahead.

    It is inconceivable that someone who's living is dependent on this would "forget"

    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 8:54pm on 19 Aug 2008, wombletiltheend wrote:

    Why is Carl Lewis treated as a great when he cheated?

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 8:54pm on 19 Aug 2008, xenosys2005 wrote:

    Ironically, the amount of negative press she has received ever since returning from her ban could have been motivation enough to go out there and win on the track in Osaka and here at Beijing.

    Her performances over the course of the last 2 years, after taking numerous drug tests throughout the season, further enhance the notion that she wouldn't have needed drugs anyway to perform as she has done.

    I personally don't believe that she was taking any PES while missing these tests and I don't think they were intentionally missed either, but that will always be a subjective matter given the mitigating circumstances.

    Unless it's in her character, she was unusually subdued tonight when being interviewed in the studio and I've never seen her so quiet before and after races.

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 8:54pm on 19 Aug 2008, mxb160 wrote:

    But 1welshbloke, she didn't miss two and then decide to miss a third. She missed one, and was subsequently tested before her next missed one, and likewise after the second one. She was being tested. And if we use the argument that drugs cheats take tests and are not caught, then surely everyone is under suspicion and there is o point in having the competitions at all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 8:54pm on 19 Aug 2008, pentonpompey wrote:

    MCFireboy...Yes if you must know, for the self same reason. Just as well he isn't.
    Just the same as I would ban Joey Barton from ever playing football again...But thats a different story.

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 8:55pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Again - to those who say how many tests she passed - read the letter from the head of Balco to Dwain Chaimbers

    Here's a link

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-566744/Victor-Contes-letter-Dwain-Chambers.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 8:57pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    mxb160 - the fact is she broke the rules. and according to the rules 3 missed tests is treated as a positive.

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 8:59pm on 19 Aug 2008, levdavidovich wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 28. At 9:00pm on 19 Aug 2008, mxb160 wrote:

    yes 1welshbloke i totally agree missed tests should be regarded as a positive in a sense that it should be punished, and punished harshly. But the fact is she didn't test positive for drugs. So I think there are mitigating circumstances.

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 9:02pm on 19 Aug 2008, David Horton wrote:

    What Ms Ohuruogo did was miss three drug tests. She did not fail them.

    However by not attending the tests, she has committed a sporting misdemeanour for which she has paid the appropriate penalty of a ban.

    BUT

    I have mixed feelings about her missing three drug tests. If this was my career, passion, love and sphere of excellence then I wouldn't have missed one test. Ms Ohuruogo missed three. What is the world to think?

    Anyone with a brain would have realised that she would be the subject of a massive controversy. Team GB and UK Athletics has in my opinion, made a mistake in allowing her to race. The standard must be set to "without any doubt whatsoever." If that means lifetime bans, so be it.

    I'm sorry Christine, but you are the person who has made us feel this way. Britain is a nation of fair play and although you are 100% clean as far as the sporting body is concerned, I too cannot really celebrate this win as much as the brilliant shining examples we have seen on and in the water and in the velodrome.

    Impressive muscle definition btw

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 9:03pm on 19 Aug 2008, Richard wrote:

    Presumably those who are knocking Christine - some to a downright libellous extent (hello dave_444 @ #13, i expect your comment to disappear shortly) - also can't stand the fact that Rio Ferdinand is playing professional football at the highest level?

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 9:03pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Christine was magnificent - that I agree with.

    But the fact is she did miss three drugs tests in 12 months.

    And even if she tested negative in between there have to be doubts.

    Victor Conte's explanation of how easy it is to get a clean test when on a drugs programme must raise those doubts.

    It is not in the slightest bit slanderous to claim there are doubts.

    It is only slanderous to claim she definately used drugs if she definately didn't!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 9:06pm on 19 Aug 2008, Tinhead_Ned wrote:

    All this about her missing 3 drug tests are of course completely true, however I saw an interview with an athlete which made me think twice about this...he explained that the drug tests are naturally unannounced, but that the testers don't exactly go all out to try to find the athletes, so if someone is in a large training facility the tester might not find them and note them as absent. It's not a case of forgetting drug tests, but of not being in the right place.

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 9:07pm on 19 Aug 2008, pentonpompey wrote:

    Very interesting 1Welshbloke, gives serious food for thought.

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 9:09pm on 19 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    I'm well pleased for Christine, brilliant race. Kept her cool when everyone else around her was losing theirs.

    She showed the mental strength needed to win at the highest level, the strength many people doubt british athletes (british sports in general) lack. Well done

    On the missed tests, Rio Ferdinand missed drugs tests, should he be banned from representing England aswell?

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 9:10pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 36. At 9:11pm on 19 Aug 2008, mxb160 wrote:

    Well 1welshbloke I suppose I do have to agree with you. Unfortunately she will forever be tainted with what happened and in a sport so caught up in drugs scandals there always have to be doubts. I mean I for one was always sceptical about Marion Jones' performances in the past few years. But with Christine, I genuinely believe there was no intention to deceive. Perhaps the silver lining has to be that hopefully her punishment was enough to make the other athletes to be more careful and aware of the system.

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 9:11pm on 19 Aug 2008, cousteau699 wrote:

    Some of the people who are casting aspersions upon this Olympic Champion have lauded Phelps' swimming achievements.

    Phelps - someone who (at least once) was guilty of drinking and driving.

    I know who I think is a greater danger to society, and not fit to be a role model to the youth of today and the future.

    Christine Ohuruogu is a great Olympic champion.....

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 9:11pm on 19 Aug 2008, davidrandall wrote:

    Let's be quite clear. 2 tests she missed through her own poor organisation. The 3rd test she went to the track to train (it's a pain to get to by the way) found her booking had been superceded by a sports day so went elsewhere to train. When the tester turned up at the original track and phoned to see where she was the tester refused to go to the track she was now at (jobsworth I say.) I cannot hold her accountable for that 3rd test.

    She will have been tested at the worlds and again tonight. I believe her to be clean and think she should be celebrated. This contrasts strongly with both Chambers and, say, Blonska who got a medal in the Heptahlon despite having clearly taken drugs in the past.

    She missed 3 tests - 1 as much the fault of the authorities as anything - served her time. Let's now celebrate her gutsy run.

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 9:14pm on 19 Aug 2008, friendlymrsflip wrote:

    But if tht is the case 1elshbloke then why were none of the other competitors bothered when they all congratulated the gold and silver heptathletes who are allegedly returning frm lenghtier bans for positive tests. And noone seems to mind competing with the americans also returning from poitive test bans.

    Are we to assume that the 400m competitors are just more fussy?

    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 9:15pm on 19 Aug 2008, DJHDJH wrote:

    She has never tested positive for drugs, nor has she been linked with anything which would suggest she has been taking drugs. All the reports surrounding her missed tests concluded that this was the case.

    Therefore she is not a cheat. If you were being harsh you would say she is a fool, and she paid for that with a year of her career and having this grudging reaction to all her successes (which will also have an adverse effect on her earning power across her whole career).

    She deserved to pay that penalty because we have to have respect for the testing system. If you think that penalty was too lenient, then it is the fault of whoever set the penalty, not her fault.

    However to try and equate that with cheats who deserve to be drummed out of the sport is not fair. Christine is as clean as anyone else and has shown immense talent and desire to come back from a self-inflicted setback to become one of Britain's finest athletes ever at a still very young age.

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 9:16pm on 19 Aug 2008, TallBlondJohn wrote:

    "Ohuruogu will return home to London as the poster-girl for the 2012 Games."

    Wow, so we can forget about Adlington, Cooke, Romero, Pendleton, etc etc. Not from London and its London's games I guess.

    And earlier there was a headline about how she lead today's medal charge.

    So we can also forget Goodison who won today's first gold, Hoy who won half of them...

    Not standing up sports so they don't count so much?

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 9:20pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 43. At 9:20pm on 19 Aug 2008, Rob Olivier wrote:

    Reading 400 metre Olympic great Eric Lindell's bio I am really amazed by his Chinese legacy and ultimate sacrifices. Amazing man! What a hero!

    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 9:21pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    post 39 - just an observation - she was clearly shunned by the other competitors

    Complain about this comment

  • 45. At 9:22pm on 19 Aug 2008, chimiratastic wrote:

    What a fantastic achievement. Let's remember that every other major athletics nation either has athletes competing here who have actually FAILED a test, or they have no domestic doping control in place.

    The rapidly diminishing band of Christine bashers would do well to remember that when they dismount the high horse. Thankfully the majority can ignore this self-righteousness and celebrate!.

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 9:22pm on 19 Aug 2008, lostinmaine wrote:

    Missing three tests in 18 months is NOT considered as testing positively. It IS a violation of the drug-testing program and punished accordingly. BUT ' missing 3 tests in 18 months' why is that the rule? Entirely arbitrary. it could have been 4 in 12 months or 2 in 24 months. Those who set up the program (IAAF or WADA?) decided 3 in 18 was correct.


    But as to enforcement...for it to be a 'good' or fair rule then the frequency of unannounced testing would have to be about the same for all athletes ..the whole world. I won't bother asking whether all you well-informed commentators have any idea whether unannounced testing is consistently applied throughout the world (..in the US, for example)...i'll just tell you it isn't. Not even close...UK has THE MOST stringent drug-testing program including comprehensive and frequent unannounced testing AND the toughest penalties.

    ..and just to dispel another idiotic notion...at the time in question, Christine was NOT a professional athlete...she was a university student trying to balance those demands with a training schedule presided over by Lloyd Cowan. Yes, she was 'funded' by UK Athletics but that then allowed her to go to school rather than have a part-time job which would have prevented her from training. Yes..she was careless...imagine, a 21-year-old university student being careless!! But i bet she would rather have skipped a drug test possibility than a training session with Lloyd!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 9:23pm on 19 Aug 2008, DJHDJH wrote:

    When you say shunned you mean they didn't go up and congratulate her. Didn't see anyone congratulating Bolt (not that they could get close enough!) so I guess he's taking something as well. And everyone else as well.

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 9:24pm on 19 Aug 2008, DorsetDipper wrote:

    great run by Christine

    A sport is defined by its rules. She missed three tests. the penalty is a year's suspension. She served it, so she's free to run.

    Complain about this comment

  • 49. At 9:25pm on 19 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    If she was shunned, she was shunned. That's the other competitors own pettiness really. Not Christine's fault or her problem.

    She missed the tests, she got banned, she served the ban. Or is society that intolerant?

    Complain about this comment

  • 50. At 9:25pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    It is clear that unannounced testing is not the same thoughout the world.

    But so what?

    What does that prove in THIS case.

    In this case she broke the rules. She broke rules which are there to stop cheating. As such she will always have doubts over her.

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 9:27pm on 19 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    It is a fantastic achievement and one which is not that surprising. She is now Commonwealth, World and Olympic Champion. I've followed her career closely and I knew she was going to become a super 400m runner when she burst on to the scene..that finish she has is a dream! She did not fail a drugs test! In Ohuruogu's case, both UK Athletics and the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, in their separate judgments, said "there is no suggestion that she is guilty of taking drugs". CAS added that Ohuruogu was "a busy athlete being forgetful".

    In between the missed tests, and many times since the suspension was imposed, she returned negative tests, so the authorities must by now have a reasonable profile of her - compiled across not months but years.

    In between the missed tests, she was tested and each time negative - at the time Becky Lyne was on two missed tests..over 100 athletes had missed a test! Ohuruogu realises she amde mistakes but the system must also hold its hands up.

    The fact that she passed tests during the period of the missed tests is pivotal.

    I think a lot of you should look at the following article:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/2325245/Dates-prove-Christine-Ohuruogu-is-no-cheat.html

    Now these are cold, hard facts - some of you will not like facts as they will spoil your baseless arguments..facts get in the way of an uninformed rant

    Complain about this comment

  • 52. At 9:28pm on 19 Aug 2008, remote1972 wrote:

    iirc, Rio Ferdinand also missed drug tests and was suspended from football for a year, yet I don't see anyone complaining about him representing our country at football, or being made captain for that matter! Get over it people, she served her ban so she's free to run.

    Well done Christine, awesome CLEAN performance.

    Complain about this comment

  • 53. At 9:29pm on 19 Aug 2008, pentonpompey wrote:


    And earlier there was a headline about how she lead today's medal charge.

    So we can also forget Goodison who won today's first gold, Hoy who won half of them...

    Not standing up sports so they don't count so much?
    .......................

    Agreed.
    How on earth anyone can rate one lap of a track, to winning Three Golds in three different disciplines is beyond me.
    Arise Sir Chris Hoy

    Complain about this comment

  • 54. At 9:29pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    I think the point people are making is that there will always be doubts over Ohuruogo because of the missed tests.

    I don't think anyone is saying that she is not clean at the moment.

    If they are then I would argue against that. But what I do argue about is whether or not her medal is tainted in some way.

    I believe it is.

    Complain about this comment

  • 55. At 9:30pm on 19 Aug 2008, DJHDJH wrote:

    “There is no suggestion that she is guilty of taking drugs in order to enhance her performance or otherwise and, indeed, this case can be viewed in all the circumstances as a busy young athlete being forgetful.”

    That's from the commission that gave her the 1 year ban. That should silence any doubts except from the ill-informed who watch athletics once a year and believe everything the tabloids tell them.

    She made mistakes, rightly paid for them and still pays for them to this day in financial terms, and has come back and proved herself a great champion.

    Now welshbloke, are you going to have the guts to admit that this commission knows a tiny bit more about all this than you and that your beliefs are wrong.

    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 9:33pm on 19 Aug 2008, rockski wrote:

    Christine ran a great race, especially over the last 100 metres - she'd done her preparation for that. The quality of her running almost drowned out the nagging ideas I've had about those missed tests - not so much about the fact she missed them, but the fact that afterwards she was so lacking in understanding of how others perceived what she'd done. But maybe she was just being over-defensive against that tidal wave of condemnation.

    On balance I choose the Scottish verdict of 'not proven' to explain away her forgetfulness.

    Complain about this comment

  • 57. At 9:35pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Its not about admitting I am wrong or that they are right.

    Its about saying that she broke the rules and that doubts will persist as a result.

    My personal belief for what it is worth is that she is not a drugs cheat. But her actions in missing the drugs tests taint her performance.

    That is my argument and I am sticking to it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 9:37pm on 19 Aug 2008, DJHDJH wrote:

    Well they taint it in so far as it will always be mentioned about her.

    Doesn't taint it one little bit in terms of its legitimacy, any more than Ferdinand tainted the Mancs successes last season.

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 9:37pm on 19 Aug 2008, HaileG wrote:

    Seeing as their sport and chosen career are so tainted by years of drug scandels you would have thought that genuinely clean athletes would be doing everything in their power to make the sport as transparent as possible. What I mean by this is that every sprint winner has to live with their achievment being tainted by nagging doubts in the public minds as to "what are they taking". Colin Jackson gave a great example of this where a bloke stopped him in the street and told his girlfriend "This is one of Britain's best ever athletes and he never told drugs" The girlfriend replied with "Well that's what he says"

    Ohuruogue has done absolutely nothing to help in this situation and her actions are of detriment to every clean athlete and thus she does not deserve anyone's congratulations now. Rules are rules and they state that you only have two strikes before your out, personally I think that is generous of the testers, as a professional athlete with an obligation to help clean up the sport you should be willing to be tested at all times.

    We will never know if Ohrouogue cheated or not and there is no place for doubt in this sport...however typical Britain is happy to pick and choose their hero's and villans, hang up Chambers yet still gloat in Linford's gold even though both have fialed drugs test, pure hyocrisy

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 9:41pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 58 - exactly and this is what this is all about.

    The fact is that she did not test positive 9 days before her third missed test and 3 days after. However........doubts must remain as a result - however small.

    Why? Because some PED take less than 7 days to clear. I totally accept its is highly unlikely that this is the case but at the end of the day she broke the rules.

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 9:43pm on 19 Aug 2008, DJHDJH wrote:

    We know perfectly well whether she cheated or not. She didn't and we know it because it has been proven by clean test after clean test even through the period when she missed tests. This was acknowledged over and over again by WADA.

    She didn't cheat, she did break the rules and she got punished accordingly. Not as harshly as I would have liked but that's not her fault, it's that of the governing body.

    It didn't help the image of the sport but I don't see that as a reason to hate her, she suffered more than anyone else because of it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 62. At 9:48pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    DJHDJH - we do not know perfectly well whether she cheated or not! But we do know she missed three tests!

    WADA did not acknowledge it to the best of my knowledge.

    What Dick Pound said was that the BOA's ban was legally vulnerable.

    I don't hate her - I am merely saying that whatever she does will always be tainted.

    I suspect, but cannot prove, that if this was an athlete from another country we would be up in arms if our athlete had come in second.

    Complain about this comment

  • 63. At 9:48pm on 19 Aug 2008, DJHDJH wrote:

    Welshbloke, what makes you more qualified than WADA that you can have doubts when they have none? That's the crux of the issue. I know she broke the rules and rightly paid for it and still pays for it in truth.

    But she is not a cheat and it is just pathetic of you to suggest that she is (or that you have doubts about it) when the highest body that deal with this issue say she is definitely not.

    Seems to me you are just a sad cynical person who can't face the fact that someone can win and win clean.

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 9:51pm on 19 Aug 2008, pentonpompey wrote:

    DJHDJH. I don't think anybody here tonight has said they 'Hate' her.
    Merely that they cast doubt on the fact that she should have been allowed to represent GB at the Olympics.

    Complain about this comment

  • 65. At 9:52pm on 19 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    Of course, it looks suspicious..Ohuruogu has admitted that on several occasions. But given the fact that she passed several tests during the period of missed tests leads me to believe she is totally clean..given the fact that she tried to drive through London to get to a test venue leads me to believe she is totally clean (hardly the behaviour of someone who wanted to avoid being tested?) and this is what I'm talking about when I say the system needs to shoulder some of the blame..if an athlete has a good reason for not being there (in this case she had to relocate training venues) and then tells the testers she is on her way to take the test, why not stay? That is totally inflexible. On the last occasion it was due to a relocation of venue when there was a sports day..did Ohuruogu plan for that to happen!?

    I accept totally that there will always be this shadow over her achievement..that is a shame but Christine recognises that and is to blame for that..not totally her fault..but nevertheless she has to shoulder a lot of the responsibilty. That said, however, there is not a single shred of evidence to say she took drugs and, in fact, quite a lot of evidence to suggest she is totally clean. Therefore, in my opinion, anyone who suggests that she is a drugs cheat is completely and utterly wrong as this is a totally baseless argument.

    Complain about this comment

  • 66. At 9:52pm on 19 Aug 2008, Donald Donaldson wrote:

    just watched it now, amazing, the commentator didnt know what was happening it was that late! class

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 9:53pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    DJHDJH - keep you comments to debate please rather than lower yourself with personal abuse.

    All I am saying is that because of the missed tests there will always be a suggestion that she is a cheat.

    The highest body (WADA) totally supported her ban. As did UK Sport.

    Complain about this comment

  • 68. At 9:54pm on 19 Aug 2008, Mike Mullen wrote:

    "My personal belief for what it is worth is that she is not a drugs cheat. But her actions in missing the drugs tests taint her performance.

    That is my argument and I am sticking to it."
    -----------------------------------------
    There's really no point argung wit 1welshbloke; hs lke oneof those Kenedy/moon landig conspiracy nuts. He'll cling to his views in the face of all information to the contrary. It's sad but all you can do is ignore their rants and perhaps spare them a little pity.

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 9:55pm on 19 Aug 2008, powerfulMorayeel wrote:


    us Brits eh ......who like us for sheer double standards .............2007 Micheal Rasmussen is kicked out of the Tour de France and villified in the British press as drug cheat for missing drug tests..........fast forward to August 2008 and CO is just a loveable forgetful athlete..........too many questions and not enough answers for me. Another thing is why are the BBC commentators so scathing about other athletes who have completed drug bans and not this one ?

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 9:56pm on 19 Aug 2008, HM-Yorkshire wrote:

    Worth remembering two points

    1) that Paula Radcliffe - hardly a soft on drug users person - said it was the right decision to allow Ohrouogu back into the Olympic team.

    2) Ohrouogu was banned for the missed tests (as was Rio Ferdinand) the issue is whether the rule particular to the BOA regarding a lifetime ban should be applied.

    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 9:57pm on 19 Aug 2008, singinghannahj wrote:

    Christine, you are a wonderful athlete and I for one am extremely pleased and proud that you are British.
    I hope you manage to avoid all the nonsense that is heading your way from all these people who have clearly never forgotten anything nor made a mistake in their lives. You have explained yourself enough. Enjoy your gold medal.

    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 9:58pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 68

    I'm happy to admit that I don't think she is a cheat.

    My argument is that there will always be suspicions.

    Convince me why I am wrong to argue that there will always be suspicions rather than make rather silly jibes like that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 73. At 10:00pm on 19 Aug 2008, Martin Davis wrote:

    I've left it until now to read comments about Christine Ohurogu's wonderful triumph in the Olympic 400m. I guess I knew that there would be the all too predictable use of hackneyed words such as "tainted."..perhaps I hoped by now that the self evident joy of an enormously talented young women would have been enough to prevent yet another outpouring of bile

    Pity I was wrong..indeed it gets worse when you read snide throway remarks like "nice muscle mass"

    Can anyone out there responsible for some of this stuff explain simply and coherently(a big 'ask' I know) how missing out of competition drug tests which an independent legally constituted tribunal has determined to have been wholly accidental "taints" anything? Rules, like all laws are there to protect and regulate. However, like all laws they have to be adminstered with flexibility and common sense when it comes to penalties. For example, if someone injures someone accidentally they are not subject to the same sanction as if they did it deliberately. So it makes absolute sense to treat an "accidental" misser of tests wholly differently than someone deliberately abusing the system

    Christine Ohurogu is a brave and committed athlete who served a years ban for her carelessness. For her to come through that and all the associated criticism to become World and Olympic chmpion does her enormous credit.

    Oh, and to say the other competitors "shunned" her is a total travesty

    Complain about this comment

  • 74. At 10:01pm on 19 Aug 2008, Batson_D_Belfry wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 75. At 10:01pm on 19 Aug 2008, cousteau699 wrote:

    Most of the detractors' comments above can be summarised as: "Suspicion hangs over her achievement."

    It is a lamentable fact that in the past decade or so, the British media (and society at large) has pursued a policy of 'guilt by accusation'. A dozen or more high profile celebrities' careers have been ruined despite them being found guilty of NOTHING (nor even charged).

    If anyone posting to this blog wants to accuse her of being a drugs cheat (i.e. someone who TOOK drugs to enhance performance), do so openly, and I hope that she will then take you to the cleaners for libel. [Of course, such a post would be immediately removed, inasmuch as it would expose the BBC.]

    The women's 400m gold medal won today is every bit as shiny and untarnished as any other gained by a British competitor during the XXIX Olympiad, and I hope that Christine will be accorded the same reward in the New Year's Honours as all other Olympic champions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 10:03pm on 19 Aug 2008, Hoycules wrote:

    welshbloke...there will not be doubts as the missed tests were years ago and have been explained....she's been tested constantly during these games and during the world championships - all clear.

    Do you get a kick out of being a negative nancy? It was a great performance by Ohurogu, don't try and taint it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 77. At 10:04pm on 19 Aug 2008, Hitcho wrote:

    SHE DIDN'T MISS HER FINAL TEST. You give plans saying where you EXPECT to be in the future over a period of time and the testers arrive unannounced at a random time. Her schedules changed, and the rule should clearly have been "report within 24 hours or you get a fail". The system was flawed, not her. No-one can predict where they will be with absolute certainty on for every single minute of every single day in the future. And as many people have said on here, she tested clean on numerous occasions before, during and after her "missed" tests. She's as clean as they come, and the tests have consistently proved it. Which is exactly why the BOA let her run in the Olympics to begin with.

    I for one am thrilled for Christine. She's a top, top athelete, who has come through the ranks the hard way and she is as modest and happy and just fantastically brilliant as you could ever hope to see in a commonwealth, world and olympic champion. She's a brilliant competitor and champion and should be vaunted.

    Good on you Christine, you've made the nation proud and I couldn't be happier for you. Enjoy your success, you deserve it all, and cannot wait to cheer you on in 2012!!!

    Hitcho

    Complain about this comment

  • 78. At 10:06pm on 19 Aug 2008, WycombeDad wrote:

    For someone with a linguistics degree she gives a TERRIBLE interview! Both the trackside, and later 7pm Olympic review interviews were painfully bad. They just gave up asking her questions in the latter.

    Not that this should do anything to take away from her brilliant victory - but if she wants to make the most of her accomplishment she better improve her 'TV persona' or the media won't want to have anything to do with her.

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 10:07pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    I love the way that people on here like to make personal digs at people who disagree with their comment.s

    Anyway - as for me trying to taint her performance. I'm afraid she did that herself by missing the tests. (For me and many others).

    I am pointing out that in my opinion her performance is tainted as a result. There is that nagging doubt. I am 99.9% certain that she is and always has been clean. But I have a doubt.

    For you that is not the case. I'm happy to accept that without resorting to personal abuse.

    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 10:08pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 77 - In all honesty I think in reality the BOA accepted it because it could have faced bankruptcy had it not.

    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 10:08pm on 19 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    1welshbloke - can you be 100%, totally and absolutely certain that there is an athlete in those Olympics that definitely, beyond all shadow of a doubt not on something, or taken something?

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 10:10pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 81 - of course not - but Chris Hoy for example hasn't missed three tests - neither has anyone else to the best of my knowledge.

    Complain about this comment

  • 83. At 10:10pm on 19 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    She informed the testers that there had been a change in venue..she then tried to drive through London to get to them..what did the testers do? They went..well done!?

    So that blow's out the argument of post 74.

    She passed lots of test during the period of the missed tests..fact.

    Have a look:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/2325245/Dates-prove-Christine-Ohuruogu-is-no-cheat.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 10:11pm on 19 Aug 2008, Hoycules wrote:

    welshbloke - sorry if calling you a negative nancy was a hurtful personal dig - I do apologise.

    But seriously, you've made your point a million times, why do you keep repeating it? This victory is not tainted in the slightest. Maybe her victories when missing the tests are tainted but not these.

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 10:12pm on 19 Aug 2008, BaronPierre wrote:

    Good to see that fair play is still such an important issue for us Brits. My view, for what it's worth - this girl is patently a 'clean' athlete and has achieved something quite remarkable, not only in overcoming the uninformed gossip, but in the way she won the race.

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 10:13pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Its not hurtful - I just find it laughable that people cannot debate without resorting to abuse (I do respond in kind sometimes I admit).

    I keep repeating it cos people keep responding! What's wrong with that?

    Like i said - I believe she is clean - but for me it is tainted.

    I believe Chambers is clean (now).

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 10:17pm on 19 Aug 2008, Caks 1999 wrote:

    Being an Irishman, I have no love of Britain (for obvious enough reasons), but you had to sit back and admire Christine Ohuruogu today. Her run was absolutely flawless.

    Those running her down and dredging up what are basically slanderous comments about her being a drugs cheat ought to get their arses off the big comfy armchair and go out and push their bodies to the limit for four years and see how they get on in 2012.

    Any money you'll all still be tipping the scales at 16 stone.

    God knows that we know what it's like over here to have Olympians stripped of medals for drugs offences, it can have as much a deflating effect on a country as the success can create a new sense of pride in the national flag.

    I'm no expert on Athletics (I prefer the good old GAA, you armchairers should definitely take up watching it), but Ohuruogu was a credit to her country today. Leave the woman alone. Innocent until proven guilty. She's as deserving of that gold medal as any of the rest of them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 88. At 10:17pm on 19 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    There you go. The issue is not just with Christine then, it's with athletics in general. Until we get a period where athletes are whiter than white (no missed tests, no failed tests) there will always be suspicion. Its the corner that athletics has backed itself into, fuelled by the sensationalizing media and the publics intolerance to mistakes.

    There is no doubt in my mind Christine is clean. There is nothing to detract from her fantastic victory today. Maybe I'm an idealist though.

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 10:18pm on 19 Aug 2008, pentonpompey wrote:

    Well regardless of whatever positive spin is put on this. I for one will always have a problem with this Medal.
    I'm sorry if that upsets many of you, it's just how i feel.
    I'm glad you feel it in your hearts that you can celebrate it, that is your choice.
    By the way If i find out in the aftermath, that our other medalists have missed three tests in the run up to the games, be rest assured I will feel the same about them. But some how I doubt we will.

    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 10:18pm on 19 Aug 2008, cousteau699 wrote:

    Rules is rules.

    If any system lets someone 'break' rules and 'get away with it', good luck to them. The rules need then to be re-examined.

    Christine was judged fit to be a member of the British team (by the BOA) and an Olympian (by the IOC). 'Nuff said.

    Complain about this comment

  • 91. At 10:18pm on 19 Aug 2008, Jonesy76 wrote:

    I hate to bring further negativity to the proceedings, and whereas I know that a lot of fans of 'standing up' sports are so pleased that they now have a gold medal to add to Team GB's haul, I have to admit to feelings of doubt over Christine.

    Yes her run was fabulous, and a testament to sheer power in the final 100m, but it is done with a shadow over her.

    I admit that she never tested positive, but then again the British cyclist David Millar never tested positive through countless drug tests during his cycling career, and he never missed any tests either.........didn't stop him taking EPO though! He admitted taking EPO, and served his ban for 2 years before returning to the sport, and now being an integral part of one of the most fiercest anti-doping teams in world cycling.

    The team is Garmin, and every cyclist in the team (funnilly enough) is trackable via satellite should the drug testing authorities require their bloods, and the team even employs a European company that specialises in drug testing to take further tests.

    Cycling is trying every which way to clean up its act, but athletics is still using drug testing techniques cycling dropped ages ago.........
    And to add a further spanner into the works........
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7516484.stm
    Have read of this all you Holier-than-thou track and field fans.

    Cycling admits it has a problem with drugs......athletics admits it slightly but tries to brush as much as it can under any available carpet and pretend it's just the odd rogue athlete. Time to wake up and smell the roses, then maybe we can all celebrate 100% when an athlete wins gold with an astonishing performance.

    P.S. Mr Ferdinand got a miserly 9 month ban for missing his drug test. I would have prefered to see him banned for 2 years as a cyclist would have been. Operacion Puerto in Spain into blood doping found a load of cyclists who were doping. What never made it out of the cycling press and onto the back pages of the newspapers was the fact that Dr Fuentes (the dodgy Doc at the heart of this blood doping case) admitted to doping athletes, tennis players, and entire spanish football teams. Somehow, whereas cycling was going after the people involved with this huge case, the other sports kind of ignored it like the veritable elephant in the room.
    Football has so much money it can somehow afford to pretend it's not happening, and I'd love to see them all tested even as harshly as the athletes - let alone the modern cyclists.

    But all football fans love to pretend that their sport is clean as a whistle........

    YEAH RIGHT!

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 10:21pm on 19 Aug 2008, Batson_D_Belfry wrote:

    "She informed the testers that there had been a change in venue..she then tried to drive through London to get to them..what did the testers do? They went..well done!?

    So that blow's out the argument of post 74."

    The testers left as they had stayed longer than they were obliged to. If you were trying to set up a schedule where you could avoid tests and then plead an accident then Ohoruogo's would have done the trick well - and you would know the testers go once the time was up.

    If you are wanting to believe all is fine because Britain's got a gold, of course it is easy to look at this as just cynical and to swallow the excuses willingly, and there is no changing that view. But drug cheating and the methods to avoid the tests that matter are in the real world a lot more sophisticated than this naive approach.

    I don't know which side Ohoruogo is on, and never will, but there is enough smoke here to leave my reason not dazzled by the shine of the gold.

    Complain about this comment

  • 93. At 10:21pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Let me explain perhaps. As it appears my views have a few knockers.

    Carl Lewis failed three drugs tests
    Linford Christie failed one.

    They also passed all others.

    Do I believe they were clean. Actually yes I do.

    Do I believe they are tainted somewhat as a result.

    Yes I do.

    There is a big difference in belief and fact after all. The fact is they failed tests at some point. My belief is they were clean if you see what I mean.

    Same with Christine - I believe she is clean.

    Just have my doubts.

    However it was a fantastic race - and I was urging her on - its Team GB after all - can;t help having my doubts thats all!

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 10:22pm on 19 Aug 2008, MikeFay wrote:

    Post 20 - you haven't even made the slightest effort to find out why she missed the tests, have you? The independent investigation body, made of people who - lets face it, are quite possibly smarter than either of us - did. And they came to the opposite conclusion to you.

    And how about this quote from the NY Times from an athlete in the 400 metres race "She had a tough break. but she never tested positive, so I mean I think that she should have been reinstated". That's from the American who came third. Your Balco statements are also pointless - if it is that easy for a drugs cheat to test clean, why on earth would they miss a drugs test?

    I'd also note that she won the slowest women's Olympic 400m since 1972, on what is widely believed to be a fast track, so it wasn't a superhuman performance, either.

    Complain about this comment

  • 95. At 10:24pm on 19 Aug 2008, cousteau699 wrote:

    How different might have been the tenor of the above comments if this was the first gold of these Games, rather than one of a likely record haul...?

    Now some golds are better than others, are they?

    No.

    Complain about this comment

  • 96. At 10:24pm on 19 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    At the time when Ohuruogu missed her 3 drugs tests (again people seem to be intentionally forgetting the fact that she passed other tests in this period..a matter of days before in some instances), Becky Lyne had missed 2 drugs tests and over 100 athletes..it begs the question why had so many athletes missed tests?

    So it is very possible that some of our heroes in the past and present have unintentionally, just like Christine, missed tests..it's just that we never get to hear of it and in fact perhaps a lot of them were thinking "there but for the grace of god go i" when Christine missed her 3 tests.

    Totally clean. Not a single shred of evidence to prove otherwise. She is a phenomenal athlete and if those who doubted her had followed her career throughout then they would have realised she was something special...Commonwealth, World and Olympic Champion and not one failed drugs tests and yet she will have been tested so many more times above the average..facts..facts..facts!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 10:26pm on 19 Aug 2008, John Holden-Peters wrote:

    Thank you DJHDJH, #40, a common-sense conclusion based on knowledge of what actually happened, something rather scarce in the majority of contributions.

    Many congratulations Christine: you have done us proud at a time when the former glory of GB in the track events is almost a distant memory.

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 10:27pm on 19 Aug 2008, sandsintime wrote:

    Christine Ohuruogu - wonderful performance. I don't believe she took PEDs, the evidence suggests she didn't.

    No one has suggested why drugs might be especially helpful in the 400m, btw: in the all-out power/explosive events - 100 and 200m sprints, triple jump, throwing, weightlifting - one can see why they are used, but in the 400m, ordinary strength-training and speed-training need to be combined with unusual mental toughness. Unless I'm missing something obvious, the last thing an athlete would need is additional unnecessary muscle mass, and speed-enhancers would be counter-productive.

    I didn't have a problem with her interview. Why someone might not be at their most eloquent and relaxed when her system is flooded with (naturally-produced) potent chemicals is not really hard to understand. Is it?

    Complain about this comment

  • 99. At 10:29pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Ekaterini Thanou has similarly never tested positive.

    (I'm happy to admit that her evasive tactics are very suspicious).

    She was cleared by the Greek athletic federation of all charges in 2005.

    The IOC would not allow her to compete in the games.

    Level playing field?



    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 10:30pm on 19 Aug 2008, flyingsherpa wrote:

    I cannot believe how many negative comments there are out there.

    Whatever you want to believe, the fact of the matter is that Christine will have been tested lots of times both in and out of competition over the last year or so since her return to racing and has been clean. I'm assuming/hoping that she would never do anything stupid like doping and think it's awesome what she's achieved today.

    So just move on everyone and give the girl recognition for what she achieved today!!!!



    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 10:30pm on 19 Aug 2008, eyeswiredopen wrote:

    Poster74 is absolutely correct. Bringing in the lawyers and suing for is a favourite tactic of the guilty, the yanks are good at that.
    A few years ago there was a news article that police found human growth hormone while investigating a robbery in the home of one of Austalia's national swimming coaches.I think at the time he claimed it was 'a plant' -- yeah right.
    Sam New Zealand.

    Complain about this comment

  • 102. At 10:30pm on 19 Aug 2008, SanaaSoleil wrote:

    @ Post 78. Wycombe Dad

    Her interview was poor most likely because she no longer trusts the sensationalist British media to relay her words correctly! Besides, having a linguistics degree probably makes you more fluent in several languages that conversant in one...so your point in MOOT!

    Onto the topic at hand. Christine...great show. To the people who can only see the bad side of this wonderful achievement, please emigrate to Australia/France already and change your citizenship. Britain does not need you.

    Go Christine!

    Sanaa

    Complain about this comment

  • 103. At 10:31pm on 19 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    1welshbloke,

    Ohuruogu actively tried to drive through London to get to a test

    Thanou stagemanaged a car crash to avoid a test.

    You see the difference?

    Complain about this comment

  • 104. At 10:31pm on 19 Aug 2008, Npd McNpd wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 105. At 10:33pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 103 - yes I personally do see the difference based on that......

    however thats not how the greek federation see it is it?

    They cleared both.

    We cleared Christine.


    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 10:35pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Indeed all evasion charges against Thanou were dropped.

    In other words there is no guilty verdict of a stage managed crash however much it may seem that way.

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 10:36pm on 19 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    Is it not fact that she tried to drive through London to get to the testers but they wouldn't wait for her (she had had to be relocated..unbeknown to her in advance) ?

    I only mention this for like the 5th time because there seem to be some uninitiated people on this board who absolutely refuse to listen to fact. Now, I undertand that facts spoil a goold old bile-ridden rant but they are kinda important to an argument

    Post 104 - moronic.

    Complain about this comment

  • 108. At 10:39pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 107 - personally I think it true that she did.

    However how is it a fact? That is what she CLAIMS.

    There is as far as I know no evidence to support this save for what she says.

    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 10:39pm on 19 Aug 2008, MikeFay wrote:

    Post 91 - the Tour de France got the EPO cheats because they tested them often enough to catch them. The climber who was caught out had been tested a number of times already before one test caught him out. Fortunately, while it may take ten tests to catch them, once they're caught they're out.

    Missing tests - I work at a university, and frankly the ability of otherwise intelligent 21 year olds to miss appointments is quite astounding (and yes, their careers, or at least grades, definitely can depend upon their making appointments).

    post 80 - that's why they caved in to Dwain Chambers then. Oh wait, they didn't.

    Complain about this comment

  • 110. At 10:39pm on 19 Aug 2008, marineirishlad wrote:

    post 37 was totally inappropriate another phelps basher. he served his prohibation and gave a talk to high school kids about his mistake his class shines through
    didnt see ohuruogu do the same with the missed drug tests but thats nothing to do with her achievement congrats to her and to team gb totally surprised me this year
    p.s. ireland got its first medals today guaranteed 2 bronzes in the boxing maybe more well done kenny and paddy

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 10:39pm on 19 Aug 2008, mblooman2001 wrote:

    1welshbloke it seems to me you are basing your view that Christine's win was tainted because of the "doubt" because she missed 3 drugs tests (which were not concurrent as u previously mentioned she was tested before and after tests and was clean, just the agreed time she missed the test).

    You further mention that Linford Christie and Carl Lewis took drugs and have tainted their achievement. If you feel that is the case, do you feel that ANYONE who has taking drugs in their life is tainted? How about Barack Obama who admitted to taking cannibis. As did David Cameron. If both are elected leaders, will they been tainted?

    What you have to compare is the situation with Marion Jones, Dwain Chambers etc who won medals whilst ON drugs.

    Then take Linford, Christine, even Diane Modal suffered a ban, but was late cleared. They won their medals CLEAN.

    If you win something clean, that can never be taken away from you and despite what you later do, should not detract from that original achievement.

    Your view that if someone takes drugs (or in christine's can missed 3 - and what happened to innocent until proven guilty?) will taint their achievement will mean that there are so many individuals that are tainted that u couldn't name them all. People make mistakes, i think you should learn to forgive and forget

    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 10:40pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Difference was the legal arguments were not the same.

    Complain about this comment

  • 113. At 10:41pm on 19 Aug 2008, Npd McNpd wrote:

    "Post 104 - moronic."

    And to prove my point about the zealots, there we have it. No coherent argument, so just resort to insults.

    Complain about this comment

  • 114. At 10:43pm on 19 Aug 2008, scallopsaregreat wrote:

    Post 104 - on the contrary the biggest rants are from those who are against Christine not those who are for her. Take 1welshbloke as the prime example! (Sorry to have another go at you!)

    On the subject of 1welshbloke - post 82 - one of the reasons Chris Hoy may not have missed 3 tests is because he can predict much more certainly where he will be during training as the cyclists train pretty much exclusively in one place. In addition Christine is the one who brought this rule very much to the forefront and to the attention of all athletes. I know that since this happened many athletes have been decidely more canny and careful about specifying the times and locations they will be at than they were before her ban. It has "sharpened their focus" shall we say.

    On to her achievement today, however - excellent. You go girl!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 115. At 10:43pm on 19 Aug 2008, MikeFay wrote:

    1welshbloke - her defence convinced the independent committee, headed by lawyer Charles Flint QC. I doubt he's a woolly minded push-over.

    Complain about this comment

  • 116. At 10:45pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 111 - Well I'm tainted myself then.

    The argument about Cameron and Obama is somewhat irrelevant surely - I would hardly call cannabis a performance enhancing drug in the context of what they do.

    In the context of Ohuruogo - I am merely stating that in my opinion her performance is tainted based on what has happened in the past.

    I just feel we treat people based on the outcome we want - Gold in this case.

    Notice the differing treatment of Ohuruogo and Thanou in the press for example. One is innocent - one is a drugs cheat.

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 10:48pm on 19 Aug 2008, namdam1979 wrote:

    I have to say there is a lot of rubbish on here about Christine. I have to give her the benefit of a doubt. For two, among other reason

    1) When she realised her situation she got almost straight away (i may be wrong on this) and she was test continually whilst banned (as pointed out in previous post).

    2) If Rio Ferdinand can miss a test when the tester are in the same building as he is, serve his ban and come back to represent his country why cant Christine.

    We have an innocent till proven guilty policy in this country. She has missed a her test for drugs, for whatever the reason and served her time.

    Now untill proven otherwise lets get behind her.

    Complain about this comment

  • 118. At 10:53pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Can I just say I am perfectly happy that she has served her ban and can and should be representing Team GB.

    I think she is clean.

    I think her performance was fantastic.

    Sadly I also think that she is tainted as a result of the missed tests.

    Why?

    I can't put my finger on it. I wish I could. Because for me I cannot see why anyone would put their sporting career on the line by missing a third test. It would play on MY mind all the time. Every day I would wake up and think I must inform the authorities.

    But hey that's just me.

    Complain about this comment

  • 119. At 10:53pm on 19 Aug 2008, seanphan wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 120. At 10:54pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    post 119 - there is no evidence of cheating. rule breaking yes. cheating no. there may be a suspicion but that is all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 121. At 10:55pm on 19 Aug 2008, seanphan wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 122. At 10:55pm on 19 Aug 2008, Anderson__8 wrote:

    Of course it is wrong to assume ohurougu was taking drugs because she missed 3 tests. It seems highly unlikely given her consistently high levels of performance both prior to and since returning from her ban and I am almost certain her gold medal was a result of a very talented athlete training exceptionally hard and well.

    HOWEVER, for me this situation raises questions about the system rather than christine ohurougus integrity.

    1. what was to stop dwain chambers 'accidentaly' missing 3 drugs tests? maybe he would have been competing at these olympics despite the fact he was definitely taking drugs... although to be fair, even on all the drugs in the world i dont think hed have got anywhere near usain bolt

    2. all those people who said 'the tests are un-announced, so how could she have deliberately missed them!?'... easy, just give the testers the wrong schedule!

    questions have to be asked of whether she shouldve been at the olympics at all... but she was and im almost certain she is a clean athlete, so fair play, a brilliant performance.

    and finally, those who have compared this situation to that of rio ferdinand... just a few points:
    - Rio only missed one un-announced test, not 3
    - he also realised his error later in the day and called the testers and offered to take the drugs test on THE SAME DAY... the testers refused
    - i personally feel he was made an unfair example of as some footballers who tested positive recieved lesser punishments! I can understand identical punishments, but how can a guilty athletes punishment be LESS than an athlete who misses a test!?

    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 10:55pm on 19 Aug 2008, levdavidovich wrote:

    The testers were unhelpful, absurd, and acting outside of their own rules. Christine should never have been banned.

    The haters on here are depressing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 10:56pm on 19 Aug 2008, Batson_D_Belfry wrote:

    "Then take Linford, Christine, even Diane Modal suffered a ban, but was late cleared. They won their medals CLEAN."

    Linford Christie clean? He was caught.

    And the Modahl situation was somewhat more complex as well - her clearance was based on alleged mishandling of the sample in Portugal. Initially BAF unanimously found against her, then on appeal decided there was "reasonable doubt". Hardly a ringing endorsement.

    This does seem to highlight that for those who don't want to listen to the questions there really is one rule if they're British and one if they're "foreigners".

    If you are only going to count people as drug cheats who are practically caught "in flagrante" at the time of competition then a lot of other reputations will need to be re-established, and the drug testing regimes that exist will become all but worthless.

    Complain about this comment

  • 125. At 10:57pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 122 - Chambers never tested positive - he admitted it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 10:57pm on 19 Aug 2008, seanphan wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 127. At 10:58pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Oops correction - he tested postive retrospectively - sorry!

    Complain about this comment

  • 128. At 10:59pm on 19 Aug 2008, Unbiased_Pundit wrote:

    I do wish people would stop talking about how the other athletes shunned Ohuruogu as if that means something - the other athletes know just as little about Christine's missed drugs tests as the uninformed masses above.

    As I understand it, appointments for drug tests are not made, athletes set out their whereabouts and then the testers turn up at the place the athlete is supposed to be unannounced, then if they're not there it's classed as a missed drugs test. Coming up with a rigorous schedule of your week and then sticking to it unerringly is not always possible, particularly if you have other commitments, such as University. I can understand the need for this system because preparations can be made in advance for doping athletes if they know they are about to be tested. However, it is not possible for an athlete to test clean on cue when they are doping. Since the committee unanimously decided that missing these tests was not deliberate, and they know far more than your average Joe about Christine's mittigating circumstances and the nature of the testing programme, we should accept that she has paid the price for her oversight and get behind our athlete!

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 11:00pm on 19 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    Post 113,

    I called it moronic because of your last inane comment about her being English and that you couldn't care less anyway...this after you had written a lengthy piece on the discussion..how does that work? You either care or you don't.

    And unless you are headless, you will see that I have posted several pieces in this discussion with coherent arguments and facts (something I accept you have a problem dealing with) so your last point is embarrassing as you haven't done the ground work which was a big mistake.

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 11:00pm on 19 Aug 2008, mblooman2001 wrote:

    1welshbloke the point i was making about obama and cameron and the use of cannabis is the fact that Christine Missed tests and isn't guilty. There is no evidence to the contrary. However, since there is evidence to say cannabis allegedly causes brain damage (of varying degrees - though this can be a seperate debate) you could say it could hamper their performance as a leader of a nation.

    Admittedly, would you miss a test if you were on drugs? probably.

    I think the question that is in peoples minds is "does 3 missed tests = 1 positive drugs test"
    In my mind Christine wasn't even a world class athlete at the time and was tested around the time, she simply missed 3 tests. There was an article about how she could miss 3, and i think that warrants a read - she was living at home with her siblings and organisation was not her strength.
    This was the same with Rio Ferdinand, and he served his due.

    From my view, there is no way Christine's performance is tainted. She's clean. Always has been as there is NO evidence to the contrary. With those facts in place you have to accept them and that Christine is a terrific athlete. However, missing 3 tests may show doubt in some peoples minds. Doubt yes, but taint no. And let us celebrate Christine for what she is - a champion we can be proud of.

    Complain about this comment

  • 131. At 11:00pm on 19 Aug 2008, carm13 wrote:

    She wasn't shunned. If she was, then so was Dawn Harper who won the hurdles because I didn't see anyone running up and congratulating her - and she had two other Americans in her race. In fact I DO remember seeing Sanya Richards walking over and patting Christine on the back when she was kneeling on the floor. We only see what the camera picks up. We don't see what happens afterwards or even in those moments when they go away and show replays.

    I had my doubts about the tests like everyone, and it be completely honest there is still a small percentage of me that does have doubts. At the same time however why she missed them was explained - and she isn't the only person to have missed tests or to have appealed against a ban. As long as she is clean after her tests for this then I'm happy. I'm pleased for her, actually. She was given a second chance and she's worked hard to do what she undoubtedly had the potential to do in the first place. I suspect there would always have been doubts about her World Championship win because she didn't compete against Richards. Well, she's done that now and she's won. It's a great achievement.

    I do find the idea that she will be singled out as a poster girl for the 2012 games a little perturbing - if only for the fact that as far as the media (in other countries as well) is concerned her achievements will always be tainted by doubts. As the only successful track athlete from these games I think it's inevitable that she will be a poster girl, though. That is unless someone comes along either over the next few days or in the next couple of years.

    Complain about this comment

  • 132. At 11:02pm on 19 Aug 2008, scallopsaregreat wrote:

    Post 128 - Well said!

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 11:03pm on 19 Aug 2008, angeliccj wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 134. At 11:03pm on 19 Aug 2008, Hoycules wrote:

    welshbloke - "Notice the differing treatment of Ohuruogo and Thanou in the press for example. One is innocent - one is a drugs cheat."

    One is banned by the IOC and facing charges of perjury and falsifying evidence, the other was cleared of any wrongdoing. DIfferent actions therefore different treatment.

    Anderson__8 "- Rio only missed one un-announced test, not 3 - he also realised his error later in the day and called the testers and offered to take the drugs test on THE SAME DAY... the testers refused"

    Same thing happened to Christine on two of her missed tests - plus she was tested 9 days prior and 3 days after the 3rd missed test.

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 11:04pm on 19 Aug 2008, taffyles wrote:

    If the testers turn up unannounced, how can she deliberately avoid them??

    Fact is she has never tested positive- she has tested clean many many times.
    Fact- she has been investigated and found innocent.

    Tests are so sophisticated now, with the new hair follicle tests they can trace whether someone has ever taken a banned substance. If I were her I would pay privately to have one of those tests done and shut the cynics up.

    Well done Christine- you go girl!! Fantastic race and run perfectly. Excellent win!

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 11:08pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    mblooman2001

    Everyone seems to think that because I feel her medal is "tainted" that I think she is one drugs.

    I don't. Its just that have doubts because I feel that if i were in that position I wouldn't have missed three tests.

    I have competed at a fairly high level. I once placed tenth in an International Traithlon that was part of that years world series.

    So my views are based on what I consider I would have done in similar circumstances.

    We all make mistakes - and if we do we can be forgiven - but forgotten? For me I am not sure.

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 11:10pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 134 - all charges agaisnt Thanou have been dropped by the IOC, the IAAF and the Greek athletics Federation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 11:12pm on 19 Aug 2008, Volley wrote:

    1) If the other athletes had shunned her, they would have stayed away completely, but they were clearly seen to have patted her on the back when he was crouched down.

    2) Would all these "anti-Christine" posters be so vocal if she was white and middle class?

    Complain about this comment

  • 139. At 11:12pm on 19 Aug 2008, namdam1979 wrote:

    Post 122

    I agree with you except that i feel there is no difference in Rio missing his test and Christines.

    In face it was harder for Rio to miss his than Christine to miss all hers. It happens and from what i gather the athletic testing is unanounced and follows your predicted location.
    Not an issue for footballers who will be in the training grounds of their respective club.

    She will have to pay a higher price than the ban she has served for missing her test. She is forever teainted, unfairly as it may be. Shame because she has done us proud.


    On a side Bar i think that the Atheletics should have Set trainig venues like the Cycling and Rowing. Where all the Athletes from paricular desciplines can train together. It would mean they are under much more scrutiny. It should be if they dont qualify for the camp and attend then they dont get our money. Just a thought.

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 11:12pm on 19 Aug 2008, sanwamie wrote:

    I take it that all those who feel they cannot applaud Christine Ohuruogu also cannot bring themselves to support England and Manchester United footballer, Rio Ferdinand.

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 11:13pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 138

    comment 2 is totally unnecessary - has anyone mentioned race?


    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 11:16pm on 19 Aug 2008, kwinquark1 wrote:

    DEALING WITH THE RACE.........

    Richards focussed? Like a Rabbit in the full glare of the headlights, just as Mr Johnson on the telly pointed out.

    How did this goon Fordyce get a job on the BBC?

    Complain about this comment

  • 143. At 11:18pm on 19 Aug 2008, mblooman2001 wrote:

    1welshbloke

    You mentioned your own previous experience, however you are a different person and everyone has different problems (personal etc).

    I agree with you on the point that if i had my career dependent on whether i get tested or not i would've been vigilant.

    I also can see that you believe Christine is clean and are happy that she won gold in the 400m.

    However, i do feel that you have to forgive people for previous mistakes. I am glad Chambers didn't run - he is a clear drugs cheat and would never want someone who was proved cheating to represent our country. But for people who miss tests, i agree there is doubt, however there is no Fact either. Thats why i bring back the question "is missing 3 drugs tests = 1 Failed test?"

    It is a thorny situation. Christine was the first person (i believe) this happened to. It set a benchmark and i don't believe this will happen again. The same goes for the situation with Rio and i doubt any footballer will miss a test again.

    Complain about this comment

  • 144. At 11:19pm on 19 Aug 2008, Hoycules wrote:

    "welshbloke - Post 134 - all charges agaisnt Thanou have been dropped by the IOC, the IAAF and the Greek athletics Federation."

    As of last week they weren't dropped and that's why she's not in beijing...do you have a link so i can catch up?

    Complain about this comment

  • 145. At 11:21pm on 19 Aug 2008, MrsJohnMurphy wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 146. At 11:21pm on 19 Aug 2008, stwl wrote:

    1welshbloke - do you really feel that the missed tests taint this medal in particular, more than the prevalence of PEDs in athletics taints all the medals?

    I wouldn't want to assert anything like 99.9% confidence about any given athlete being clean. Perhaps we should just agree on deeming them innocent until proven guilty? At this time, Christine Ohuruogu stands innocent, in the eyes of the sport, of being a drugs cheat. That's all we can ask.

    Complain about this comment

  • 147. At 11:21pm on 19 Aug 2008, Anderson__8 wrote:

    namdam1979 -
    "On a side Bar i think that the Atheletics should have Set trainig venues like the Cycling and Rowing. Where all the Athletes from paricular desciplines can train together. It would mean they are under much more scrutiny. It should be if they dont qualify for the camp and attend then they dont get our money. Just a thought."

    Kelly Holmes was talking about this on the BBC the other day... sounds like a good idea which to be honest im pretty surprised hasnt happened already.

    Its a fair point that it was much harder for Rio to miss his test than ohurougu's, but im sure most would agree, he's not the sharpest tool in the drawer and thats why he missed the test. Again, I think this shows a failing of the system that testers refuse to return on the same day when athletes realise they have missed the test... i know some drugs can exit the system quickly, but im almost certain there are none that leave the system in less than a day!

    Complain about this comment

  • 148. At 11:21pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 144 - the IOC banned her for bringing the games into disrepute.


    Post 143 - we are probably closer in agreement than this blog shows - all Im saying is there is a question mark

    Complain about this comment

  • 149. At 11:23pm on 19 Aug 2008, Hoycules wrote:

    welshbloke...the reasons for why she's brough the games into disrepute is why she's treated differently.

    Complain about this comment

  • 150. At 11:24pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    post 149 - but she is vilified as a drugs cheat despite not proof!

    Complain about this comment

  • 151. At 11:24pm on 19 Aug 2008, stwl wrote:

    MrsJohnMurphy - Rasmussen was, as I recall, pulled out by his team on the grounds that he had lied to them. Marion Jones admitted drug use having lied to a grand jury. Prove us the lies in this case, and we will pour away the "bottle of jingoistic hypocrisy".

    Complain about this comment

  • 152. At 11:25pm on 19 Aug 2008, Anderson__8 wrote:

    MrsJohnMurphy-
    "If she were German, Russian or American then the cries of 'cheat' and 'doper' would be deafening but because she is a nice British girl we are happy to believe that she just forgot and that it was all a misunderstanding."

    lol

    i think if you read down the replies to this board, there are a LOT of comments from british people condemning christine ohorougu.

    Complain about this comment

  • 153. At 11:26pm on 19 Aug 2008, kevwalsh wrote:

    As a past Paralympic swimmer i am totally against the use of drugs in sport. I think Christine made some mistakes but should be allowed to get on woth her career untarnished. She has been tested time and time again and found to be clean. Also it is so easy for these armchair critics who haven't got the first idea what it takes to exercise let alone make it to the standards we are talking about here. For God's sake celebrate the fact that we still have people who strive to be the best and put themselves on the chopping block for idiots to knock down. Be proud

    Complain about this comment

  • 154. At 11:27pm on 19 Aug 2008, MrsJohnMurphy wrote:

    Yes and there are a lot of people defending her who would not be defending her if she were foreign.

    Complain about this comment

  • 155. At 11:30pm on 19 Aug 2008, stwl wrote:

    #154 - FWIW, I thought Rasmussen was harshly treated, in that the Tour is very inconsistent about whether its drug users get punished. And when Kelly Sotherton whined about Blonska, I couldn't help thinking that the gulf in performance between them was due to more than drugs. But let's stay on topic.

    Complain about this comment

  • 156. At 11:32pm on 19 Aug 2008, John Holden-Peters wrote:

    I had not seen your comment mrmichaelh, #96, when I posted my comment a few moments ago. I am happy to see that that the community of well- informed and rational people is larger than I thought. I could not agree more with what you said.

    Some of the revelations, or rather opinions about the use of drugs in athletics in recent weeks have been sensational, i.e. aimed at causing a sensation. So many people have claimed that their use is widespread and that only the simpletons don't indulge, but without offering a shred of evidence.

    I simply don't believe that is true, though if I were asked to name one sport and one country where there are obviously real problems with drugs, it would be cycling and Spain. The evidence of the Tour de France and that of Maribel Moreno in Beijing is very worrying and, at the same time very sad, because it tars all the Spanish riders with the same brush.

    The men's road race in Beijing was won by one by the Spaniards, Samu Sánchez, one of the few major road race competitors to indulge in both, very different versions, of the sport. Was he on drugs? Don't think so. Did he miss a test? Don't think so. Was he found to be positive on any of his numerous tests in France or China? No.

    Yet the international press, not the Spanish press of course, suggests that he might not be whiter than white, indeed not white at all. Guilt by association. It is just that kind of atmosphere of suspicion, doubt and, maybe, the desire to be the sporting correspondent, or even the editor. of one of the many grubby representatives of the gutter press in England, that lead people to say some of the most ridiculous things and, availing themselves of the greatest achievement of democracy, namely total press freedom, put them on one of the BBC blogs, Have your Say, etc. etc.

    I think we should simply say Chapeau!, Good on yer!, Thank you and do the same in 2012!, to Christine Ohuruogu.

    I don't suppose all this controversy about drugs had the slightest effect on her. She was too strong for that and knew she had nothing to answer for. So let's just get off her back and let her enjoy, together with her companions in Team GB, their greatest performance for 100 years in the Olympics,. There's more to come!

    Complain about this comment

  • 157. At 11:34pm on 19 Aug 2008, piechucker31 wrote:

    Hello all you angry people! This is an interesting debate and worth having, and LONG. Fine and good.

    I'd just like to raise to your attention that some of the other blogs here are by individual athletes sharing their hopes dreams etc. People like David Davies the long distance swimmer, and Goldie Sayers the javelinista. Just think it would be a good thing for any of you to take 5 minutes to have a look at their articles and give some encouragement, share some love etc.

    Peace

    Complain about this comment

  • 158. At 11:34pm on 19 Aug 2008, BigPundit wrote:

    Fabulous Debate this one.

    Firstly, let's not forget that this is another British Gold medal (and in Athletics - which most were convinced we were going to win sweet FA in). So let's not get too picky guys, personally if a pumped-up gorilla pretending to be from Blighty won a gold - I'd take it. Team GB has been such a lift to the nation in the past couple of weeks, we may as well milk it for as long as possible......

    .....However, on the Christine debate I really don't feel I can defend her.

    Who in their right mind would miss 3 testing sessions in a row if there livelihood depended on it...? I would be so scared after missing one, I would agree a location and time of day (as required by the BOA) and then chain myself to that location for the next year - if that is what it would take to pass the next test.

    You just CANNOT seriously 'FORGET' to turn up to something so important. People say we all forget. This is not like forgetting to put out the rubbish in the morning or forgetting to send Aunty Maude a Thanks Giving card....... This is forgetting something that will have implications for the rest of your career....the rest of your life.

    However, another gold for team GB. I imagine Christine isn't too bothered about the comments either.... She'll have probably forgotton them by tomorrow

    Complain about this comment

  • 159. At 11:35pm on 19 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    MrsJohnMurphy,

    Take a look:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/2325245/Dates-prove-Christine-Ohuruogu-is-no-cheat.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 160. At 11:38pm on 19 Aug 2008, LyndonApGwynfryn wrote:

    Most of the detractors here seem to be suffering from a basic failure in comprehension. The tests that Christine missed were RANDOM, she couldn't possibly have known they were coming so could hardly have deliberately avoided them as part of some cunning masterplan.

    Her failure was in being insufficiently organised to inform the authorities about her every movement. This is hardly surprising in a 21 year old student. when I was in Uni I was frequently absent from where I was supposed to be (lectures mainly).

    Complain about this comment

  • 161. At 11:38pm on 19 Aug 2008, Martin Davis wrote:

    I'll probably give up after this, as no one in the "tainted" camp has even begun to take up my simple request for a coherent explanation of what "tainted" means.

    However, a few simple questions

    (i)Was the tribunal that looked at her case independent and legally constuted?

    (ii)Did they adjudge that missing the tests was careless not deliberate?

    (iii)Should regulations, like laws in general, treat careless actions differently than deliberate ones?

    If the anser is yes to all the above thats an end to it..the matter is closed..there is no "taint" ..thats why there are courts and other regulatory bodies sitting in adjudication. Anyone can believe what they want..some people think the earth is flat...it doesnt make it so..anyone can harbour "suspicions..some people have suspicions that the planet is ruled by lizards who have taken human form.!

    If the answer is no to any one of the above, please explain which and why...

    ps the issue of whether as a "professional athlete"(not exactly true at the time but let that pass) she should have ensured that she made the tests is a red herring I'm afraid..even if there is truth in it, its simply evidence of what the tribual found to be her "carelessness"...and for which she served a penalty..how on earth does that leave any stain any "taint"...?

    Complain about this comment

  • 162. At 11:42pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 161

    Tainted because we cannot understand HOW she could miss three tests, even the last one.

    If it were me it would play on my mind every day. "I must tell them where I am".

    Post 160

    Read Victor Conte's letter to Dwain Chambers. Random means nothing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 163. At 11:43pm on 19 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    Congratulations Christine Ohuruogu on a brilliant and, for some of us, unexpected success. Fantastic result and well deserved.
    The Internet has provided a platform for everyone to voice a view, including people with sincerely held but grossly uninformed opinions - people who are in possession of no facts and little education, just hunches and prejudices - people who neither read nor research thoroughly (lest their prejudices prove false). Sad, but that's the price of free speech.
    The irony is that if the BOA had refused Christine Ohuruogu's apeal against her ban it would have all come out in court and she would have won, and not on a technicality. Those who imply directly or indirectly publicly that she is or has been using illegal means to enhance her performance would be at risk of legal action. The BBC might take a dim view too.
    The BOA have more or less admitted that their system was faulty, and Christine Ohuruogu wasn't the only athlete to unintentionally fall foul of it. End of story in the real world. However, in the fantasies of people for whom reality is too boring obviously it will keep rumbling on. And as far as Sanya Richards comments are concerned I think they're just sour grapes. After all her personal best is a second faster than Christine Ohuruogu's, which is considerable over 400 metres, so what's she been taking?

    Complain about this comment

  • 164. At 11:43pm on 19 Aug 2008, MrsJohnMurphy wrote:

    Yeah Michael H so you keep saying. It proves nothing. You can easily pass tests as Marion Jones showed. So your repeating that statement is meaningless.

    Go away and read Victor Conte's letter to Chambers outlining how to pass the tests.

    Complain about this comment

  • 165. At 11:44pm on 19 Aug 2008, Il Pirata wrote:

    I don't care if she cheats or not but her medal should not eclipse the achievements of Chris Hoy whose triple gold is the best Performance by a brit since 1908! I noticed Mir Bose telling us all how much more important her win was - He is of course an idiot.

    Chris's wins were totally emphatic and not the result of miscalculations and poor performances by his rivals as Ohurugu's was.

    Complain about this comment

  • 166. At 11:46pm on 19 Aug 2008, Unbiased_Pundit wrote:

    BigPundit

    Perhaps once you've become informed of some of the facts you might feel more able to defend Christine - such as she did not miss three tests in a row, she tested negative inbetween these tests. Secondly, it's not a case of 'forgetting' when you're not told when they're going to turn up, it's a case of not keeping exactly to a timetable that you have set out for yourself. Not the same is it?

    You think Christine will not be too bothered about what people think of her? I totally disagree. She wants to achieve not just for herself, but also for Great Britain. If she thinks the people of Great Britain don't attach any significance to her achievements, she won't be happy about it. She would love to be revered like any other successful athlete, but unfortunately because of her missed tests (which a well-informed committee ruled were NOT deliberate) she will probably never be considered a major part of Britain's athletic history.

    Michael Johnson, who I have the utmost respect for, will always speak out if he gets the impression an athlete has doped, and he is full of praise for Christine.

    Complain about this comment

  • 167. At 11:47pm on 19 Aug 2008, BigPundit wrote:

    I think you're missing the point post 160.

    The test are not completely random. The drugs squad don't just smash down the door when you're relieving yourself at Waterloo station.....

    ......You name a location and a time frame.

    .....You be there.

    .....End of story.

    Complain about this comment

  • 168. At 11:47pm on 19 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 163

    You start your post with congratulations.

    You then make remarks about those of us who feel Ohuruogo's medal is tainted. Ill informed and uneducated? On what basis? Cos we don't agree with you?

    And then you finish by suggesting that the only reason Sanya Richards is faster than Ohuruogo is because she is taking something.

    Time for bed methinks!

    Complain about this comment

  • 169. At 11:48pm on 19 Aug 2008, mes wrote:

    I feel like I've washed up in the set of 'Little Britain' reading all these posts... God help us for sad bitter nation we are.

    Complain about this comment

  • 170. At 11:51pm on 19 Aug 2008, BigPundit wrote:

    You're probably speaking more logically than me Unbiased_Pundit.

    I didn't know Michael Johnson supported her - if that's true - that probally says quite a lot.

    Cracking debate though

    Complain about this comment

  • 171. At 11:52pm on 19 Aug 2008, MrsJohnMurphy wrote:

    166 - so committed to Britain she threatened to run for Nigeria if she didn't get her way. Funny how that's been airbrushed out of history.

    Complain about this comment

  • 172. At 11:54pm on 19 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    164,

    Yeah, I can understand why you'd have a problem with facts..kinda spoil an uninformed argument don't they?

    Running better now than before the ban? Haha, she was Commonwealth champion though you probably weren't aware of that.

    There is not a single shred of evidence to say she took drugs but you can carry on spouting your spurious nonsense if it makes you feel better

    Complain about this comment

  • 173. At 11:58pm on 19 Aug 2008, Martin Davis wrote:

    After this I will , finally, give up..its clear that no one can explain to me what "tainted" means outside hackneyed tabloid headlines

    Just one parting comment, my 3 earlierquestions included asking if an independently constituted tribunal found that missing the tests was down to carelessness..of course they did..once they did , as I said , any miasma of "suspicion" should then evaporate...otherwise forget the courts, forget the law in the end..its all to be left to the "court of public opinion" or something...at which thought it certainly is time for bed!

    Complain about this comment

  • 174. At 11:59pm on 19 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    Post 162, maybe you don't understand how she could miss three drugs tests. But then you weren't at the tribunal nor were you a member of it. Nor are you Christine Ohuruogu.
    My take is that the "tainted" twitterers have no intention of reading the tribunal's findings or believing them anyway. They like their conspiracies and fantasies to be fact free. Thankfully though it doesn't really matter what their "opinions" are. The only opinions that mattered in this case were those of the BOA, the drug testers and the law. They decided the ban was unjustified because of the circumstances, and there has never been any evidence of drug taking in her case, not before during or since. No taint there except in the minds of extrapolationists with nothing more constructive or productive to think about.

    Complain about this comment

  • 175. At 11:59pm on 19 Aug 2008, Adored99 wrote:

    It's a genuine shame that Ohurogu is never going to be the golden girl of British Athletics, no matter her fantastic achievements. However, that's the price she has had to pay for all the cheats who have been caught over the years - the public is pretty cynical of anyone with even a whiff of steroid abuse surrounding them.

    What is interesting, is the underperformance of the Americans who, on paper, should be dominating the sprint events. I can't help but harbour suspicions about some of the sprinters who have regularly posted incredible times, really struggling to get anywhere near their best when it comes to the Olympics. Take the men's 200m for example - do any of the Americans currently look capable of running in the 19.7s and 19.8s as they have done on numerous occasions throughout the season. It makes you wonder.

    Complain about this comment

  • 176. At 00:02am on 20 Aug 2008, MrsJohnMurphy wrote:

    LOL. Unfortunately the facts and you seem to be an alien concept. Her time at Osaka was a PB - now when Blonska produced a PB at Osaka the cry from Sotherton was doper. So she is running faster than she was before. Is this simple enough for you to understand?

    The point which you seem to be struggling with is that passing dope tests does make you clean. If dope tests were to catch every doper every time we would be watching very small fields indeed. Again, is that simple enough for you?

    If we followed your logic then Marion Jones would be running the sprints at this Olympics. Afterall, no failed tests, so therefore in your eyes not a shred of evidence that she was a doper.

    Complain about this comment

  • 177. At 00:03am on 20 Aug 2008, Martin Davis wrote:

    Finally, finally!

    An earlier posting suggests that it would only be defamatory(ie libel/slander) to state categorically that x uses drugs, and not to say that there was "doubt"..As a lawyer(sorry to have to admit this!) I can assure them that, in the right context, continuing to raise "doubts" in an appropriate setting could certainly amount to defamation .

    Complain about this comment

  • 178. At 00:03am on 20 Aug 2008, cilurnum wrote:

    Missing three drugs tests is suspicious, whatever anyone says, and the fact that she was banned meant that she had no reason whatsoever for missing them despite her excuses.

    If other competitors shunned her because of that then I find that...............ironic. Bitterly ironic.

    However, unlike other countries, I'm pleased that Christine actually had out-of-competition tests to miss.

    Complain about this comment

  • 179. At 00:04am on 20 Aug 2008, mark-lister wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 180. At 00:08am on 20 Aug 2008, Jon Wharf wrote:

    Great run by Christine Ohuruogu. A well-deserved medal achieved by dedication and discipline.

    The tainted comments of 1welshbloke are simply disgusting. I have no idea why he needs to continue with his stupid campaign to cast any shadow over this great achievement. He has obviously never forgiven anyone for any mistake at any time past, no matter how apologetic they were or what punishment they endured, so I sincerely hope he has no children. My advice to him is: STFU.

    Complain about this comment

  • 181. At 00:09am on 20 Aug 2008, KentDave wrote:

    It is clear that 1welsh.... has decided that he is going to "taint" or "doubt" CO's gold medal performances. No matter what arguments are put his way, no matter how many times argumenats and links to articles explaining how she is not a drugs cheat, he will have doubts.

    Let's be clear - this is not based on scientific or logical reasoning. He just doesn't trust. Some folks are automatically set to disbelief when they hear and see things and some are set to belief. That's just the way it is and 1welsh won't be persuaded because his argument is based neither on logic or fact, but on hunch and gut feeling.

    Those that do not credit her for what she has done will continue to not credit her. Those that do give her credit will do so. People still trying to prsuade at this point really should give up as both sides are now dug into their trenches.

    On a side-note, I can understand the comment re CO being a poster-girl for 2012 as it is Athletics - and track and field events have always held a larger share of the limelight than those in the velodrome, pool or on the water. I for one though think that others will take that mantle from her - Romero and Pendleton for instance.

    Finally, I would like to congratulate all competitors, medal winners and not, on a wonderful games for team GB. I read an article about the birth of our sucess on the cycle track and how the originator of that success is now in charge of the whole thing Let us hope that he can instil that same winning attitude in all our Olympic sports - so we can see the success of 2008 as the stepping stone to greater achievement in 2012.

    Complain about this comment

  • 182. At 00:14am on 20 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    176-

    What? An athlete running faster than they were two years ago? Give over, whatever next? Fire? Wheel? Geez....

    2006 PB 50.28
    2008 PB 49.61

    Is that difficult for you to understand? Not very good stuff she was on really was it!?

    Adlington smashed her PB in the 800m..should we be suspicious? The Cycling Guys did their pursuit in a time 11 secs faster than in Sydney 2000..should we be worried?

    Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember Ohurougu stood in public in tears admiiting to steroid abuse? Is Ohuruogu in Jail? You see the difference? It's not that hard to grasp surely..?

    Complain about this comment

  • 183. At 00:14am on 20 Aug 2008, Martin Davis wrote:

    This really is final! Posts 178/179, please read posts 161/173 and then let me know how you feel your comments can hold up in that context..it would be nice to know.

    Complain about this comment

  • 184. At 00:14am on 20 Aug 2008, stwl wrote:

    #176 - If you insist on the comparison with Blonska, I think the question was whether previous drug use might boost performance. I believe this was suggested about Grit Breuer at 400m also.

    Once again, in the absence of accepted evidence that Ohuruogu was on drugs, this is not the most relevant issue here. Her ban didn't provide her with any opportunity to avoid drug testing (unlike Chambers, incidentally, which caused a controversy on his return).

    Complain about this comment

  • 185. At 00:15am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    170, many other athletes supported her, but justice isn't decided by celebrity endorsement, any more than fact is decided by public opinion.

    171, you don't know much about sports or serious athletes. People don't take up sport because they love their Country. It's nothing whatsoever to do with loyalty to one's Country (that's just tabloid jingoistic tosh and a misguided worship of amateurism). For athletes as in other sports it's about the motivation to do the very best one can at the chosen sport. The pinnacle for an athlete is performing on the Olympic stage to the best of one's ability. The nation under whose flag one performs is secondary.

    Complain about this comment

  • 186. At 00:15am on 20 Aug 2008, dudepod45 wrote:

    I think if Christine had been taking drugs she would have posted much better times than she has. She is by no means the fastest 400 metres runner in the world. And lets face it, Sanya Richards threw the race away in a display of tactical incompetence. However, Christine is going to have to live with the suspicion that maybe, just maybe. I predict that one day the ban on drugs will be lifted entirely because the athletes always seem to be one step ahead of the enforcers.

    Complain about this comment

  • 187. At 00:23am on 20 Aug 2008, mark-lister wrote:

    the rule is that 3 missed test results in a positive test. CO got special treatment because Team GB has little to none medal prospects in athletics. Competitors like rebecca adlington and hopefully Phillip idowu fully deserve their success because they make their test not even failing one, never mine 3. its sad to see the british public jumping on the gold band wagon. I for one am absolutly thrilled we are having a fantastic games and credit goes out to those that follows the rules. they truly do make GB proub

    Complain about this comment

  • 188. At 00:27am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    168, 1welshbloke, if you haven't deliberately misrepresented my post (163) which actually I believe you have, then your reading skills are really very poor. You come across in this forum as a troll, and a very ill educated one at that.
    If you have a point to make you could do so without distorting the words or sense of those with whom you disagree. It undermines your efforts somewhat, not to mention your integrity such as it is.

    Complain about this comment

  • 189. At 00:28am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    well having just had an email from the bbc saying they have removed my post cos it may be defammatory i have to say there is no point in continuing this debate.

    i cannot even suggest that doubts exist.

    which means in effect that this whole thread will become a one sided argument.

    goodnight! again! lol

    Complain about this comment

  • 190. At 00:29am on 20 Aug 2008, MrsJohnMurphy wrote:

    185 - My post was a response to post 166 which claimed she was doing it for Britain. No she was doing it for herself and that she had threatened to run for another country if she had not got her own way. Hardly the mark of a role model.

    Oh Michael your love for CO is very admirable but the problem is you claimed that no failed dope tests is proof she's clean. Marion Jones proves otherwise. Not my fault that the facts undermine your argument. You need to come up with a better one.

    None of the swimmers, or cyclists had served a drugs ban so your argument about their PB's is irrelevant.

    When a foreigner comes back from a ban and beats her PB the Brits cry 'doper' when a Brit comes back from a ban and beats her PB the silence is deafening.

    184 - There is evidence from scientific research carried out in Sweden using a large sample of elite athletes that shows that the physical benefits from PED remain long after the athlete has come off PEDs. In some cases the 5+ years after the athlete concerned had stopped using PEDs. As Conte showed in his letter to Chamber it is very easy to dope and avoid testing positive, so I would say that she had plenty of chances to dope before and during her ban, and even subsequently.

    Complain about this comment

  • 191. At 00:29am on 20 Aug 2008, Jordan D wrote:

    For me it comes down to the BOA - in their own rulebook it says that missing three tests equals a positive drugs test result. We all know that Dwain Chambers tested positively for a drugs violation, was banned and had his challenge (through an injunction) of the BOA Olympic Ban rejected by the courts. The BOA vigorously defnded their position.

    So what's the difference between one positive test in their rule book and another? The BOA seem, from my viewpoint, to have been hyprocritical and for me, Christine shouldn't have been at these Olympics.

    I can't celebrate her win and find it almost amusing that Lord Coe presented her the Gold Medal considering Coe's stance against Chambers on the basis of drugs violations.

    Complain about this comment

  • 192. At 00:30am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    post 188

    what a load of rubbish

    Complain about this comment

  • 193. At 00:30am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    187, more fact free speculation (and poor spelling).
    Why is it that conspiracy theorists and fantasists are such poor logicians and spellers? With all their scrupulous attention to microscopic detail and all that...

    Complain about this comment

  • 194. At 00:31am on 20 Aug 2008, Robert O'Hara wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 195. At 00:33am on 20 Aug 2008, cssefmps wrote:

    Let us all hope that when Christine returns she will dedicate as much time effort and intelligence (which she obviously has in abundance) to inspiring and training men and women athletes for 2012. This country needs to find a way of keeping such brilliant individiuals as Christine in real, applied athletics rather than letting them drift away into the nether regions of the media haze.
    The BBC commentator was spot on when he explained the victory as a tactical masterpiece. The thing in any sport about about controlling and holding onto one's prepared tactics is that it gives the performer a sense of being in control. What Christine did yesterday took a lot of nerve as she could easily have bolted and then busted in the final straight.
    Steve C.

    Complain about this comment

  • 196. At 00:37am on 20 Aug 2008, mark-lister wrote:

    its rather pathetic that britons would rather get caught up in the actions of an athlete that cant follow the rules and parade her gold like a proud achievement than the achievements of the GB sailing and Gb cycling which do truly deserve applauding. its almost sickening and embarrasing to associated with the same nation as these hypocrites.

    Complain about this comment

  • 197. At 00:40am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    185, firstly athletes don't take up their sport in order to be role models. If other people regard them as role models, outside their own sphere of activity, (in this case athletics) then more fool them for their stupidity. Criticising someone like an athlete for not being a good role model is ridiculous. You might as well criticise the postman or the supermarket checkout person.
    Secondly it's all very well citing Swedish evidence, but it would be great if you posted a link to it or some references to where the research was published. Otherwise it's meaningless.

    Complain about this comment

  • 198. At 00:41am on 20 Aug 2008, mark-lister wrote:

    193, I never realised punctuality and grammar had a sway on whether someone was a drugs cheat or not. i suppose thats highlights your whole idealogical way of thinking then. Oh well....i'll remember that the next time someone questions my BHS. Well Done CO....???

    Complain about this comment

  • 199. At 00:45am on 20 Aug 2008, JabeyBaby11 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 200. At 00:45am on 20 Aug 2008, Martin Davis wrote:

    In legal terms the absolute position in the BOA rule book would have been very hard to defend in court, as the "three strikes and youre out " rule is arbitrary..agreed there was an element of "face saving" in the tribunal decision to make Christine O an exception but an inflexible rule which admits of no exceptions will always be hard to justify

    If you read the court decison in Dwayne C's case the judge was far from giving the BOA's rules a clean bill of health., and I tend to agree the "establishment" closed ranks against Chambers very "conveniently" .However, .the cases are clearly different, so I wouldn't accuse Seb C of hypocrisy

    As for Mrs JM if we follow the logic of your argument that "no postive test doesnt mean innocent of doping"..then, implicitly every athlete in Beijing is open to suspicion! Alternatively is one only to be suspicious of the ones you want us to be suspicious about? Most legal systems operate a principle of "innocent until proven guilty" for good reason..

    Complain about this comment

  • 201. At 00:47am on 20 Aug 2008, JabeyBaby11 wrote:

    (To add, i think its time we give her benefit of the doubt for now... on the basis she wil be closel monitred in futre and her furture performances as well should prove her innocence)

    Complain about this comment

  • 202. At 00:47am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    pvandck - I am intrigued - how did I misrepresent your post?

    (and by the way I have two masters degrees so if I come across uneducated I can assure you I am not!)

    Complain about this comment

  • 203. At 00:50am on 20 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 204. At 00:52am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    196, fact-free troll at work. What's more Mr Lister you aren't even brave enough to say by name exactly about whom and to what you are referring.
    Who Mr Lister? What rules? And what qualifies you Mr Lister to arbitrate the case? Do know the rules? Do you know the circumstances? What's your evidence (as opposed to your opinion)? Were you a member of the tribunal?
    Do you get your information and moral guidance from the Daily Wail, or the Daily Diana.

    Complain about this comment

  • 205. At 00:54am on 20 Aug 2008, JabeyBaby11 wrote:

    MRMICHAELH... Based on that i take back any criticism!!! Sadly for her she still has to live with the rep..

    Complain about this comment

  • 206. At 01:00am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    POST 204 - i think it pretty obvious which rules are being referred to - namely the missing tests rules.

    As for he or I being trolls - I find your stance quite amusing actually. You criticise people who don't agree with you as being ill-educated. Why? Because we come to a different conclusion as you and the independent tribunal?

    I have on this thread not once claimed Ohuruogo was taking drugs. I have stated that I cannot believe how she could miss three tests - and whatever the commision may say I stand by that view.

    For me it means there are doubts - though unfortunately by stating that the BBC may well remove this posting.

    I have come to an informed opinion based on the facts that PED's can be cleared in a certain timeframe and my opinion that I cannot see any reason why someone would miss three tests.

    If you disagree with that then fine. It is no reason to make the kind of comments you make about people's intelligence and so forth.

    Complain about this comment

  • 207. At 01:01am on 20 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    205

    She's always accepted that and will have to live with that. She's a totally clean athlete though and that's all that matters.

    Complain about this comment

  • 208. At 01:04am on 20 Aug 2008, JabeyBaby11 wrote:

    Agreed 207!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 209. At 01:04am on 20 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    206 -

    Considering at the time when the missed drugs test occurred, Becky Lyne had missed two and over a hundred athletes had missed one, does that help you to understand why people could miss a test? That maybe the system was flawed? Or were all 100 deliberately avoiding tests? 100 people is a lot. How many of those 100 would have gone on to miss 3 had it not been for the Ohuruogu case. I'm sure a lot of them were thinking "there but for the grace of God go I". The system accepted that it had major faults and now has changed.

    Complain about this comment

  • 210. At 01:05am on 20 Aug 2008, dav4439 wrote:

    CO is no more guilty of being a drugs cheat as any other athlete at the games. Unfortunately winning a gold medal just makes her more vulnerable to accusations. I am sure if CO had not even made the final, or won a medal - this debate wouldnt even make it past the first five posts.

    The only things CO is guilty of is being negligent for missing three tests. And who are we to judge this human of faults in anyone else?

    Well done Christine for your hard work and dedication despite what others may think of you. Most others would have given up long ago. If for nothing else, we should all commend you for that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 211. At 01:06am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    203, nice post. But unfortunately it cuts no ice with truthseekers and conspiracy mongers who "know" the "truth" no matter how much at odds it is with reality. They have invested their intellects (and limited reading skills) in their evidence- and logic-free hypotheses and they aren't about to admit that the herculean effort has been a waste of time. And why should they when they have the Internet to showcase their skills, spelling and indignation?

    Complain about this comment

  • 212. At 01:06am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Yes over 100 athletes had missed ONE.....but to miss THREE???

    For you it is understandable. For me it is not.

    I feel entitled to that opinion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 213. At 01:09am on 20 Aug 2008, Joey-CFC- wrote:

    The comparsion between CO and marion jones is totally irrelevant. The fact is Marion jones was given non-detectable drugs substance by the testing company BALCO, and this company is notrious for supplementing other athletes during that time, and its owners have been rightly convicted. The testing system of IACC and WADA has improved greatly after that scandal and we know see the rigorous testing of those governing bodies on athletes.

    Chrisitne hasn't tested positive once during and after her missed tests. The british pannel has looked into the matter and have rightly administred the punishement of a year ban for missing three tests, and considered her mitigating circumstance. I think her missed tests are to do more with her disorganisation than the act of taking drugs especially at the age of 21, so there really is no reason to dobut her wonderful achievement.

    All in all i appllaud Chrisitine for getting over that trivial time, and winning the world championship as well as gold. As a 400 runner myself that run truly was a tactical masterpiece, and i look forward to seeing her do the same at london.

    Complain about this comment

  • 214. At 01:09am on 20 Aug 2008, piechucker31 wrote:

    Internet bravado! (ooh, scary)

    Lots of people having "man-offs"!!

    Terrific!

    Complain about this comment

  • 215. At 01:10am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 211

    I admire you for having the gall to make fun of other posters despite your more than shabby grammar!

    Complain about this comment

  • 216. At 01:17am on 20 Aug 2008, lolita_zhong wrote:

    I am Chinese. In my opinion, she has done a good thing. She has run as an expert. I am a sport fan. I love to see someone find their own way to do their sport. It is important for sport development. I am happy for that. She has done different way to run 400m.

    Complain about this comment

  • 217. At 01:19am on 20 Aug 2008, MrsJohnMurphy wrote:

    Yeah MichaelH so you keep saying, it proves nothing other than she passed the tests.

    200 - every athlete is clean until they fail a dope test. This does not mean that they are not doping. Athletes can and do dope for years without being caught, the details of the doping programs for the cyclists involved in Operation Puerto is testament to this. Marion Jones, or the cyclists Ivan Basso, Jan Ullrich, all of these athletes and plenty of others never tested positive but all of them were doping. To assume athletes are clean strikes me as naive in the extreme, also this isn't a legal system we are talking about. Afterall, the murder is not endemic among the population the way in which doping in endemic within elite sports.

    Complain about this comment

  • 218. At 01:24am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    206, 1welshbloke, I criticise you for deliberately misrepresenting my post. It might be the pinnacle of intellectual achievement as far as you are concerned and I suspect it is but, in fact, it's merely a rude and dishonest activity. As far as I can make out other contributors here can read and I don't really think they need your ridiculous reinterpretation of my words, no matter how interesting or funny you think it is. Similarly you don't need me to to undermine your intelligence. You're doing a sterling job all by yourself.

    You say you "have come to an informed opinion based on the facts". What facts? And how are they relevant to Christine Ohuruogu's case? You appear to be suggesting that the tribunal's findings are incorrect. What is your expertise exactly and on what basis are the tribunal's findings incorrect. What "facts" do you have that undermine their published conclusions? Are you saying everyone involved with the case is either ignorant or a liar? If not, what are you saying exactly?

    Complain about this comment

  • 219. At 01:27am on 20 Aug 2008, mahone202 wrote:

    A young girl from a family of 8 children from east london makes a mistake (a rather large one)

    She decides that instead of giving up, throwing in the towel and sitting in the corner crying, that'll she'll get up, shake it off and carry on working hard.

    From that day forward, she learnt from her mistake and never made it again. She worked hard day in, day out hoping that one day her dream would come true.

    Today, that dream came true.

    Her dedication, determination and example should be applauded, yet there are still individuals who want to beat her over the head with a stick and say 'You made a mistake, thats not allowed and you will be punished till the day you die'.

    It may not be forgotten but it can and should be forgiven.

    Christine O, you are amazing, may you stay fit and healthy for London 2012.

    (P.S The girls did congratulate her after she got up off the floor, Sanya Richards went to congratulate her earlier but realised she was in shock)

    (P.P.S Kelly Sotherton did not congratulate Blonska)


    Complain about this comment

  • 220. At 01:28am on 20 Aug 2008, Firebrandcaz wrote:

    Typical brits - always suffering from 'tall poppy syndrome' - the minute anyone starts to grow tall someone always has to cut them down....

    As for Christine - I applaud her totally....

    As for the pompous detached middle class inflexible (and I suspect in some respects, biggoted) hierarchy of UK Athletics you should hang your heads in shame tonight!

    For those of you who have on here stated that other athletes in team GB deserve more recognition than other medalists - all I can say is that I pray that none of your chosen favourites prove positive to drugs!

    Christine has stood up on a point of principle against those who were, and are hellbent on trying to destroy her promising atheltics career..... it's time the rest of us stood shoulder to shoulder with Christine!

    As for those comments about her interview techniques - I would love to see you in front of a camera after the peaking of four years of intensive training...... believe me, I work in hard hitting PR and I have seen much more high profile individuals do alot worse during interviews!

    Get a grip folks! Let's just accept that we have a wonderful and genuine hard working athlete who deserves the same praise and support that others have enjoyed throughout these games!

    Complain about this comment

  • 221. At 01:29am on 20 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    217 -

    Come again? So passing the tests means nothing? So no one is clean? What a cynic you must be..

    To assume athletes are guilty, like you do, strikes me as perverse in the extreme.

    Commonwealth, World and Olympic Champion - she's a superstar! The Haters will never be able to take that from her and I hope that torments them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 222. At 01:33am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    215, glad you like my shabby grammar. Ta muchly. I doubt it would surprise you to know that I teach English. The world's going to the dogs. English teacher with "shabby" grammar... starting a sentence with a conjunction, finishes with preposition! Christine Ohuruogu brilliantly win's an Olympic gold medal. Shocking! Whatever next?

    Complain about this comment

  • 223. At 01:40am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    post 218

    pvandck - you criticise people for not backing up their posts. Well I asked you how did i misrepresent your post. You have declined so far to show that.

    As for the facts....

    Fact - she missed three drugs tests

    Fact - there are steriods that clear the system in 7 days.

    Read my posts and you might find that I have stated time and time again that I think she is clean. However I state that because of her actions in missing three tests I feel that doubts exist. I state this in light of the letter from Victor Conte.

    Now if you have an issue with that, and you clearly do, then stop doing yourself a disservice by making your petty and snide remarks about intellect just because we don't all agree with you.

    And if you do want an argument about intellect feel free. I hardly think an MA, BSc, 4 A levels at grade A, 11 O Levels and an IQ of 152 make me the unintelligent person you keep harping on about.

    Yours may well be higher. Good for you. But please!!!!

    We can agree to disagree and I am happy to do that. You on the other hand seem to think that unless anyone agrees with you they are ignorant etc.

    Complain about this comment

  • 224. At 01:41am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Post 222 - if you make fun of people purely cos of their spelling what do you expect?

    Complain about this comment

  • 225. At 01:42am on 20 Aug 2008, dazjoe78 wrote:

    Just 2 simple questions for anyone (if people can simply be honest in their answers instead of blindly lying simply because she's British), no.1 For everyone saying how great it is she's won and everyone should get off her case, would you have the EXACT same attitude if she was American, or Russian. Be serious, the answer is almost 100% NO. And why are there so many comments that have been removed, if somebody makes a valid point about an athlete who has missed 3 drug tests, incurred a 1 year ban, and has naturally raised a whole deal of suspicion about herself, can you really not handle this and feel the need to report the comment to remove it? So every comment on here should just be 'well done Christine your the best', no other opinions are allowed? What a strange society we live in today, freedom of speech, biggest joke ever

    Complain about this comment

  • 226. At 01:45am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    212, 1welshbloke, you say:

    "For you it is understandable. For me it is not.
    I feel entitled to that opinion."

    Something that isn't understandable to you is an opinion? Really?

    Actually, I don't think you really know the first thing about Christine Ohuruogu's case. Obviously that doesn't preclude you from having an opinion about it.
    As you say, you're entitled to your own opinion. But you're not entitled to your own facts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 227. At 01:47am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    oh this is pathetic.

    for me it is not undertandable that she can miss three drugs tests.

    hence I am entitled to my opinion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 228. At 01:52am on 20 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    227 -

    Is it understandable for you that over 100 athletes could miss one? I, for one, would find that quite difficult to understand...100 athletes missing tests..unless the system was really flawed and its very essence actually seemed to bring about missed tests..?

    Complain about this comment

  • 229. At 01:56am on 20 Aug 2008, trevrut wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 230. At 01:57am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Yes I could understand 100 athletes missing one.

    I mean - if there is a 1 in 100 chance of missing a test and there are 10,000 athletes across all sports then yes 100 athletes missing one test is understandable.

    But if that is the case then it would mean there is a one in a million chance of missing three tests.

    (All things being equal of course).

    Complain about this comment

  • 231. At 01:57am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    223, the post you deliberately misrepresented is still there for everyone to read. It is the evidence. Stop trolling.
    You feel that doubt exists. So what? What expertise and facts do you have that weren't available to the tribunal? The tribunal feels that no doubt exists.

    224, is also a misrepresentation. Where have I criticised anyone purely for their misspelling? And where have I complained about anyone's criticism of my grammar?
    Your reading and comprehension skills though are truly atrocious. You can quote me on that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 232. At 01:57am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    #229 - no she is not a drugs cheat. she missed three tests.

    Complain about this comment

  • 233. At 01:59am on 20 Aug 2008, mahone202 wrote:

    Post 223

    "Fact - she missed three drugs tests

    Fact - there are steriods that clear the system in 7 days."

    Fair enough, but what exactly are these steroids and do the help a female run 400 metres after they've left the system?

    "And if you do want an argument about intellect feel free. I hardly think an MA, BSc, 4 A levels at grade A, 11 O Levels and an IQ of 152 make me the unintelligent person you keep harping on about."

    Academic achievement and high IQ's are fantastic, but when used unwisely they can make you seem unintelligent. I was always told at school that when you claim something is a fact, you need to back it up with hard evidence and not just make a generalised statement as those less intelligent may not understand your wisdom.

    One of the cornerstones of British life is that you are innocent until you are proved guilty. There may be doubts, but they are not reasonable until evidence appears that drugs were taken and a judgement is made.

    Until that time, we should celebrate this young womans enormous achievement.

    I say Yay to Christine O.

    Complain about this comment

  • 234. At 02:01am on 20 Aug 2008, pvandck wrote:

    230, you aren't very good at statistics either.

    Must go now. Sleep beckons. Goodnight!

    Complain about this comment

  • 235. At 02:03am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    #231

    I never said you did PURELY on spelling but you have criticised people about spelling.

    As for mispresenting


    Here is your post from #163 which I;ve annotated with my post.

    "You start your post with congratulations."

    Congratulations Christine Ohuruogu on a brilliant and, for some of us, unexpected success. Fantastic result and well deserved.



    "You then make remarks about those of us who feel Ohuruogo's medal is tainted. Ill informed and uneducated? On what basis? Cos we don't agree with you?"


    The Internet has provided a platform for everyone to voice a view, including people with sincerely held but grossly uninformed opinions - people who are in possession of no facts and little education, just hunches and prejudices - people who neither read nor research thoroughly (lest their prejudices prove false). Sad, but that's the price of free speech.
    The irony is that if the BOA had refused Christine Ohuruogu's apeal against her ban it would have all come out in court and she would have won, and not on a technicality. Those who imply directly or indirectly publicly that she is or has been using illegal means to enhance her performance would be at risk of legal action. The BBC might take a dim view too.
    The BOA have more or less admitted that their system was faulty, and Christine Ohuruogu wasn't the only athlete to unintentionally fall foul of it. End of story in the real world. However, in the fantasies of people for whom reality is too boring obviously it will keep rumbling on.

    "And then you finish by suggesting that the only reason Sanya Richards is faster than Ohuruogo is because she is taking something."


    And as far as Sanya Richards comments are concerned I think they're just sour grapes. After all her personal best is a second faster than Christine Ohuruogu's, which is considerable over 400 metres, so what's she been taking?

    --------------------------------------

    There - I think that puts that one to bed don't you?

    Complain about this comment

  • 236. At 02:05am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    #234 - well you clearly can't do probability then!

    Complain about this comment

  • 237. At 02:11am on 20 Aug 2008, MrsJohnMurphy wrote:

    Oh dear michaelh - calling anyone who disagrees with you a 'hater'. No not really, I don't think she should be racing and I don't think she is someone the media should be falling over themselves to praise. The willingness of people to defend her is down to the fact that she is British.

    Cynical - no realistic - a sport which has given us cheats such as Ben Johnson (doped for 7 years before being caught), Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery, Chambers, Christie, Torri Edwards (never tested positive), Gatlin, Alvin/Clavin Harrison, Pettigrew, Doug Walker, Whitlock, Yegorova and Kelli White to name but a few not so naive to believe the hype when someone claims be clean.

    Complain about this comment

  • 238. At 02:14am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    #233 no PEDs help when they've left the system in the sense of would I run faster if they are still in my system

    What PEDs do is enable you to train longer and recover faster (in the main).

    Anyway - my argument is not that Ohuruogo IS a drugs cheat - clearly there is no evidence to suggest that this definately is the case. My view is that doubts will always exist because of the missed drugs tests.

    As for me posting about IQ and so forth, that was in response to another poster and is in no way meant to say "look at my IQ and qualifications - I must be right".

    Just that I feel my view is a justfied one. I can see why people can be perfectly happy that her win is not in any way tainted. For me it is. Its not because I have any evidence she is a drugs cheat, but because the suspicion that she may have been is increased.

    Its a bit like the Flo-Jo argument isn't it? Or going further back, Kratochvilova, or Marita Koch even. The level of suspicion is higher even though we don't have evidence. Does that make sense?

    Complain about this comment

  • 239. At 02:35am on 20 Aug 2008, 1welshbloke wrote:

    Dear BBC - could I suggest that this entire thread is pulled - so many posts have been removed that the debate is meaningless.

    Complain about this comment

  • 240. At 02:41am on 20 Aug 2008, pineapple wrote:

    Hence the Mark Chambers' affair! @#229

    -----------------------

    wow, you've just shown how much you know about athletics. It's Dwaine Chamers you tool!!

    Congrats Christine.

    She missed 2 drugs tests due to her own forgetfulness at 21. And the third one she missed was due to her schedule being changed and the testers turned up at the wrong place. Thats what happens with random drugs tests - plans change and you might not be where you have been anticipated.

    In my opinion I don't think she has ever touched a performance enhancing drug but others will always disagree.

    Complain about this comment

  • 241. At 03:44am on 20 Aug 2008, dazjoe78 wrote:

    Will peolple stop comparing this to Rio Ferdinand!! Point 1- Rio only missed 1 test compared to Christine's 3, yet recieved almost as long a ban (8 month compared to 12), if the going rate is a 8 month ban for a missed test Christine should have been out of athletics for 2 years, so she can count herself lucky, agree? Point 2- Rio phoned Old Trafford just 2 hours after the test was scheduled to say I forgot and am my way back now, the tester was still in the stadium but out of his own pathetic pettyness refused to wait, ultimately costing a young man 8 months out of his job, I really hope this sad person sleeps happily every night knowing he nearly ruined another's career because he wouldn't wait half an hour. So Rio must have been taking some real wonder drug, if he knew it would be all out his system in those 2 hours, eh. Christine never did anything like this, she simply missed tests, shrugged shoulders, and said 'oh well'. Point 3- Rio even gave hair sample's to prove there was NO illegal substance in his body (in case you don't know, drugs remain in your hair, so anything Rio had took in the previous 5 month or so would still have been visible), they came back 100% clean, he proved beyond ALL doubt he had not taken anything, something Christine has not no matter how much you like her. Point 4- At the same time as Rio was getting banned for 8 month for a missed test, other players around Europe were taking, and failing, drug tests. They all got 6 month bans. Does it not make more sense then for Rio to have taken, and failed, the test, and been back 2 month quicker? And finally Rio is a footballer, not a profession so associated with drugs, and when it is it's always non performance enhancing drugs i.e. cocaine, or canabis. Christine is an athelete, a sport that has been tarnished so much that every body now just assumes the top athlete's are cheats, the authorities should be way harsher with anyone caught on drugs, or missing tests, as the public is fast falling out of love with athletics. How many people have you heard say ' Bolt must be on drugs ', how many have you heard say ' Wayne Rooney must be on drugs'? Their both at the very top of their profession, so why the difference? If there's doubt, there must be stiffer penalties, simple as that

    Complain about this comment

  • 242. At 04:11am on 20 Aug 2008, NightRider wrote:

    It is a very sad day for British and World athletics, and the Olympics themselves.

    To read such an article makes it all the more worse.

    But I understand where it is coming from - I've read glowing, long winded, emotional tributes paid to everyone who won a medal (and Paula Radcliffe, lest I forget), so it is OK.

    At what cost, the question remains.

    Complain about this comment

  • 243. At 04:29am on 20 Aug 2008, bacon_trout wrote:

    RIGHT. I have read every last one of these comments - I think it would have served one or two commenters well to have done the same!

    For starters, the levels some of the "debate" has plummeted to is absurd! This is a perfectly reasonable issue to be discussing, and to just ouright dismiss the opposing side in such a vitriolic manner is ridiculous.

    I have to be blunt, the worst has come from the pro CO camp (although I've obviously not seen some of the fruitier moderated posts!). *pvandck* - as an English teacher, your dismissive and patronising attitude to those you percieve to be of lesser intelligence is slightly worrying. Just glad you weren't my teacher! Also, when taking time out to banter others spelling and grammar on t'net, you have to be damn sure your own is PERFECT. In this regard you have failed.

    This something I've been wanting to say for a while, and this appears the perfect place - you are not going to change someone's mind here. You can only express a statement, a little brain thought...and as a reader, you suck it up, it adds to your own thoughts and gives you a greater base to draw opinion from. So don't rage against an opinion different to yours! It is impotent rage. The truth is, both opinions can exist quite happily.

    On to the debate (finally!), all I would say is read post 91, and the link attached - one of the more rational (or cynical, depending how you look at it!) posts. I would also say that if you'd read another of the links, you would see that the some of the drugs available can be out of the system within 24 hours, rendering the "she tested negative x days before/after" argument a bit useless. At the same time, it is not inconcievable that there are drugs unknownst to the testers - in all walks of criminality, the criminals are generally one step ahead of the police. This is no chicken and egg situation - the drugs are created first, only later are they cottoned on to. You can be sure there are labs around the world RIGHT NOW looking to create new untraceable PEDs.

    This of course is a heavily cynical view, and would mean it might be hard to believe in any athlete! But they are "facts" such as they are, the point is they can co-exist quite happily with other points raised above.

    FINALLY (phew!) I have purposely left out my own opinion on the matter, as it would not add much at this point, however I suspect it would be different from what you might think.

    Complain about this comment

  • 244. At 05:02am on 20 Aug 2008, wombatsrus wrote:

    Post 241
    "Rio phoned Old Trafford just 2 hours after the test was scheduled to say I forgot and am my way back now, the tester was still in the stadium but out of his own pathetic pettyness refused to wait"
    ...
    "So Rio must have been taking some real wonder drug, if he knew it would be all out his system in those 2 hours, eh. Christine never did anything like this, she simply missed tests, shrugged shoulders, and said 'oh well'."

    So you've read all about CO's case have you? Actually I think you'll find that 2 of her tests were exactly like that. She tried to drive back across London to take the test but the testers would not wait. They only wait for the 1 hour period that is stipulated and are too inflexible to do anything else, even if notified by the athlete at that point.

    From the telegraph report mentioned in other posts:
    "June 28 2006: Ohuruogu tried to drive across London when she realised she had not notified testers she had switched training venues from Mile End to the Olympic Medical Institute in Harrow. She failed to make it in time.

    July 25 2006: A school sports day at Mile End forced her to relocate at the last minute to Crystal Palace. In the panic to drive to the venue, Ohuruogu forgot to tell the testers. "

    These are all verifiable events, which should arouse no suspicion. However there are so many people who will not accept this decision. I haven't heard anyone complaining about the Triathlete Tim Don yet either.

    UK Athletics have admitted that the systems for reminding athletes were poor in the last few years, to the extent that there were several high profile athletes who had missed 2 tests due to oversight or forgetting to notify testers of a change of location.

    So perhaps all those who have missed one test should be under suspicion now as well. They have broken the rules. They have received a punishment (in this case a warning letter) therefore we should not trust any of them. Why is 3 tests in 18 months the rule? Why not 1 test in eighteen months? Or 5 tests in eighteen months?

    Lets just not trust any of them any more!

    Complain about this comment

  • 245. At 05:48am on 20 Aug 2008, dazjoe78 wrote:

    Post 244
    I apologize to ms Ohuruogu if I have done her a misjustice in saying she made no effort to have the tests taken, my mistake. But you ask why is 3 missed tests in 18 months the rule for harsher sentencing, answer, it isn't. But where do you stop, so missing 3 tests is only mildly bad, and should be treated as such. Then what about 4, or 6, or 10, or 30? Where's the line between 'you've missed x amounts of tests so it's a year ban, and you've missed y amounts so it's a 2/3/4 year ban?' If I was putting my heart and soul into something I had dreamt of since I was a child, something I was determined to achieve, something which could bring me fame/wealth/and glory I could never have imagined as a young child, I would make DAMN sure I did everything expected of me to follow the rules that apply to this. You miss 1 test it's wrong, but forgiveable. You miss 2, there's something pretty suspect going on and you really need a better excuse than 'I changed my schedule', you miss 3 and I'm sorry, but no body's that unlucky, or careless.
    And am I the only one really getting fed up with the one's crying for her to be forgiven taking the moral high ground here? Their willing to turn a blind eye to past offences, and seem to think this makes their opinions somehow more valid than others

    Complain about this comment

  • 246. At 06:35am on 20 Aug 2008, justino23 wrote:

    The most telling thing for me in all this is that not one of her competitors went to her to congratulate her on victory - she was left very much on her own and that speaks volumes

    Complain about this comment

  • 247. At 06:42am on 20 Aug 2008, Jordan D wrote:

    What's interesting is that people are backing Christine, despite the fact that she said that if she couldn't take part in the Olympics due to a GB Ban, she'd simply switch nationalities to another country.

    For me, I find that really disappointing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 248. At 06:51am on 20 Aug 2008, JulanB wrote:

    Why are some people so sad they can not rejoyce. Give the lady a break. She didn't take any drugs. You are just jealous she got where you can never be. Aren't you racist by the way?

    Get a life

    Complain about this comment

  • 249. At 06:56am on 20 Aug 2008, JulanB wrote:

    Dazejoe78, who do you think you are. You have no clue. get lost. get a life.

    Complain about this comment

  • 250. At 07:00am on 20 Aug 2008, Batson_D_Belfry wrote:

    Nobody can go back and repeat the tests she missed, so we'll never know.

    People here are saying it's like missing the gas man or being late for a meeting. Sorry, but it isn't. If your job or career depended on these you'd make sure you turned up. Michael Johnson said at the time, "How do you miss 3 drugs tests, it's your job?". Precisely.

    And there were at least 3 means of communication she could have used, including a simple text message to inform of change of venue. Or she could have arranged for the tests to be done at home if she knew the facilities were difficult to rely on, as she must have realised at some point. The line is that she didn't do this because of privacy, but again if your job or career depended on it, you'd get past that concern. And frankly, she seems too bright, methodical and organised for this "forgetful student" tag to fully stack up.

    And many clean tests proves nothing. All drug cheats who have been caught also have had many clean tests before the positive got them. And many people have question marks over such as Florence Griffith Joyner, but she was never caught, and it took years to catch up with Marion Jones.

    Each to their own view on this one, but I think rehabilitation for her in many people's eyes came very quickly after the world championship gold, as they want to believe it. But I can't get enthused because of the questions, and switched to table tennis when this came on the highlights, which I don't think I'm going to stick with too long.

    As to this stuff about 3 tests being arbitrary, and why not a ban after 1? Well, 3 missed tests was the rule, and all athletes knew that. Nobody denies the system was in need of improvement, and that many athletes missed 1 or 2 tests. But very few missed 3 because they knew that was where the line was.

    All the detailed reasons for each test having been missed are themselves missing that point and the big picture here.

    Complain about this comment

  • 251. At 07:00am on 20 Aug 2008, Christine wrote:

    If she'd missed 3 tests and not had had any tests during that time, I would've been suspicious. But during those 18 months she was tested on numerous occasions and never once had a positive test. Yes, she was wrong to be careless and she paid for it with a ban. But no, she was never caught doing drugs. I don't hear anyone demanding that Rio Ferdinand never play football again. What Christine did has nothing in common with Dwain Chambers. What we need is a better testing system that allows for last minute changes in venues, or for our athletes to have dedicated training venues that are never used for anything else.

    Complain about this comment

  • 252. At 07:03am on 20 Aug 2008, Batson_D_Belfry wrote:

    And oh dear, just read post no. 248. I suppose it was only a matter of time before someone brought race into this, and it probably says more about them. She missed 3 drugs tests - I don't think that has anything to do with the colour of someone's skin does it?

    Complain about this comment

  • 253. At 07:08am on 20 Aug 2008, hongkongtri wrote:

    For those that raise the case of Rasmussen, he missed 2 tests by his National cycling federation and two by the UCI so 4 in total. Also he told the testers he was in Mexico when he was seen training in Italy, so very Different case.

    Point 2: a well known British Trithlete was also banned from the olympics for missing 3 tests (but banned for only 3 months) he appealed and competed as well and was a good choice for a medal but didnt win due to illness. Is his being male and white what has saved him this out pouring of un-informed vitriol or the fact that he just didnt win?

    Complain about this comment

  • 254. At 07:22am on 20 Aug 2008, dazjoe78 wrote:

    JulanB, I most truly hope the sad, pathetic, and VERY offensive comment about being racist was not directed at me, and should not have been aimed at anyone. Her skin colour has NOTHING to do with why people are questioning her. And you say she never took drugs, are you one of her closest friends, or family? No? Then how the hell can you say what she has, or has not done. If I took a drug test now, or at any point in the last 8 years it would be clean, but it would be a lie to say I'd never taken drugs (what I might have ingested is entirely my business by the way, not yours). Who do I think I am, I think I'm one of many hundreds of people who wish to contribute of a fair and free topic on the bbc website, and I do so without resorting to just aggresive comments.
    And if jealousy is the key motivation behind these comments, then surely the most hated man in Britain most be Steve Redgrave, as we'd all be jealous of his achievments. Just because people have a different opinion to yours does not make them wrong, and you right, or vice versa. Thats the beauty of living in a free country like this, we can air our honest opinions without fear, though you seem to want everyone to just agree with you. Ok, just to put a smile on your face, YEAH YEAH!! GO CHRISTINE!! YOUR THE BEST!!
    All better now?

    Complain about this comment

  • 255. At 07:32am on 20 Aug 2008, bacon_trout wrote:

    249. At 06:56am on 20 Aug 2008, JulanB wrote:
    Dazejoe78, who do you think you are. You have no clue. get lost. get a life.

    --------------------------------

    Get lost? Get a life? For having an opinion? This is a debate forum. Your post is worthless. Add something of some insight, and try to hide your disgust at someone for thinking in a different way.

    Complain about this comment

  • 256. At 07:39am on 20 Aug 2008, Lizzie P wrote:

    Some of the comments here are pathetic. Christine had the support of her fellow athletes: Kelly Holmes and Colin Jackson to name but two. Both of these didn't want Dwain Chambers at the Olympics.

    Well done to her to win a fantastic race and silence Sanya Richards once and for all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 257. At 07:42am on 20 Aug 2008, bacon_trout wrote:

    253. At 07:08am on 20 Aug 2008, hongkongtri wrote:

    Point 2: a well known British Trithlete was also banned from the olympics for missing 3 tests (but banned for only 3 months) he appealed and competed as well and was a good choice for a medal but didnt win due to illness. Is his being male and white what has saved him this out pouring of un-informed vitriol or the fact that he just didnt win?

    -----------------------

    Hmmm, trying to shoe horn a racist/sexist slant in there. Interesting angle. You mention Rasmussen, there have been negative comments about him above. I don't watch much cycling, is he a black woman?

    I would argue that "well known tri-athlete" is in fact an oxymoron to the general sport watching public, and not many people will know that story.

    Complain about this comment

  • 258. At 07:45am on 20 Aug 2008, dazjoe78 wrote:

    bacon_trout
    You know, I think I like you!
    It really is sad how the people behind Christine seem to be getting more aggresive in their comments, and are now resorting to racist/sexist claims.
    I wonder why this is?

    Complain about this comment

  • 259. At 07:51am on 20 Aug 2008, bacon_trout wrote:

    256. At 07:39am on 20 Aug 2008, LizzieP wrote:
    Some of the comments here are pathetic.

    --------------------

    *sigh* one last effort.

    It is not pathetic to have a different idea on something than yourself.

    I find it amusing that some people are calling others "blinkered"... clearly the concept of 6 billion people having 6 billion different mindsets isn't one they are yet open to.

    Keep your cool, understand that two opposing views can exist beside each other.

    Complain about this comment

  • 260. At 07:56am on 20 Aug 2008, ilelolose wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 261. At 07:57am on 20 Aug 2008, Lizzie P wrote:

    * Sigh*

    I don't think there is anything wrong with people having different opinions but it is pathetic if people form one sided views without reading any of the facts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 262. At 08:00am on 20 Aug 2008, Batson_D_Belfry wrote:

    "Point 2: a well known British Trithlete was also banned from the olympics for missing 3 tests (but banned for only 3 months) he appealed and competed as well and was a good choice for a medal but didnt win due to illness. Is his being male and white what has saved him this out pouring of un-informed vitriol or the fact that he just didnt win?"

    Oh dear. I suspect the fact he didn't win a medal, and is thus very low profile has a lot more to do with it. This poster seems to be one of those who are coming onto here and trying to bring race into it - all I can say is that you're the ones who seem to notice the colour of skin and see that as relevant, and you're the ones with the problem.

    For what it is worth, my views on the triathlete or anyone who breached the drug testing rules would be exactly the same.

    Complain about this comment

  • 263. At 08:12am on 20 Aug 2008, croydonrich wrote:

    What a joke

    Heaven forbid she had been a foreign athlete who beat a British girl into second place

    3 missed tests in 1 year !?!??!

    Complain about this comment

  • 264. At 08:18am on 20 Aug 2008, Phil_in_Holland wrote:

    I believe that we should be proud of our athletes, i also believe that we should give them the benefit of the doubt. Don't you people think that she is under the attention of the governing body and after winning the Gold will more than likely be tested. Until the time that she is tested POSITIVE i think people should stop speculating that she is using. How would you people feel if your own child was found guilty of drugs usage without first of all be tested. Some people just can't give credit where it is due. After all this is the best Olympics I can remember in my lifetime. Or would rather have athletes like Eddy the Eagle (yes i know that is winter olympics) I live in Holland and those sort of Athletes made GB a laughing stock.

    Complain about this comment

  • 265. At 08:20am on 20 Aug 2008, Lizzie P wrote:

    Please remember that she was tested regularly before and after each missed test – 14 plus times in the last year alone – it shows how improbable it is that she could ever have used ‘performance enhancing’ drugs without detection.

    Complain about this comment

  • 266. At 08:29am on 20 Aug 2008, Batson_D_Belfry wrote:

    Well, I think all this long thread shows is that everyone now has their view on this athlete, and it is unlikely to change.

    My final thoughts on it all are this.

    It does strike me, as others have noted, that those questioning Ohuruogo use words like doubt, uncertainty and questions. This acknowledges the grey areas of life, and that there will never be an answer on this just views and opinion. Many of those backing her seem to prefer language like "she has not used drugs" and try to go for definite statements on things that can never be known. It's a bit like the politicians' tactic that say something often enough and it becomes the truth. If these people allowed more for it being an opinion this would probably have gone on a lot less.

    Second, as has always been the case, there is a tendency to judge Britons by a different standard to others. We have a view of ourselves as a nation of fair play, yet not so many years ago we had a pretty bad reputation for drug use in sport. This was the reason for the get tough policy, and trying to treat a missed drugs test the same as a failed one, and while people criticise the system it has does seem to have improved our act. I do respect the opinions of those who believe her to be clean (rather than those who try to state it as a fact) but at the same time I'm glad they are not in charge of the country's drug testing policy.

    And finally, all the useful above threads seem to come down to two views. One that looks at the list of reasons and excuses for missing the tests and finds them reasonable and therefore holds onto these. The other that steps back and goes "hang on, but 3 times?", and if the system was so much to blame and it was so easy, why aren't there so many more athletes out there like this? Plenty yes with 1 miss, and quite a number with 2, but few with 3. And yet the same system with its faults was in place for all the athletes, and Ohoruogo was not the only young student or athlete with a job and a difficult schedule.

    The problem here is that for every Chambers who once caught does at least hold his hand up and say "I did it" (not that I think he should be allowed back in competition), there are a great many more who come up with a load of reasons and excuses (faulty test, must have been something I ate, or it was my coach I never knew etc., etc.). And similarly with those who miss tests - there are always very credible reasons given, and it is just down to whether you believe those as innocent explanations or not.

    And yes, I am one of those who look at it all and question it. Because the facts do remain, she knew the rules, she missed 3 tests, she knew testers only waited an hour (as they do presumably have other athletes to test and should not be paid to stand around all day), and she could have opted to have this all done at home and had no risk.

    So it leaves a question that can never be answered to me, and it would appear many others like me, and I will never get enthused as a result on this athlete's successes as I have on others in these Games, because I simply don't and cannot know if what I am watching is "real".

    Complain about this comment

  • 267. At 08:32am on 20 Aug 2008, threedegreesburn wrote:

    Fantastic race by a great - and clean - British athlete. The fact that no one came up to congratulate her was a shame but says more about the others than it does about her. Kudos to Christine for showing such determination over the past few years with all the negativity she's had to put up with. Great run by Shericka Williams too.

    Complain about this comment

  • 268. At 08:33am on 20 Aug 2008, darkvalleysboy1978 wrote:

    I'm sorry but I cannot celebrate this gold model as much. Hoy has won THREE gold medals, Adlington TWO gold medals, yet this woman gets all of the attention simply because she is a runner. Don't get me wrong it is great that she won her gold medal (though I have to agree that I can' t see the difference between Chambers and Ohuruogu) but lets put it into perspective as this was the day where we crowned our most successful athlete at a single games in Hoy.

    Personally I would consider the double gold and world record thrashing Adlington achieved to be a far superior achievement to this victory

    Complain about this comment

  • 269. At 08:35am on 20 Aug 2008, mrsvennis69 wrote:

    She should never have been allowed in the Olympics. Sure she never failed a test but it is hard to fail if you never take them. Missing 1 test might be explainable but by the third time?? She broke the rules. She should have paid the price for breaking those rules.

    Complain about this comment

  • 270. At 08:37am on 20 Aug 2008, threedegreesburn wrote:

    Mrs Vennis: have you been reading the posts? She has paid her price. And she's taken loads of tests - and never failed a single one.

    Complain about this comment

  • 271. At 08:41am on 20 Aug 2008, JayRed - The Babes' Remembered Forever and a day! wrote:

    Her medal should be forfeit.

    None of you can say she did not take drugs. Have you been with her 24/7 over the last few years ? No. Then what makes you certain she is/was clean ?

    Missing 3 tests doesn't just happen because of a busy schedule.

    I feel like saying congratulations to her, but I can't.

    Complain about this comment

  • 272. At 08:43am on 20 Aug 2008, Moutarde wrote:

    It's a shame the BBC sees fit to delete any posts by people who don't think "Our Christine" should have competing. I'm afraid that anyone who celebrates her gold medal should feel guilty the next time an athlete is discovered to be drugs-cheat.

    Complain about this comment

  • 273. At 08:54am on 20 Aug 2008, darkvalleysboy1978 wrote:

    Marion Jones took loads of tests and never failed a single one.....makes you think doesn't it

    Complain about this comment

  • 274. At 08:56am on 20 Aug 2008, doctord wrote:

    Christine wasn't shunned anyway.She was overwhelmed by the moment and didn't get up for ages.Several athletes approached her while she was down, and as soon as she finally got up it was sanya richards who came over and congratulated her.

    Complain about this comment

  • 275. At 08:58am on 20 Aug 2008, threedegreesburn wrote:

    Batson D Belfry (266): I understand all the doubts (though I don't share them) - but only about the period when the tests were missed. Surely, whether or not you believe Christine should have been there, you can have no doubts about yesterday's performance being real.

    By contrast, I'm reminded of idiots like Dawin (you have to take drugs to compete) Chambers and Ben ("you can't run in less than 9.80 seconds without the right drugs") Johnson. It's people like that who undermine the achievements of the great athletes we've been watching this summer. Yes, let's test them like crazy. And when they test negative, let's give them the credit they deserve.

    Complain about this comment

  • 276. At 09:00am on 20 Aug 2008, threedegreesburn wrote:

    Doctord: thanks, must have missed seeing Richards congratulating her.

    Complain about this comment

  • 277. At 09:02am on 20 Aug 2008, reallyquitesomething wrote:

    this is from the Telegraph article which revealed the details of the official report on Christine's case

    The Flint committee concludes that there were many other times during the critical nine-month period when Ohuruogu tested negative, which is why the report declares with such certainty that she was not guilty of doping.

    In fact, Flint says in his conclusion that if he had the powers to set Ohuruogu's punishment, he would have chosen a less stringent three-month ban.

    Flint writes: "In fairness, the committee should make clear its view as to the limited degree of fault attributed to her. This was a minor unintentional infraction of the regime due only to forgetfulness. There is no suggestion, nor any grounds for suspicion, that the offence may have been deliberate in order to prevent testing. The omissions are too haphazard for any such suspicion to arise. The athlete was tested negative on several occasions during this period and has always co-operated with doping control officers. She did notify changes to her schedule on many occasions but failed in these three instances. Those failures are understandable given all the circumstances.
    Accordingly, if the committee had... a discretion to order a fair penalty, we would have imposed a sanction of three months, consistent with the [World Anti Doping Agency] code. But... the committee is obliged under IAAF rules to impose a fixed penalty of one year's ineligibility."

    So the qualified committee that spend time looking into the case had 'no grounds for suspicion'. End of story. Please all stop posting messages suggesting Christine is a drugs cheat. Just THINK for one moment how damaging that is to her livelihood, how disrespectful it is. I wonder if she'd be getting so much negativity if she was white.

    Christine Ohuruogu is an inspiration, the indisputable best female 400m runner in the world and a Great Britain. We should celebrate her not try and take her down.

    Complain about this comment

  • 278. At 09:07am on 20 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    Well said reallyquitesomething

    Complain about this comment

  • 279. At 09:07am on 20 Aug 2008, Coldcell2008 wrote:

    Firstly, well done Christine, you've obviously worked very hard for this.

    Secondly though I would like to point out a few things. Like many others here I would like to ask why she missed three drugs tests and is allowed to compete? I am drawing parallels with Dwain Chambers here. I understand that she served a ban etc. But so did Dwain Chambers. It seems unfair somehow.

    Thirdly, I would like to point out the element of luck that played into her hands. The American went out far too hard and I think if she had been tactically sound would've won it comfortably. However, I do appreciate that luck, or good fortune, plays a part in most sports.

    Fourthly, I would like to point out the standard in women's 400m is appallingly low - just look at how much faster the OR is, never mind the WR. But at the end of day that was the Olympic final and she won.

    I know I sound like a cynic but just trying to put some perspective on things. I want to make it very clear I wish Christine a very huge well done and no matter what your opinion you should be pround she won. Roll on the womens 4x400m relay!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 280. At 09:10am on 20 Aug 2008, run800 wrote:

    I am truly disgusted by most of the comments posted above. They are obviously posted by highly ignorant people who do not know the first thing about athletics, or the drug testing procedures involved in the sport.

    It was careless to miss two tests, I agree. But the circumstances in which I believe the third test was missed were exceptional. Turn up at the local track, where you have previously informed the testing authority you will be training at a certain time, and a school sports day is on. So pop across the city to another track to train.

    You have to inform of your whereabouts weeks, months in advance of you actually being there - I have done this myself, I know the system. I must admit, the last thing on my mind if I was in her shoes on that day would be to inform the testing authority of a change in training venue for such a one off event. I would want to find somewhere so I could train.

    She is not a drugs cheat. She has not failed a drugs test. She was a 21 year old who missed 3 tests - I'm not sure over what timescale - but she was young (in athletics terms). Not every 21 year old on an athletics team is at the level to be subject to such stringent testing procedures. In other sports, such as swimming where younger ages are common, they will have become familiar with the testing procedures in their mid to late teens. And lets face it, there's not much chance of a school sports day taking over a swimming pool at 5am, or whenever they train.

    I would hazard a guess that the year she missed her third test was the first year she was subject to out-of-competition drug testing, which coincidently could have been her big breakthrough year. I bet there are plenty of other young athletes in other sports who have fallen foul of this rule, but as they were not high profile it wouldn't have been reported.

    She should not be mentioned in the same breath as Dwain Chambers et al, who are drugs cheats. And as for the comment about "how do we know she hasn't taken drugs, has anyone been with her 24/7?" - Well, has any sports person been followed in this manner? I think that is the most ignorant and stupid comment I have ever read. Whoever wrote it, you know absolutely nothing about this topic and your opinion is totally outrageous and unfounded.

    Why can't we celebrate champions in this country? It is truly a sad state of affairs when I read what has been posted above. I am absolutely sickened by it.

    We should be thankful that we have a young, extremely talented athlete who will represent us with pride in London 2012, as a defending Olympic champion at a prime age to defend her title. End of.

    Complain about this comment

  • 281. At 09:11am on 20 Aug 2008, CaptMarvel2705 wrote:

    I think the thing that strikes me most about this is not the fact that Ohurougu has served a ban which was just, it is the hypocrisy of the BOA in allowing an athlete who has been found guilty of a drugs related offence to compete at the Olympics when they took such pride in stating that this would never happen.

    I think that Ohuruogu has served her time and should be allowed to compete again but the fact that the BOA relaxed their rules as she was a realistic gold medal hope is abhorrent.

    The Dwain Chambers decision was made a lot easier by the fact that:
    a) he was found guilty of using PES AND
    b) it is doubtful he would have placed in a medal position.

    With Ohurougu being World Champion, their would have been backlash from certain groups as she is obviously one of the world's best and is clean.

    Complain about this comment

  • 282. At 09:12am on 20 Aug 2008, Coldcell2008 wrote:

    A final comment - just read reallyquitesomething's comments and I never knew that. Very informative these forums.

    Also those suspecting racial motivations for downplaying her achievements - please be more respectful. I don't think anyone here is suggesting anything discriminatory.

    If they are then I would suggest they realise just how hard all the athletes at the Olympics work for everything they get regardless of background.

    Complain about this comment

  • 283. At 09:15am on 20 Aug 2008, Hookers_armpit wrote:

    The point continuously overlooked by the majority of posters (and my word there are a few) is that the missed tests were random tests that happened when she was not expecting them.

    Testers turned up unannounced. Therefore there is no possibilty of cunning manipulation on the atheletes part. ie cleverly missing tests to fit a drugs schedule.

    As has been mentioned once before she was not where she said she would be. For the third test she had gone to train at a different track because her normal track had been double booked. What should she have done? Wasted a day hanging around on the off chance a tester might turn up? She informed people where she was going but the tester refused to go to a different location.

    What is at fault here is the British love of jobsworths and unworkable administrative systems.

    Complain about this comment

  • 284. At 09:18am on 20 Aug 2008, singinghannahj wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 285. At 09:21am on 20 Aug 2008, croydonrich wrote:

    This is ridiculous.

    A rational adult who already somehow had missed 2 tests wouldnt deviate from their announced schedule, unless or until they had contacted the authorities. End of story

    So either this 21 year old graduate:
    (a) gambled on not getting caught or being let off if she was
    or
    (b) is too stupid to understand the regime and/or the consequences of her actions
    or
    (c) had a reason to miss the test

    I think those who aren't diehard athletics fans or caught up in the fevour of Team GB know the most likely explanation

    Complain about this comment

  • 286. At 09:21am on 20 Aug 2008, darkvalleysboy1978 wrote:

    I'm sorry but I just knew that as soon as she won this medal she would become the "poster girl" of the Olympics (both 2008 and 2012) when I would consider Hoy's triple gold and Adlington's double gold to be far superior achievements. Let's get some perspective here people. Swimming and cycling athletes work just as hard to their respective golds as track and field athletes

    Complain about this comment

  • 287. At 09:25am on 20 Aug 2008, run800 wrote:

    Post 285 - what bit don't you understand?

    Out of competition testing is random, she didn't know that someone was going to turn up at the training ground to test her. So how could she have knowingly and purposefully missed a drugs test?

    Please answer my question, I am keen to know you answer and how you can back it up.

    Or are you another person commenting on something you know nothing about...? Like 99% of the posts above?

    The gutter press have a lot to answer for in this country, judging by the number of people taking their views as gospel.

    Complain about this comment

  • 288. At 09:26am on 20 Aug 2008, AndyRAC wrote:

    Difficult one this, a fantastic achievement, clouded slightly. If it had been a 'nasty foreigner' I'm sure everybody would be up in arms. As she is an honest Brit there seems to be no doubt in the commentators minds. While she has never failed a test, to miss 3 is highly dubious. Last year Michael Rasmussen was thrown out of the Tour de France whilst leading due to missing tests and misleading the testers as to his whereabouts, as far as I'm aware he has never tested positive.
    Such doubts about Christine are legitimate, but the brushing under the carpet by the British 'experts' is unforgivable.

    Complain about this comment

  • 289. At 09:31am on 20 Aug 2008, clubrower wrote:

    Those that criticise Christine Ohoruogu and accuse or suspect her of cheating due to the missed drug tests should explain why both the courts that examined her case (including the International Court of Arbitration in Sport) and explicitly acquitted her of any suspicion of drug taking and of any intention to miss tests, are wrong.

    Both said her offence was 'unintentional' and 'minor' and that no suspicion should be levelled at her, even though they upheld the ban on the grounds that strict compliance is necessary.

    Why do people unacquainted with the facts of the case presume that they know better?




    Complain about this comment

  • 290. At 09:33am on 20 Aug 2008, hizento wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 291. At 09:36am on 20 Aug 2008, Tim wrote:

    Very well done indeed to Christine Ohuruogu: she ran a wonderful race, and deserved to win, because her competitors didn't execute.

    To the Christine knockers: your whining on the inscrutable question of whether Christine is a cheat is all very interesting, but the simple fact of the matter is this: ANYBODY in athletics could be a cheat, and Christine Ohuruogu, as a British athlete, even as one who has served a ban for a technical offence, is LESS likely to be a cheat than the girl in second place, who has a far inferior domestic testing regime. This does not take away from the fact that ANY or ALL of them COULD be cheats. If you cannot handle this fact, the answer is simple: just don't watch athletics any more. The idea of watching, and then denigrating the achievements of the participants, is a ludicrous and farcical waste of time and effort!

    Complain about this comment

  • 292. At 09:54am on 20 Aug 2008, badger51 wrote:

    Christines acheivement was fantastic, and I was certainly screaming her home.

    I have just read all comments and shinyAllspark is the one who really hit the nail on the head.

    Cheating has become commonplace in almost any sport you care to mention, and you must accept the fact that some get caught and some don't.

    If you can gain an advantage in sport, you will.

    I for one feel that it happens in all sports, and it is something we have to acknowledge and live with. We are better at testing for cheats in this country, than most others.

    But you just have to acknowledge that their are always new ways to cheat, and don't you just know that there are a lot of competitors at the Olympics who have got away with it.

    For what it's worth I am sure with all I've read Christine is a true champion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 293. At 10:02am on 20 Aug 2008, theyresalutingyou wrote:

    She's constantly portrayed herself as a victim. To my knowledge she's never shown genuine contrition. She even threatend to quit athletics as if she's been unfairly treated. The rules are there to protect the integrity of the sport and she broke them. I have no doubtr that she's clean and credit to her for a great performance but she doesn't appeat to realise that her ban was for the good of the sport as whole and until she accepts that she's not the victim then she shouldn't be held up as a role model. There are more deserving contenders.

    Complain about this comment

  • 294. At 10:07am on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Ohuruogu proved herself to be a brilliant athlete for the big event. Absolutely outstanding performance. For me she is the story of British success this year. She made a mistake (a genuine one not the daily "mistake" Chambers made over a number of years), by missing the test which she was investigated fully for, she served a ban that was admitted harsh by the board who sentenced her, and came back to compete. Despite this interruption and the huge and Moors murderer-like negative publicity she received she put her head down and achieved gold in the World Championships. She has then followed this up with the Olympic gold in supremely executed tactical race.

    While her hate filled detractors will always question the missing test despite it being fully investigated by those who actually know the facts and the relevant rules, they cannot with any credibility claim her win yesterday was drug assisted. For me, these people who persist in this cynical armchair backbiting are the real shame of this country and it is despite their energy sapping negativity that she achieved greatness. For me she is a symbol of triumph over adversity and we as a nation should be proud of her. I am.

    Forgetfulness is not a crime but there are many who would love to make it one. And one with a life sentence.

    Well done Christine. Your achievement raised my and like-minded people's spirits. Thanks for not allowing yourself to get bullied into giving up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 295. At 10:11am on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    "Why do people unacquainted with the facts of the case presume that they know better?"

    Good comments clubrower. My guess would be extreme arrogance.

    Complain about this comment

  • 296. At 10:11am on 20 Aug 2008, he_hit_the_upright wrote:

    I have a couple of questions.

    My understanding is 3 missed tests = 1 positive test, an under the BOA bye-law that equates to a lifetime ban from the Olympics.

    However, Tim Don (Triathlon), Peter Cousins (Judo) and Christine Ohuruogou have successfully appealed and been able to compete.

    Have the BOA changed their stance on missed tests? Have UK sport changed their procedures to prevent athletes accidently missing tests?

    Bearing in mind Conte's letter about how to miss tests it would be a dangerous precedent.

    With regard to the subject, I believe Ohurugou is clean. But for the general public Athletics (like cycling) is seen as a tarnished sport where virtually all performances are treated with suspicion. Regrettably Christine has to live with the accusations and I believe she has acknowledged this.

    Complain about this comment

  • 297. At 10:14am on 20 Aug 2008, a dog named spot wrote:

    The BBC are reporting that Blonska has failed a drugs test.

    Complain about this comment

  • 298. At 10:35am on 20 Aug 2008, water_park_ji_sung wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 299. At 10:36am on 20 Aug 2008, cilurnum wrote:

    Blonska wouldn't surprise me if true, and I would question all of the medallists who suddenly started getting PBs all over the place.

    Complain about this comment

  • 300. At 10:39am on 20 Aug 2008, friendlymrsflip wrote:

    for all those people who do not believe it is possible to be forgetful:

    I have forgotten a vital part of my weekly tasks in my job 3 times in the past year. I may not be an athlete but as a single parent my job is every bit as important to me as any athletes is to them.

    according to all of you after the first time I should have been concentrating harder and believe me i thought i was but clearly not.

    I am fortunate that I did not pay for my memory loss with my job and will remain thankful to my dying day that i do not work for anyone who does not believe in forgetfulness.

    I am not saying that I believe without a doubt that she forgot just that if she did many of us do in circumstances just as important to us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 301. At 10:42am on 20 Aug 2008, White_Rat wrote:

    Leaving aside whether she has or hasn't I found one thing about her run intriguing.

    Usually after an event the competitors make a point of congratulating a winner, lots of back-slapping and hugs.

    They all avoided Ohuruogu like she had the plague. Not one went near her, whilst they congratulated others. That spoke volumes about the others attitude to her even being there.

    Her attitude of "I don't care what people say. I've got a gold medal and that's all that matters to me" as quoted above also gives pause for thought. If the gold truly IS all that matters then anything that helps to achieve that end is legitimate in her eyes.

    I'd have had more sympathy if she'd acknowledged that when people have these concerns they really DO matter to her and reinforce her desire to run clean. She should care deeply about public opinion if she wants their continued support

    Complain about this comment

  • 302. At 10:56am on 20 Aug 2008, TheInvigilator wrote:

    I said last night on one of the Cycling forums that I very much doubt if the British public is really interested in sharing any pride in Ohurugou's victory. The BBC has been shoving athletics down our throats for more years than I care to remember - and it seems little has changed. Yesterday saw the probably the single biggest UK Olympics success story of all time - cyclist Chris Hoy taking his third Gold in one games, a feat not achieved for 100 years so I gather. But instead, BBC Ceefax, the website, BBC TV evening news, the 7pm BBC TV round-up all headlined with Ohurugou's tainted victory....
    Is the BBC really so desperate to promote athletics that they give this questionable victory precedence over everything else?
    I'm not going to go into all the details of Ohurugou's missed tests etc - others here have made a better job of discussing this, suffice to say that I don't think she should have run in these Olympics. I'm far from alone in this opinion - witness the many "pulled" posts above - but could the BBC please exercise a little more balance and common sense?
    And at the end of this year the BBC will strongly urge the UK public to vote for Ohurugou as SPOTY - but will deliberately airbrush away Nicole Cooke's infinitely more worthy Olympics Gold, and will even do it's level best to sideline Chris Hoy's historic 3 Golds.
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/columnists/2008/08/20/christine-ohuruogu-won-britain-s-16th-gold-last-night-but-i-don-t-count-it-115875-20704882/

    Complain about this comment

  • 303. At 10:59am on 20 Aug 2008, Onion_C94 wrote:

    I really wonder if there would have been so much negativity if it had been a white male runner in the same situation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 304. At 11:07am on 20 Aug 2008, Mark Peters wrote:

    If you had missed two tests and knew that you would get a year ban if you missed another one, surely you would definitely do everything in your power to make it.

    She knew where and when she had to be so unless there was an emergency situation surely she should have ensured that she was there.

    It is hugely sad that if she is as clean as a lot of people think that her title will always have a tinge of doubt to it.

    As for Rio Ferdinand, i would prefer him to be selling programmes at Old Trafford than playing for my country!

    Complain about this comment

  • 305. At 11:11am on 20 Aug 2008, Llamanatorx wrote:

    The amount of ridiculously uniformed opinion on here is amazing.

    3 or 4 posters have time and time again posted the facts of the case, and peopl are ignoring it.

    The 3 tests she missed were random. Due to unforseen circumstances she was not in the places she had originally told the testers she would be at the start of the season.

    She attempted each time to contact the testers and meet with them, and each time they would not wait.

    She has had numerous other tests between the 3 missed ones, and afterwards and never failed.

    Whats so hard to understand about this? How many ways have the facts got to be presented? Im sure that people just read the tabloid headlines of '3 tests missed' and look no further before spouting their baseless and ignorant opinions all over this blog.


    There was no wilfull manipulation of the rules to her benefit, and she has had to pay the price.

    She a true champion and we should be proud.

    Complain about this comment

  • 306. At 11:16am on 20 Aug 2008, Factfan wrote:

    What short memories we have. After missing three tests Christine was quite rightly banned and should not have been allowed to compete at the Olympics under BOA rules. Once this decision was relayed to her she threatened to quit Britain and run for another country. A true patriot!! Athletes like her are in the sport for personal gain and not for the kudos of representing one's country. And some want to make he the face of "London 2012". It seems that we are happy to accept her gold medal and forget that as a professional she should have ensured that she was available for testing. I am not celebrating the result of the race as she shouldn't have been there.

    Complain about this comment

  • 307. At 11:21am on 20 Aug 2008, darkvalleysboy1978 wrote:

    Onion_C94, how in the world can you consider this to be racially motivated? Usain Bolt destroyed the rest and thoroughly deserved his medal.

    We are jsut debating as to why Ohurugou was allowed to race but not Chambers and how Ohurugou's 1 gold medal seems to be more important than Hoy's 3 or Adlington's 2? Just because it's athletics instead of cycling or swimming

    Complain about this comment

  • 308. At 11:23am on 20 Aug 2008, Mark Peters wrote:

    Llamantorx, you need to be careful when calling people ignorant and uninformed when you don't know them.

    Having discussed this with a very good friend who represented GB at the 2004 Olympics it is easy to miss a test but 3 in a year is beyond careless or unlucky.

    On the matter in general surely UK Athletics has to do something to ensure that their top athletes do not fall fowl of these 'admin errors'. If it is such a minor indiscretion, as the governing body admitted, then a ban for an entire year seems a harsh penalty.

    Unless athletics wants to end up like the Tour de France surely they need to do everything in their power to make sure that they do not leave their clean athletes open to these allegations.

    Complain about this comment

  • 309. At 11:23am on 20 Aug 2008, Llamanatorx wrote:

    Chambers was not allowed to race becuase he was a drugs cheat, and was found with banned substances in his system

    Ohurugou missed 3 tests, and completed many more and was always found to be clean.


    Is it really that hard to see a difference?

    Complain about this comment

  • 310. At 11:26am on 20 Aug 2008, Llamanatorx wrote:

    I am calling people ignorant becuase clearly they are ignorant about the facts of the Ohurugou case. They clearly demonstrate this by what they have posted here.

    I am entirely justified in that opinion by looking at the fatc and evidence- ie what they have written about this case on this blog.

    Thats how we make an informed opinion - we look at facts. Which is clearly not hwat most people in here are doing about the Ohorogou case.

    Complain about this comment

  • 311. At 11:28am on 20 Aug 2008, aredeegee wrote:

    Shame on those of you who aren't lauding a great British champion Learn the facts of the case before criticising a girl who has taken 100's of drugs tests before, during and since her ban. It is such a curmudgeonly British attitude which explains why we are somethime unsuccesful; because so many people thrive on failure. Christine is a world beater, a fantastic athlete and Briton, and should, IMO, receive our full support.

    Complain about this comment

  • 312. At 11:30am on 20 Aug 2008, SirRonDennis wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 313. At 11:31am on 20 Aug 2008, Llamanatorx wrote:

    Disgusting comment SirRonDennis

    Complain about this comment

  • 314. At 11:33am on 20 Aug 2008, scallopsaregreat wrote:

    I would just like to add an interesting aside to this highly emotive debate. Jamaica have always refused to sign up to a Drugs Policy. So the only times their athletes get tested is in competition - which is obviously too late. Yet no-one questions the fact that their athletes might be cheating - all because they manage to completely avoid testing!

    Compare that with the number of times Christine got tested clean outside competition.

    Please also note that the athletes have to specify a location for one hour a day THREE months in advance, not the day before or anything like that - so that is how mistakes get made. I know of one athlete who had to peg it from London to where the drugs tester had turned up because he had forgotten to inform them of the change of venue (he was injured and was in London seeking medical attention with the BOC). He had one hour to get there and thankfully made it.

    And finally it was a new system that had been introduced and I am sure as most people can testify to - when new systems get put into place mistakes get made. Termal 5 springs to mind (although that would be the equivalent of all GB athletes missing all drugs tests perhaps!!). Implications weren't realised or even necessarily understood - however, I think they maybe now!

    Complain about this comment

  • 315. At 11:38am on 20 Aug 2008, aredeegee wrote:

    scalloparegreat - bravo. I couldn't agree more with you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 316. At 11:40am on 20 Aug 2008, Llamanatorx wrote:

    100% agreed scalloparegreat

    Complain about this comment

  • 317. At 11:41am on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    Excuse slight change in username but the question many have raised is "is her medal tainted?"

    Those who comment on all the negative tests have come to a perfectly logical conclusion which is they are satisfied her medal is not tainted. I have no objection to that - it is a perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw.

    Others, myself included have come to the conclusion that we are not satisfied with the explanation of three missed tests. I admit that at the time of the final missed tests that Ohuruogu tested negative nine days prior to the missed test and three days following the missed test.

    It suggests to me that in all probability she was clean.

    But I still have my doubts. Why? Firstly because of the information in Victor Conte's letter to Dwain Chambers and secondly because I do find it hard to believe that the gravity of missing yet another test wouldn't have registered.

    Anyway, back to the question I posed at the start of this post. It would appear that commentators in most of the newspapers have raised these very concerns today.

    Further, the fact that there appear to be more people raising doubts about Ohuruogu than Hoy, Bolt, Phelps does tend to suggest that rightly or wrongly, as far as the general public is concerned there is a large body of opinion that has these doubts.

    It is I think a borderline case for many people. We want to believe she is clean. We have a nagging doubt.

    I compared it earlier to Flo-Jo who incidentally never tested positive. But I have a nagging doubt.

    Complain about this comment

  • 318. At 11:44am on 20 Aug 2008, MikeFay wrote:

    There are a lot of bad comparisons here.

    Chambers took drugs, and was found out.

    The Balco letter is about how to pass tests despite taking drugs. Not about how to gamble on missing tests. If you're taking drugs, you *certainly* schedule this so you don't get banned on a technicality.

    Rasmussen missed more than three tests *in a row* but they were from two different bodies, so he got away with it. He was actually on a different *continent* to the one he said he'd be at, which is more than a bit of bad timekeeping.

    Thanou faked a motorcycle accident to avoid a test she knew was coming.

    Ferdinand drove away from a test he'd been told about to go shopping (but he's more of a colossal pillock than a cheat)

    The BOA has (reluctantly) accepted that they hadn't done a good enough job of making sure athletes couldn't/wouldn't accidentally miss three tests. However, if they've improved their system (e.g. made sure that the athletes have the mobile phone number of the testers, and in form them immediately if they miss a test so they are aware), then combined with the publicity of this case (the most high profile of three such cases I know of) I don't think there can be any more excuses in future.

    Again, this case was looked into by a highly qualified QC - an independent tribunal, not hired by the athletics body. He found that there was no reason at all to believe that she had cheated. Why do people believe they know more than the QC did?

    As for how could you make such a dumb error - people do them all the time. While I don't have any points on my driving licence, I bet many of the rest of you do. And if you think that's trivial - see 11:57 on from http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/weightlifting/7571099.stm.

    Complain about this comment

  • 319. At 11:46am on 20 Aug 2008, Llamanatorx wrote:

    As far as all evidence shows us Welshbloke, she is 100% clean and always has been.

    The real issue is, should the rules be changed and that if anyone misses a drug test for any reason, then they should be banned for life, regardless of past testing history or reasons for missing the test?

    Personally I dont agree with that view, but obviously others in here do.

    As the rules are at present Christine is perfeclty entitled to race and we should be proud of her achievement.

    Complain about this comment

  • 320. At 11:46am on 20 Aug 2008, Liveonce wrote:

    Good article.
    I am glad to see someone appreciating the great achievement made by Christine.
    To win the medal was absolutely phenomenal. Well done.

    I am quite disgusted by the amount of rubbish coming out from the media regarding this great win.

    To go over the missed test saga again is boring, but for people to go on about this in light of an athlete who has done so well but has to put up with comments due to forgetting the tests is in my opinion a great shame.

    I say a great big congratulations. she has done Great Britain proud, and if she does not win the sports personality of the year and is not the leading ambassodor for the 2012 games then something is definately not right in this country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 321. At 11:57am on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    Not Logged In

    Hasn't the IAAF, the IOC and the Greek Athletic Federation dropped all charges against Thanou in relation to that incident other than a ban for missing a test? Her third violation incidentally.

    What she is now guilty of as far as I know is bringing the games into disrepute.

    Thanou has never tested positive by the way yet people here who defend Ohuruogo vilify Thanou. Indeed she was cleared by the greek athletic federation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 322. At 12:00pm on 20 Aug 2008, Alan Cheese wrote:

    I cannot celebrate this victory....why?

    1. 3 tests missed (like there are not the most important things in her life)
    2. Threatening to leave the country and run for Nigeria if the if the BOC did'nt overturn her LIFETIME ban from competing in the Olympics (I blame the spineless BOC here)
    3. Blaming God for missing her tests (article in Christianity Aug 08)

    Not normally a sceptic but something not right here.

    Complain about this comment

  • 323. At 12:01pm on 20 Aug 2008, SurfingSharka wrote:

    I can't believe this debate is still going on!

    Nobody can prove anything one way or another. And when people give their take on the (often very few) facts they do know, it turns into a load of macho posturing worthy of a boxing bout in Vegas.

    Ultimately each fighter spends so much time and effort ducking the factual, semantic and downright childish blows of their opponant, they find that their argument has been narrowed down to the bare bones that cannot be attacked, namely that's it's just their opinion. Yawn!

    Inevitably someone will end up screaming "well I have twenty A-levels and an IQ of 300 so don't tell me what I don't know and anyway it's just my OPINION and I'm entitled to my OPINION aren't I?" *blows raspberry*

    Good grief. I love the internet.

    Complain about this comment

  • 324. At 12:04pm on 20 Aug 2008, uptoeleven wrote:

    water_park_ji_sung: chambers could have decided to miss his test and probably be in the Olympics right now

    how? They are random drugs tests. He didn't know when they were going to be. How can you miss something that you don't know is going to happen. I could decide not to be hit by a drunk, speeding motorist this afternoon if I could read the future.

    he_hit_the_upright: yes they have changed their procedures - you are now allowed to inform them of a change of schedule by text message

    run800: you are spot on. The system is rubbish. They have changed it. It works better now.

    It's great to have a soap box and stand on it and make pronouncements about drugs testing and so on. Many people on here have done just this - many people on here feel justified in decrying Ohuruogu as a cheat.

    The problem then comes, at least in this case, when the BOA and UK Sport take the actions they did. Not when they allowed Ohuruogu to compete. No the action which they took very quietly and with very little fanfare was to change the testing procedures. Now if you look at the changes they don't look to be fundamental but in reality they represented a massive shift. As far as I am aware the way it used to work was like this: you had to inform the testers IN WRITING where you would be at particular times of the day each week for the whole year. The testers would turn up at random and test you. If you weren't there, you failed the test, unless you informed the testers in writing or by email that you wouldn't be there. Ohuruogu's final test was missed at Crystal Palace - she turned up, it was a school sports day, she went somewhere else to train, she couldn't get online to tell the testers where she would be (not that she knew she would be tested that day) because she was in a car driving across London. The testers turned up, no Ohuruogu, test missed. At the hearing UK Sport acknowledged that they needed to change the system because it was registering "false positives" - people were being punished for missing tests due to circumstances beyond their control.

    The system change is that you can now inform the testers by text. Simple as that. So if you say "I will be at home between 7 and 8 am every Tuesday" and then one Tuesday - I dunno - something happens, maybe a flood or something that means your PC is offline and you need to be out of the house at that time in the morning - it's ok, you just text and say "this Tuesday I'm wherever, in case you want to test me."

    A lot of people seem to think that Ohuruogu would have known when her tests would be. This is an insult to the testing authorities. Random drug tests are exactly that - random. They are carried out every 7 to 10 days. If Ohuruogu was going to somehow know when her test was and somehow have substances in her body, the traces would still be there 10 days later. They are tested all the time, in competition, out of competition, on holiday, at work, everywhere, all the time.

    Finally in Ohuruogu's case in every interview with her that I've ever seen or read she comes across as somewhat absent-minded and a bit ditsy. I'm sure she's very focused on her running and that obviously detracts from her ability to concentrate elsewhere. As someone who is similarly organisationally challenged she has my full sympathy. Athletics should be about what your body can do, not how organised and on the ball you are the rest of the time. You race with your legs and your feet, not a pda and a filofax. If we are honest - she has managers and coaches and they should be carrying the can for her missed tests as much as her.

    Complain about this comment

  • 325. At 12:04pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    323 - I think that was me actually because my intellect was called into question because I didn't agree with someone!

    Hee hee.

    But I agree with you - it does come down to opinion - and I've stated more than once that I find it perfectly reasonable for anyone looking at the evidence to draw either conclusion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 326. At 12:05pm on 20 Aug 2008, Llamanatorx wrote:

    People are entitled to an opinion. The trouble is if that opnion is ill informed, ignorant or plain stupid and they have expressed their opinion loudly then they should expect to have someone else tear it to shreds and show it for what it is.

    Complain about this comment

  • 327. At 12:06pm on 20 Aug 2008, Steelystan wrote:

    Many of the negative comments in this thread make depressing reading because the authors are so keen to sensationalise.

    You wonder what the facts are - of course you do, but none of you know, and until you know, mouths should be kept shut, (in some cases the moderators have removed messages - perhaps owing to abusive tone or even unsupportable libel, we don't know). Its sadly the case that many of us are ready to pronounce fact where only suspicion exists. I wonder where you would stop - would you taunt her kids in school if she has any?

    A few years ago, a mob attacked the house of a paediatrician (foot doctor, just to be clear) because they thought the word meant child molester. Thankfully they didn't kill the chap, but they acted on the same instinct as these critics - ignorant suspicion.

    In Ohurougu's case she was only found to have transgressed a procedural technicality, and was punished as such, which is fair enough. Given a slap if you like. The procedure was in place to attempt to detect cheating, not stop it. She was tested many times before, during and after the period of missed tests and never found to be cheating. Those missed tests could have concealed something, but until we know for certain we can't hang the girl. She was banned for being stupid enough to introduce an element of uncertainty, not for cheating. Paid her dues. square with the house. Hence she can compete - clean and stupid you might say, but still clean. Lord! Even a drunk driver who kills a pedestrian can eventually get their licence back.

    Complain about this comment

  • 328. At 12:06pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    "Llamantorx, you need to be careful when calling people ignorant and uninformed when you don't know them.

    Having discussed this with a very good friend who represented GB at the 2004 Olympics it is easy to miss a test but 3 in a year is beyond careless or unlucky."

    It is ignorant and uninformed if you ignore the fact that this has been investigated by two arbitration panels and you still persist in ignoring their judgements. I would add ignorant and uninformed AND arrogant.

    Complain about this comment

  • 329. At 12:07pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    #324 - Chambers could easily have missed it.

    All he need do when taking any PED's is to tell the testers he's somewhere he isn't. They turn up - Chambers isn't there. Result? Missed test.

    Then after a few clean days he updates his whereabouts and esnure he is there for the foreseeable future.

    Complain about this comment

  • 330. At 12:08pm on 20 Aug 2008, illustriousdodger wrote:

    The amount of naive opinion on this topic is astounding.

    Simply claiming that testing is random, therefore to miss one let alone three is understandable, is not a defense. And to say that you can understand because you forget things too is quite honestly moronic. All the other athletes have managed to comply with the 'random' testing. Is Christine so special that her non-compliance is acceptable?

    Christine has served her time for the most, but according to the BOA by-law she should be banned for life. She did however win an appeal and thus has every right to compete at these games. It is my opinion, in-line with the BOA by-law, that she should not be able to represent her country. I'm sure there are many other athletes deserved of an Olympic place who have not broken any rules.

    And to those who correlate Rio Ferdinand and Christine's actions are quite right. He should be exactly in the same boat, but honestly is that another excuse you're making for Christine?

    Most importantly the minute Christine declared she would leave GB and run for another country she should have been kicked out. The Olympics are about having pride in your nation and sharing that with the world. Her comments reflect poorly on the nation, quite possibly in a worse manner than her ban.

    Her excuses make me feel embarrassed and not the least bit happy for her so-called success.

    Complain about this comment

  • 331. At 12:10pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    Just as a matter of interest - does anyone know how arbitration panels work? Do they judge on the balance of probabilities or is it innocent until proven guilty?

    Complain about this comment

  • 332. At 12:10pm on 20 Aug 2008, Llamanatorx wrote:

    Welshbloke- Chambers could have done that, but Im sure he doesnt have a crystal ball that would ensure he knew when the random test was going to happen.

    Complain about this comment

  • 333. At 12:12pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    "Thanou has never tested positive by the way yet people here who defend Ohuruogo vilify Thanou. Indeed she was cleared by the greek athletic federation."

    Who exactly vilified Thanou? Please tell me 1WelshBloke? You guys repeatedly roll this out but who exactly is slagging her off? You plainly make it up to vindicate a bogus argument.

    Complain about this comment

  • 334. At 12:14pm on 20 Aug 2008, EDAVFC wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 335. At 12:16pm on 20 Aug 2008, Liveonce wrote:

    This debate shows the great issues in our society, people will always want to knock those who are successful, regardless of what the facts may point towards.

    I not going to repeat the facts of the case because i think others have pointed them out clearly enough.

    I just want to ask the question to all the christine bashers, as to why you would hold such negative views when she has been cleared of no foul play.

    She is a young lady who has reached the pinnacle of her career and i for one am proud of her.

    the 18month period of those tests she was a university student. I'd like any of you to point out any university students of that age to keep to every single schedule that is set for them?

    Some of you are vilifying her for forgetfulness, individual laspes that we are all prone to. Recently i got reprimanded at work, for forgetting to submit my timesheet for the 3rd time in the year. I had a valid reason for each one, but i still forgot. But is my reputation at work forever tarnished for this misdemeanor? of couse not!

    In 4 years time, will we still be talking about a missed drug test in 2006? if we are, then i feel that we need to be taking a hard look at ourselves.

    Shouldn't we also agree then that any victory that Man U or England have with Rio Ferdinand in the side is tainted for his missed drug test? Don't make me laugh

    Complain about this comment

  • 336. At 12:17pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    Llamanatorx

    Of course he doesn't - but what any athlete who is doping does know is when they are doping and hence their whereabouts for that period of time will be incorrect.

    Then when they are doping the information is correct.

    e.g. I am doping for the first 11 days in January - I will give incorrect information of my wherebouts. I need three days to become clean so after Jan 14th my wherabouts will be correct.

    If the testers call between Jan 1 and Jan 14 I get a missed test

    If they call between Jan 15 and Jan 31 I get a clear test.

    Thats what Victor Conte was on about.

    As stated though I don't actually believe Ohuruogo was doing anything of the sort - it just leaves a nagging doubt which I find disappointing cos normally I'm the first to be shouting for Team GB.

    Complain about this comment

  • 337. At 12:20pm on 20 Aug 2008, NIreland1-0England wrote:

    Unfortunately Athletics will always fall foul of drugs cheats. The problem is that as testing evolves to catch the cheats so to do the drugs to remain undetectable. Marion Jones must have been tested hundreds of times and the drugs remained undetected. Who is to say which athletes are clean at these games?

    I hope that the greats in these games like Bolt, Phelps, Hoy etc are clean (for the record I believe these 3 are) but all who compete will forever be tarnished by others.

    Heres hoping it never descends into the chaos of the Tour de France but it appears to be heading that way with so many already doubting Christine without a even 1 positive test.

    Complain about this comment

  • 338. At 12:23pm on 20 Aug 2008, levdavidovich wrote:

    Chrstine was maginficent!

    The only gold so far that I have got excited about.

    Complain about this comment

  • 339. At 12:23pm on 20 Aug 2008, Applemask wrote:

    "She has served her ban, and is allowed to compete, because she has never tested positive for doping. Dwain Chambers on the other hand, cannot compete; because he did test positive.
    Would somebody please tell me the difference?"

    It doesn't take Bamber Gascoigne to figure that one out, surely?

    Why can't the British just accept it when something good happens?

    Oh, well, Oliver Holt and all those other bitter little nothings can just pickle in their bitterness, because Ohuruogu won an Olympic Gold medal, and she did it by being better physically and mentally, and no amount of childish self-important pouting can take it away from her.

    In other words, eat it hard.

    Complain about this comment

  • 340. At 12:24pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    EDAVFC but why can't you accept that the two panels that investigated her and exonerated her from guilt of taking substances actually know a lot more about this case, and are a lot more qualified to judge it than you?

    Complain about this comment

  • 341. At 12:24pm on 20 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 342. At 12:25pm on 20 Aug 2008, andywills82 wrote:

    SHE HAS NEVER TESTED POSITIVE!!!

    I for one am ashamed and disgusted at the attitude of some of the views displayed on this blog. I'm so bloody proud of this wonderful athlete we have produced. Not only has she beaten all her rivals in an awesome, tactical Olympic final, she's also had to battle all her sceptics for the past 2 years.

    I have enjoyed the Olympics this year like many others, but it did not truly come to life for me until I'd seen Christine Ohuruogu win her gold medal. I can't praise her enough. I just hope she keeps winning and, by doing so, sticking two fingers up at all the sad, sad doubters out there!

    Complain about this comment

  • 343. At 12:27pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:


    My point was that Thanou has been cleared of all charges other than missing a test. But her name is brought up as DELIBERATELY avoiding tests.

    The IOC, the IAAF and the Greek Athletic federation have withdrawn any charges on evasion or refusal to give a test.

    Thanou therefore is in exactly the same position as Ohuruogu on doping as far as the IOC and IAAF are concerned.

    Complain about this comment

  • 344. At 12:27pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Ditto that sentiment andywills82.

    Complain about this comment

  • 345. At 12:29pm on 20 Aug 2008, betarider wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 346. At 12:29pm on 20 Aug 2008, whatbill wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 347. At 12:33pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    "My point was that Thanou has been cleared of all charges other than missing a test. But her name is brought up as DELIBERATELY avoiding tests."

    She did and it is a difference but noone is really making a point about it, least of all those applauding Ohuruogu. But who brought her name into the argument first? I made this point about Blonska in that many make an argument that if she was not British we would all be slagging her off but that is not true. There was not a peep about Blonska despite her winning a silver medal having tested positive 5 years before. So I don't know where you get this perspective from.

    Complain about this comment

  • 348. At 12:34pm on 20 Aug 2008, GunnerImmy wrote:

    Just adding my opinion (it will be interesting to see the balance of feeling once this blog closes).

    Ohuruogu is a great racer, better than the rest of the field and is once again proved to be a world-beater. Warm congratulations - Olympic gold medals are never won easily. Like nearly all athletes I think she races for herself and I imagine she uses her past experiences for motivation - good luck to her in her future races.

    However, her career will always carry the record - once served a ban for missing tests. It is unavoidable that society will make judgements because of that. Though she has served her ban her punishment will continue.

    It is so frustrating for an athletics fan to watch a world class athlete prepare in such a meticulous and determined way in all aspects except the one most important to the average spectator in the current climate - to maintain an unblemished record where testing for illegal performance enhancement is concerned. Do not blame the system or make excuses for Ohuruogu. It is the athlete's responsibility to follow the rules and many manage to do it without fuss.

    I love sport and want to believe that winners are competing fairly. I make the following suggestions to improve public confidence that competitors are clean.

    1. Legality of bans. The current situation where local sport federation bans may or may not be illegal in law is untenable. The Chambers case should be tried to clear up this area in the UK at least. Then everyone will know the exact penalty for breaking the rules. If we cannot make long bans stick in court then athletes will risk testing positive.

    2. Benchmarking. Sport testing regimes should be rated and results publicised by broadcasters during events such as the olympics so that the public can judge whether there is a level playing field.

    3. Open personal information. I'm always surprised that various stats are not displayed when athletes are introduced on the track (e.g. PB, season PB, season ranking, average finishing position for the season, years professional, titles, etc.) Not sure about data protection implications but surely a simple graphic with e.g. testing regime rating, frequency of testing during last 3 years, number of missed tests during last 3 years, prior misdemeanors, etc. would go a long way to assuring spectators of what exactly they are watching as the athletes line up?

    4 Voluntary code. Project Believe in the USA aims to put credibility back into sport with top performers submitting to testing over and above the minimum required of the national and international regimes. Ohuruogu adhering to such a code and being seen to take personal responsibility for improving credibility in her as an athlete would do more to reduce suspicion than anything else in my opinion.

    I would have thought that top performers concerned about PR would be very interested to be tested by the strictest regimes, go beyond this regime where possible and would like to get this information out there to the public. If not then they are insufficiently interested in the credibility of their sport and they may find their public paymasters drifting away.

    Complain about this comment

  • 349. At 12:36pm on 20 Aug 2008, EDAVFC wrote:

    but united_dreamer they can only exonerate what is in fornt of them which at the time was a clean athlete! she never failed a test because she "forgot" to turn up to them!

    it just seems clear to me that what she did as well as what Chambers did carry a lifetime ban from the Olympics, and the only reasons her ban was lifted was because of her childish and quite frankly offensive threats and also because the people who hold sway at the BOC like her and dont like Chambers! Kelly holmes and that hypocritical lot have lost a lot mof my respect in this who embarrasing debacle!

    Complain about this comment

  • 350. At 12:37pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    "3. Open personal information. I'm always surprised that various stats are not displayed when athletes are introduced on the track (e.g. PB, season PB, season ranking, average finishing position for the season, years professional, titles, etc.) Not sure about data protection implications but surely a simple graphic with e.g. testing regime rating, frequency of testing during last 3 years, number of missed tests during last 3 years, prior misdemeanors, etc. would go a long way to assuring spectators of what exactly they are watching as the athletes line up?"

    I believe that information is on the BOA site and the name is normally mentioned.

    Complain about this comment

  • 351. At 12:39pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    "but united_dreamer they can only exonerate what is in front of them which at the time was a clean athlete! she never failed a test because she "forgot" to turn up to them!"

    No they looked at the circumstantial evidence of the missed tests. Don't be so naive as to think that panelists do not look into all the circumstances surrounding this. Do you think you are the only person that realises the implications of their judgements?

    Complain about this comment

  • 352. At 12:40pm on 20 Aug 2008, Emblpa wrote:

    Rather than hammer Christine for her past and I believe innocent mistake, we should all applaud her talent and dedication to the sport. She has done herself and great Britain proud and thoroughly deserves her success.

    Complain about this comment

  • 353. At 12:41pm on 20 Aug 2008, MartinDFerry wrote:

    These shrill fools who are hailing Ms Ohuruogu as an Olympic heroine can't deny that she will be forever tainted by the failure to comply with drug test regulations and the ban she served. She can't prove she didn't cheat, nor can her supporters. I for one am ashamed that she has been allowed to wear the Union Flag. She should give back the medal and slink into the twilight world of sporting shame where she belongs.

    Complain about this comment

  • 354. At 12:44pm on 20 Aug 2008, Perceblog wrote:

    If all our other competitors found it possible to take the tests, how does this well-educated, intelligent woman manage to miss them?

    It might appear more difficult to arrange to avoid them, so her performance and her medal will always be questionable.

    There`s no way to prove that she ever took anything, of course, but that`s the whole point of the tests, isn`t it?

    Athletes who break the rules should be banned for life, without exception, and samples from those who do pass should be kept for, say, 5 years and tested again when the technology has evolved and is able to find what may not, at the moment, be detectable.

    The culture of doping will always be there, but the threat of being kicked out of competition forever, or having their medals taken away, might make the cheats think twice.

    After all, the moaning Mr. Chambers only stopped cheating when he was caught, and if he hadn`t been, he might well have been at it now, not that he`d have had a prayer of winning anything anyway.

    And let`s not forget, there are other arenas where testing is far less stringent, such as, whisper it, the Premier League.

    If London hosts the cleanest games ever, it would be it`s most valuable achievement.

    This has been a jaw-dropping games for our lot though - way to go !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Tough on the Aussies though - hard luck lads. Thought you were a bit more competetive.

    Perce

    Complain about this comment

  • 355. At 12:44pm on 20 Aug 2008, uptoeleven wrote:

    steelystan - Paediatrics is the branch of medicine that deals with the medical care of infants, children, and adolescents. The upper age limit ranges from age 14 to 18, depending on the country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 356. At 12:44pm on 20 Aug 2008, AndyRAC wrote:

    It annoys me that people don't realise that the testing in Cycling is far more rigorous than any other sport including Athletics. Instead the same old cliches come out from uninformed jounalists. If they did any research they would realise this.
    I've said before, I'm 99% sure she hasn't taken anything, but not failing a test is no defence. Many people have passed their tests but been later found out to be doping. I think what people want is consistency - Chambers was rightly banned but complained, Millar accepted his punishment and Olympic lifetime ban, I've never heard him complaining - instead he is now one of cycling's most anti-doping spokesmen, as are his team Garmin-Chipotle.

    Complain about this comment

  • 357. At 12:44pm on 20 Aug 2008, Ladhar_Bheinn wrote:

    There is a very old fashioned concept of trust. Its rather like virginity, once you've lost it its pretty well impossible to get it back. The shear volume of negative comments on this blog is a testamony to this.

    Christine cannot complain that people are looking back at her history because its a history all of her own making and one cannot decide what parts of one's history should be ignored what parts should not be.

    Christine's run was fantastic and her gold medal is a gold medal however all people who have violated sports drug rules have to accept the consequences of their own actions and if that means your gold medal doesn't shine as brightly as others or isn't considered by many people as worthy, then that's the price you pay.


    Complain about this comment

  • 358. At 12:44pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    MartinDFerry - I think it is your perspective on life that is tainted my friend. There will always be doubt if that is all you look for. Unfortunately you will also miss the genuine glory while busy looking for fault.

    Complain about this comment

  • 359. At 12:46pm on 20 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    MartinDFerry - great display of intolerance and unwillingness to accept that people make mistakes. I'm assuming you have never made a mistake in your entire life that you've needed forgiveness for.

    She made a mistake, she's served her ban, there is no proof she took drugs. She's got on with what she's needed to do and should be applauded. Shane Warne was allowed to continue in his sport after serving his ban? Or were the australians wrong there?

    Complain about this comment

  • 360. At 12:47pm on 20 Aug 2008, Terenceno14 wrote:

    Give it a rest you tedious doom-mongers. Ohuruogo's win was one of the most amazing moments of the games. she's isnt on drugs, and hasnt been on the drugs, so change the record and see it for what it was - brilliant.

    Complain about this comment

  • 361. At 12:49pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Ladhar_Bheinn - actually for me the medal shines brighter for the adversity she has had to overcome from the media spotlight. And still achieved. If you can empathise with the spirit she would have needed to accomplish what she has under the circumstances then you will see this.

    Complain about this comment

  • 362. At 12:49pm on 20 Aug 2008, Applemask wrote:

    Martin Ferry - you can't prove a negative, and besides, the burden of proof rests on you - ie the prosection. So go on. Prove she did anything wrong except miss a couple of tests by what the BAO and IOC agree was an innocent mistake.

    Complain about this comment

  • 363. At 12:50pm on 20 Aug 2008, TheInvigilator wrote:

    Dream on Terenceno14.... and if that was the most amazing moments of the Games you really haven't been paying attention.

    Complain about this comment

  • 364. At 12:51pm on 20 Aug 2008, EDAVFC wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 365. At 12:56pm on 20 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    EDAVFC - so we teach our kids that mistakes will never be forgiven and that you have to be whiter than white at all times? How about teaching our kids that if you make a mistake, you have to work to make up for that mistake which is exactly what Christine has done!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 366. At 12:59pm on 20 Aug 2008, EDAVFC wrote:

    so shinnyallspark why doesn't dwayne chambers get that chance?! because of hyporcrites and up themselves people who think it is their right to choose whos life gets a repreive?! give me a break!

    Complain about this comment

  • 367. At 12:59pm on 20 Aug 2008, VAMOS wrote:

    its one think for Brits to tut a Russian athlete but they get behind their own if there is a medal in it

    Complain about this comment

  • 368. At 12:59pm on 20 Aug 2008, Factfan wrote:

    Christine does not run for Britain but for herself, so shouldn't be considered as a role model nor a "face of 2012" - this is the woman who threatened to quit Britain and run for Nigeria when she was told she had broken the rules - patriot indeed!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 369. At 12:59pm on 20 Aug 2008, MartinDFerry wrote:

    united_dreamer: Thanks for your comment, I'm concerned that your idea of "genuine glory" is being praised for running fast in a circle. The ability to run fast may seem important when you're five years old, but most of us get over it. My pet whippet could beat Christine over 400 metres, would you like to get excited about him, too?

    Complain about this comment

  • 370. At 1:00pm on 20 Aug 2008, uptoeleven wrote:

    #329 welshbloke: All he need do when taking any PED's is to tell the testers he's somewhere he isn't. They turn up - Chambers isn't there. Result? Missed test.

    Great. But that's not what happened in Christine's case. What happened in her case was that she was unable to inform the testers of a last-minute change of plan because the regime as it stood at the time was incapable of taking such changes into account. This has now been changed.

    EDAVFC: she never failed a test because she "forgot" to turn up to them
    In much the same way as I will fail to be run over tomorrow afternoon by a drunk driver because I will "forget" to cross the road in front of him? Given that I use the same crystal ball as Ohuruogu uses to predict when her drugs tests are going to be. That's how much sense your argument makes - you don't get told when the tests will be or even what day they will be. You just know that every few days the testers turn up and test. Unless you are on WADA or on the arbitration panel for the BOA I don't think anyone can sit here and pronounce that they called it wrong. That 3rd test miss was unavoidable, simple as that - and UK Sport changed their procedures as a result which proves that they knew the procedures needed refining.

    Perceblog: read the whole report on her appeal. It outlines precisely what happened and why she couldn't do anything about it. I'm all for punishing drugs cheats. She isn't one, she was just exceptionally unlucky. If the ban had not been overturned she would have had every right to take it to a higher court to appeal because the circumstances surrounding her missing the test were unavoidable AND UK SPORT'S PROCEDURES CHANGED AS A DIRECT RESULT. UK Sport got it wrong and admitted as much and changed. The BOA made an excpetion in her case as a result of UK Sport saying "you know what - we need to be able to let athletes inform us when plans change". There was a school sports day. It was unannounced. She didn't know it was going to be there. She had to train elsewhere. She shouldn't have had the ban in the first place because that 3rd test was missed because the procedures were incorrect. She has no case to answer.

    Seb Coe is anti-drugs to the point of obsessiveness and he endorsed her win. I'm satisfied she had no case to answer.

    Complain about this comment

  • 371. At 1:03pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    EDAVFC - Prove she is guilty and I will believe you. Until then I will believe the panel with the experience and clarity of judgement and in their superior knowledge of the case. She was proved innocent of taking drugs and guilty for missing the third test just like two other athletes before her.

    For me she is innocent.

    I would be naive to believe you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 372. At 1:04pm on 20 Aug 2008, Factfan wrote:

    What a precadent that has been set here - miss drug tests but then appeal and get reinstated. As a professional athlete who gets money from the taxpayer, she should be held accountable. She is certainly no role model and her medal is tainted - many other performances at these Olympics should be heralded above her achievement.

    Complain about this comment

  • 373. At 1:04pm on 20 Aug 2008, halfwheeler wrote:

    Ms Urugu should have gone to whatever country it was she said she would switch to unless we changed our rules to let her compete.

    3 missed tests = failed drugs test. 1 Failed drugs test = lifetime ban.

    This is always the case - unless British athletics finds it's-self in dire straights, with a dearth of success and desperate to justify the 20 million+ in funding.

    This gold will always be controversial and always be embarassing. Give it back.

    Complain about this comment

  • 374. At 1:06pm on 20 Aug 2008, woodsy1977 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 375. At 1:07pm on 20 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    EDAVFC - Dwain Chambers was found guilty of taking substances, Christine has not.

    I felt Chambers should have been allowed to compete in Beijing. He has served his sentence, proved he is now clean. The BOA was wrong in my opinion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 376. At 1:08pm on 20 Aug 2008, EDAVFC wrote:

    regardless of whether she has always been clean anyway do people really feel happy for someone, who threatened to abandon Britain and go run for Nigeria when she was found to have broken the rules?! the only reason she had the opportunity to win this medal was because she bullied the BOC! gold medalist- yes role model- absolutely not! and just an interesting thing I wonder how many of you would sympathise with linford christie, i suspect not many!

    Complain about this comment

  • 377. At 1:09pm on 20 Aug 2008, NIreland1-0England wrote:

    Chambers should have been allowed to compete in these games in order to get the punishment he deserved - a pasting by Usain Bolt!

    Complain about this comment

  • 378. At 1:11pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    MartinDFerry - I guess your not watching the Olympics then. As you ask, for me, applauding her achievement is about empathising with the hard work, spirit and commitment it takes to achieve this and admittedly taking joy in some reflected glory in that achievement as a countryman of the athlete. For the record I'm not excited about your pet whippet but I can assure you my car is faster;).

    By the way Ohuruogu also has a degree in linguistics at UCL. So she obviously finds time for academic endeavous as well as running in circles.

    She is a great role model for youngsters to follow and it is clear our youngsters need this. To decree her achievement is to decree that opportunity.

    Complain about this comment

  • 379. At 1:18pm on 20 Aug 2008, MartinDFerry wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 380. At 1:19pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Actually can I just thank poster of post #370 for taking the time to explain things? Excellent post. Anyone wanting to really understand the situation and understand the truth read that post. Anyone peddling their own agendas, carry on.

    Complain about this comment

  • 381. At 1:24pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 382. At 1:25pm on 20 Aug 2008, MartinDFerry wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 383. At 1:27pm on 20 Aug 2008, GMoneyLFC wrote:

    I think we just have to face some facts here:

    1. None of us here (I assume) have any idea what it's like to be a top athlete, how they train, the pressures, their schedules etc. Any comments on these to back up argments are just people guessing; the reality might be quite different.

    2. There are a number of reported facts on the missed tests and negative tests that people have posted that others should read. The forums are full of people commenting without looking up any facts at all.

    3. Christine's life is athletics. To fall foul of something so fundamental as missing tests that could ruin all that, is inconcievable to most of us. My first reaction is was that she was at best a stupid girl. But when you read the explanations it is in fact entirely plausible, so how can we prove different? Again, read point 1.

    4. You're always going to get three types of opinions on this issue, and we just have to get used to it:
    A) She was dodging and is guilty. The gold medal is tainted.
    B) She was stupid/naive/forgetful/unlucky but is innocent. Well done on a magnificent gold medal for Britain.
    C) I'm not sure. I'll celebrate but they'll be a cloud over her forever.

    All of these opinions are perfectly acceptable as we don't actually KNOW the score. My personal experience on forums is that you can't really change people's minds, even with some facts, so I'll just have to accept that the nation will always be split on this.

    As for me, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt based on what I've read. And you know what? I'm much happier on her gold than all the haters who think otherwise, so I don't care!

    Complain about this comment

  • 384. At 1:27pm on 20 Aug 2008, Steelystan wrote:

    UptoEleven

    Yeah, I know! I didn't phrase it very well, but the confusion was across the terms podiatrist/paeditrician/paedophile as the root of the issue. He was a called a paediatrician despite being a podiatrist, and assumed to be a paedophile.

    Poor chap.

    Complain about this comment

  • 385. At 1:31pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    I'm glad I had a chance to read Jaymore Sterling's post before it was pulled. Great post and quite amusing. I guess it was pulled because it was slowing the site down it was that long;)

    Complain about this comment

  • 386. At 1:34pm on 20 Aug 2008, Emma_Fowler wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 387. At 1:35pm on 20 Aug 2008, sad saddler wrote:

    Great race plan, well executed and a gold medal. Sweet as.

    Yes, people who break rules for whatever reason (deliberate or not, on the field ot off it) when they are in the public eye do often suffer once the sentence has been served. Having read many of the posts I'm more pro-Christine now, although I detest drug cheats and foul play in general. She must still have some of the shine taken off the achievement, although you could argue that it is more of one to come back from the ban, even if you think (as the athlete) you have been unfairly treated.

    Seems like the sort of mistakes any university student could make and that she was hard done by in the first instance, its a good sign of that when the rules are changed afterwards to reduce the chances of re-occurance - unless you conspiracy theorists think that was because she bullied the BOA.

    Next you'll be telling me that Bush demolished the Twin Towers - ......yeah right

    Complain about this comment

  • 388. At 1:37pm on 20 Aug 2008, Alan Cheese wrote:

    I hope Ms Fowler has a good lawyer.

    Complain about this comment

  • 389. At 1:39pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    I'm just counting the minutes it stays up;)

    Complain about this comment

  • 390. At 1:40pm on 20 Aug 2008, Emma_Fowler wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 391. At 1:41pm on 20 Aug 2008, Forthview wrote:

    Oh dear- more heat than light here.....

    I find myself with some sympathy for both sides of the argument- at least when expressed with moderation. I'm prepared to accept that the reason Ohuruogu missed the crucial third test probably says as much about the inflexible and rather shambolic state of UK drugs testing a few years ago as it says about her (the fact that testing procedures have been quietly modified strongly points in this direction). I think the BOC was riding for a fall by decreeing that three missed tests = one positive= a lifetime ban (this doesn't say much for the quality of their legal advice).

    On the other hand, the sad reality is that althletics has a persistant drugs problem (as today's news makes pretty clear) and the brute reality is that any athlete who has had the slightest whisper of trouble on that front in the past can expect their subsequent performances to be treated with some suspicion (the same is true of cycling)

    A British athlete has the additional problem that the UK in the past took a stratospherically high moral line on these issues (until enough Brits were caught doping to induce a bit more humility) and the British media are still very quick to point the finger at competitors from other nations. A question asked repeatedly on this thread which I haven't seen answered is how the UK media would have reacted had Ohuruogu been American and Richards been British- I suspect it hasn't been answered because the answer is obvious and it isn't that the UK media would all be lauding the great tactical race the American ran.

    I just hope the London 2012 organisers don't make Ohuruogu the sole poster girl for the games, even if she is local and hits the right buttons in other ways. If they do they'll be setting themselves (and indeed setting her) up for four years of sniping from across the Channel and across the Atlantic- and even within the UK. It may be grossly unfair but that's how the world is- and I would hope that a lady with a degree in a subject as complex as linguistics would have enough nous to understand that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 392. At 1:42pm on 20 Aug 2008, sad saddler wrote:

    I think MDF is a pseudonym indicating the density of something or other..........

    BTW 348 and 370 and 383 are the good, well reasoned posts (near this end) to read first (although the last two arrived after I came back to the thread and wound up my Kiwi brain - its late down ere!).....

    Complain about this comment

  • 393. At 1:43pm on 20 Aug 2008, Emma_Fowler wrote:

    Before I get permanently banned, Forthview, I'd just like to say how much I agree with you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 394. At 1:45pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    "A question asked repeatedly on this thread which I haven't seen answered is how the UK media would have reacted had Ohuruogu been American and Richards been British- I suspect it hasn't been answered because the answer is obvious and it isn't that the UK media would all be lauding the great tactical race the American ran. "

    I think that was answered in the Blonska case personally. She tested positive in 2003 and noone said a thing about her silver. I don't think it is a genuine issue personally. Maybe its needs to be led by a tabloid headline.

    Complain about this comment

  • 395. At 1:46pm on 20 Aug 2008, MartinDFerry wrote:

    Oh dear Emma_Fowler. An accusation of paedophilia seems like a bit of an over reaction to a discussion about doping in athletics doesn't it? If you post an apology on this board I'll take no further action.

    Complain about this comment

  • 396. At 1:46pm on 20 Aug 2008, sad saddler wrote:

    E_F well said, second time around at least.
    Your original point is not lost though and long may you remain on-board..... :-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 397. At 1:48pm on 20 Aug 2008, sad saddler wrote:

    MDF - time to extract the wood chip from inside the head and understand what was meant by the post rather than latching onto what was said in it............

    Complain about this comment

  • 398. At 1:51pm on 20 Aug 2008, punkfrock wrote:

    About missing tests - let's put it this way

    Say you are about to go on a trip to an area of the world with - let's say Yellow fever.

    Now you have to pay for this shot. I think it's about £50.

    And Yellow fever is very, very, very nasty.

    Would you miss your shot?

    It is necessary in this country - at any rate - to create a climate about testing that means it is without doubt the single most important thing - that competition revolves around it.


    Complain about this comment

  • 399. At 1:51pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    He'll set his whippet on you!

    Complain about this comment

  • 400. At 1:56pm on 20 Aug 2008, MartinDFerry wrote:

    sad_saddler: That's a very strong point, well made. Your reference to my initials is funny too. Unfortunately neither "That's not really what she meant" nor "I'm a funny guy, honest" excuses baseless accusations of deviant and abhorrent sexual behaviour. Now, would you like to think up another funny joke for us all, or shall I unleash the fury of my angry whippet, who's still really upset about United Dreamer's comments earlier?

    Complain about this comment

  • 401. At 1:58pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Yeah thanks punkfrock we understand the argument - no need to dumb it down. Now read #370 for the counter-argument.

    Complain about this comment

  • 402. At 1:59pm on 20 Aug 2008, rivcoach wrote:

    Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me, fool me three times???

    Sorry but poor planning or forgetting three times just doesn't stack up.

    The sad thing is how so many people are willing to just accept her "forgetfulness".

    She should have had a lifetime ban.

    Complain about this comment

  • 403. At 2:00pm on 20 Aug 2008, Hausa2 wrote:

    To the poster who says nobody went to congratulate Christine, actually Sanya Richards did. There is a picture of it in today's Times. Further, if you look at the post race footage after Christine gets up from the track, you will see that she was congratulated by some of the other competitors. In any case, if post race congratulations is supposed to be damning or in some way a suggestion of suspicion then what are we to make of Kelly Holmes's 800 and 1500 victory in Athens? Not one of her competitors in both races (including her then close friend, Maria Mutola) congratulated Kelly afterwards. I remember being struck by this at the time. However, I am in no way suggesting that Kelly's victories are under suspicion or are in anyway tainted because of this, as the poster who made the original point about Christine has.

    Complain about this comment

  • 404. At 2:00pm on 20 Aug 2008, sad saddler wrote:

    About yellow fever shots - yeah I'd do my utmost, but then people miss those shots, people miss tests or are unable to make appointments, hell I know people with more degrees than this lady who mis-read their larium scrips and took one a day instead of one a week - don't mean they are on PEDs...they are just people, fallable, human, you know like the rest of us.....
    And I know absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and I also know that “Circumstantial evidence is a very tricky thing...It may seem to point very straight to one thing, but if you shift your own point of view a little, you may find it pointing in an equally uncompromising manner to something entirely different.”
    But then that was someone who was on PEDs..........

    Complain about this comment

  • 405. At 2:01pm on 20 Aug 2008, Waint wrote:

    levdavidovich wrote:

    This is the first gold medal for Britain that I have got excited about. Cycling, swimming, rowing, sailing do nothing for me.

    Chrsitine was magificent!

    (How sad there are these annoying, slanderous braindead....) yes bla bla bla

    Interesting Levdavidovich you are not a sports fan at all are you, multiple golds in the sports that you mentioned above do "nothing for you", you can't be very patriotic either (with my excuses if you are not British), I bet you watch Wimbledon for 2 weeks and haven't a clue for the rest of the year.

    Please grow up and be a sports fan or dont bother watching or commenting on things that you are really not interested in.

    Complain about this comment

  • 406. At 2:03pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    rivcoach - check post #370. That should clear things up for you.

    Complain about this comment

  • 407. At 2:06pm on 20 Aug 2008, sad saddler wrote:

    MDF - so did you get her point or not?
    Or are you just argumentative for the sake of it......
    Bet your whippet has better jokes.......than me at least........

    Complain about this comment

  • 408. At 2:13pm on 20 Aug 2008, threedegreesburn wrote:

    Scallopsaregreat (314): "Jamaica have always refused to sign up to a Drugs Policy. So the only times their athletes get tested is in competition - which is obviously too late. Yet no-one questions the fact that their athletes might be cheating - all because they manage to completely avoid testing!"

    I agree with you re Christine, scallops, but you could be a bit more careful with your wording about Jamaican testing. They don't "completely avoid testing" - their top sprinters have been some of the most tested athletes around in Beijing and they're apparently the IAAF's fifth most tested nation (don't know if that's an absolute figure or per athlete) - and they're tested at trials as well as at international competitions.

    The situation's not perfect, there have been some US-based drug-users , and I don't know the reason behind their not setting up their own anti-doping commission until now (it's just been approved) apart from the fact that they don't have the resources that we do (such programmes don't come cheap). But I do believe their medical doctor Herb Elliott (not 'that' Herb Elliott) when he says:

    "I say come down and see our program, come down and see our testing, come down and see how we operate, we have nothing to hide."

    "We couldn't have the Asafa Powells and not test them. The good name of this country cannot be sullied by this. ... I trust nobody, OK? And I think the federation feels the same way, but that is why we're doing the testing we're doing. We're also asking WADA to come down and strengthen what we're doing."

    The point about pride is hugely important for Jamaica - a Ben Johnson fiasco would be tragic for the island and I can't see the top sprinters or their coaches doing anything to risk ruining the country's athletics reputation. Let's hope they receive the support they need to boost their testing programme.

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/athletics/dont-patronise-us-says-jamaican-chief/2008/08/17/1218911461530.html

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7476274.stm

    Complain about this comment

  • 409. At 2:15pm on 20 Aug 2008, woodsy1977 wrote:

    I am a little upset that a previous blog discussing the relative merits of letting Christine run or not at these olympics has been taken down along with a lot of other postings on the same theme. If the BBc simply want a love in with the journalist and the athletes and to have a blog that adheres to only their view of the world then perhaps they should set that out a little more clearly.

    Complain about this comment

  • 410. At 2:18pm on 20 Aug 2008, MartinDFerry wrote:

    sad saddler: Yep, I get where she's coming from, and you're absolutely right that I'm just looking for a bit of a light hearted internet argy-bargy to pass a few minutes on a rainy afternoon. Can't help but feel that in the circumstances being accused of paedophilia is a bit harsh though. No hard feelings, and I'll call off the angry whippet!

    Complain about this comment

  • 411. At 2:19pm on 20 Aug 2008, snorebenskid wrote:

    at 8.31pm on 19th Aug Pentonpompey wrote that Christine o had not been tested during her 12 month ban, and therefore was not a worthy champion. Well she was 4 times in fact. She is a worthy winner, and I think she should be the face of 2012 posters. More power to your elbow girl, if only a few more youngsters would learn from her.....

    Complain about this comment

  • 412. At 2:22pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    Now why would my previous post be pulled. As the house rules stand I have not broken them.

    Based on everything here. I can conclude the sentiment is guilty until proven innocent. Therefore any athlete that has had more than seven days between testing can consider any medal they win tainted there. See what I've done I used the reasoning put forward by Chritine's detractors, and can I say it make perfect sense if your mind is wired that way. Following with that kind of reasoning it does not matter what your sport is riding, swimming, football, atletics et al. How do cam we vouch for any of them, do we spend every hour of every day with them.

    For me follow the logic now, the whole Olympics is tainted.

    Guilty until proven innocent or destroyed by sensationalised headlines.

    Complain about this comment

  • 413. At 2:23pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    woodsy1977 - actually I agree if it would keep posters such as yourself off of this blog. This should be a time to celebrate a truly massive performance not repeat the endless arguments about her innocence. I'm sure the site still exists but it should not be linked to in the main athletics site as the argument has been done and dusted and her gold is much bigger news.

    Complain about this comment

  • 414. At 2:23pm on 20 Aug 2008, Emma_Fowler wrote:

    MDF, I apologise :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 415. At 2:27pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Jaymore-sterling - it was probably too long mate. It was entertaining still. Can you please give me a list of all the tainted golds in the games? Actually that might get moderated on length as well;)

    Complain about this comment

  • 416. At 2:28pm on 20 Aug 2008, sad saddler wrote:

    /throws a kiwi mutton bone to the whippet/ and
    /strokes him/

    now that is illegal down here.....

    LOL to MDF and E_F

    nitey nite :-))

    Complain about this comment

  • 417. At 2:31pm on 20 Aug 2008, Forthview wrote:

    Interested in the clarification at 408 about the situation in Jamaica given the earlier news reports which suggested that their sprinters could hardly go on the track for a training run without being tested!

    Complain about this comment

  • 418. At 2:35pm on 20 Aug 2008, Reggie81 wrote:

    Who actually cares if she missed these tests? Why don't they just test her immediately after her race yesterday and if she is clean then the world will know that she has acheived her gold medal fairly and there can be no more arguments!!

    In summary if she has not been taking drugs to win her olympic gold medal then she deserves all our respect and congratulations

    Complain about this comment

  • 419. At 2:40pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    Not my position really, just following the logic of some of the posts I have seen on here.

    But if you buy the argument that although someone has not tested positive despite being vigorously tested. Some people on here have even presented themselves to be scientist, and professed to understand the molecular make-up of these drugs and how the human body breaks them down. Now somebody put forward that some drugs take seven days to clear the system, and as such there was enough of a doubt there for him/her. Now I think I can be right in assuming that the guy/female is no biologist then again he might be :o), but using his logic and following it to it's eventual conclusion, anybody that goes more than seven days between test and gets a medal whether they missed or did not missed a test, must be using that logic tainted, as it was put just because they have not tested positive does not mean they are not using perfomance enhancing drugs right.......

    :o)

    Complain about this comment

  • 420. At 2:41pm on 20 Aug 2008, halfwheeler wrote:

    Athletics fanboys ringfencing their gold medal with adhominem attacks on anyone who won't raise a pom pom for CO. Sad sad sad. :)

    In my opinion (and in no way statement of fact etc) Unanounced tests are very rare - the athletes almost always know when they are about to be tested. Every time busted athletes squeal, this view is reinforced.

    Of course this means that the national federations, the international federations and the drug testing agencies are either corrupted or complicit.

    I can't see any way around this issue without either legalising PEDs or starting a breakaway sporting system that is truly transparent and democratic (to cut what would have been a long complicated post very short)

    Again, this is my view and in no way statement of fact.

    Complain about this comment

  • 421. At 3:01pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    halfwheeler I can see where you are going with this all the athletes know when they are gonna get tested, ofcourse they do how else are they gonna get to use their performance enhancing drugs without testing positive. And there was me thinking there had to be seven days gap between tests. With your wonderful logic they dont even need to bother. So using your wonderful logic I have to add Christine must just have not been paying attention when they told her they were going to be at the venue where the sports day was been held. I believe you definately know what you are talking about not the arbitration panle et al. You are truly smart, let me guess you have a PHD or something like that right, cause your level of intelligence is truly astounding.

    :o)

    Complain about this comment

  • 422. At 3:03pm on 20 Aug 2008, Forthview wrote:

    As a PS re 394's comment on my earlier post- I detected some media mutters about Blonska but nothing much, I agree. On the other hand, (a) the relevant UK athlete was going to be outside the medals even if Blonska did test positive and (b) she'd put in a somewhat sub-par performance and media coverage was a bit muted (especially as there was an awful lot more positive for the British media to accentuate on the relevant day anyway).

    I stand by my general point- the UK media is very keen to finger-point about "cheating foreigners" in any sport, especially if a Brit (or British team) narrowly misses out on a result. It's a good deal less consistent in its attitude if a Brit gets into hot water. There is a certain tendency to double standards. I dare say the UK media isn't unique in this (indeed I know it isn't) but I sense it is several degrees more sanctimonious in its condemnations of the sins of others than, say, its French counterpart

    Complain about this comment

  • 423. At 3:03pm on 20 Aug 2008, Factfan wrote:

    I find it insulting to see Christine draping herself in the Union Flag having threatened to change her allegiance and run for Nigeria if the BOA wouldn't let her run in the Olympics.

    Complain about this comment

  • 424. At 3:03pm on 20 Aug 2008, GunnerImmy wrote:

    "3. Open personal information. I'm always surprised that various stats are not displayed when athletes are introduced on the track (e.g. PB, season PB, season ranking, average finishing position for the season, years professional, titles, etc.) Not sure about data protection implications but surely a simple graphic with e.g. testing regime rating, frequency of testing during last 3 years, number of missed tests during last 3 years, prior misdemeanors, etc. would go a long way to assuring spectators of what exactly they are watching as the athletes line up?"

    "I believe that information is on the BOA site and the name is normally mentioned."

    So why can't the broadcasters make it easier for us to see this on TV as they line up? As I said in the original post - in the current climate athletes, adminstrators and broadcasters should be bending over backwards to prove clean competition to the casual or invested spectator.

    Complain about this comment

  • 425. At 3:04pm on 20 Aug 2008, MartinDFerry wrote:

    Emma_Fowler: Thanks. I'm sorry for provoking you.

    Sad Saddler: Night!

    GROUP HUG with Whippet

    Complain about this comment

  • 426. At 3:08pm on 20 Aug 2008, darkvalleysboy1978 wrote:

    The BOA should never have allowed themselves to be bullied by this athlete by her threatening to run for Nigeria!

    Complain about this comment

  • 427. At 3:14pm on 20 Aug 2008, run800 wrote:

    It's a good few posts ago now, but many people were referring to Marion Jones never having failed a drugs test. This was entirely a different situation as she was on THG which was undetectable at the time, therefore she provided the samples but was never caught as THG was not tested for. Hence the negative tests! No need to "miss" a test if you're on something that cannot be traced.

    Another case of people commenting on things they know absolutely nothing about!

    Christine, I sincerely hope you don't get round to reading the dross that has been posted on this site. Better off spending the time training for London.

    And as for the post stating broadcasters should post on screen the number of tests performed etc. to enlighten the viewers, that would be difficult as so many nations do not have testing proceudres for out-of-competition situations.

    Complain about this comment

  • 428. At 3:16pm on 20 Aug 2008, Mark Peters wrote:

    Come on Reggie81, the fact that she is clean on the day of the race has nothing to do with the training and strength work that she has put in to get to that day and whether she has or hasn't used drugs to do that.

    The calls for her to be the face of 2012 when she threatened to quit GB and race for Nigeria are interesting too.

    Simply due to the fact that she was banned for a year due to missing drugs tests means that there will always an unanswered question that no-one will ever be able to prove, hence the split and unchanging opinions on the blog.

    It is very sad this debate is raging at what should be a unequivocally happy time for her and GB athletics....

    Complain about this comment

  • 429. At 3:17pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    Hey factfan I understand you to some degree. But I would not hold that against her. The way in which that came out suggested there was some media manipulation in the works. She was eligible to run for Nigeria if I remeber and you had sports pundits commenting on where and how she could further her sporting ambition. To hold that against her seems a bit like knit picking to me, if you despise her so much that anything will do to get at her then it's understandable though. You'll soon have people commenting on her interview performance and moaning about that.... oh I'm sorry .. they have already oooops seems like I spoke to soon..

    :o)

    Complain about this comment

  • 430. At 3:19pm on 20 Aug 2008, Alex Trickett - wrote:

    Thanks for all the comments. This is clearly an emotive topic, so please stick to the house rules (there have been a few posts crossing the line).

    Many thanks.

    Alex Trickett
    BBC Sport

    Complain about this comment

  • 431. At 3:19pm on 20 Aug 2008, halfwheeler wrote:

    "I believe you definately know what you are talking about not the arbitration panle et al. You are truly smart, let me guess you have a PHD or something like that right, cause your level of intelligence is truly astounding."

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ad+hominem

    Way to go, fanboy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 432. At 3:21pm on 20 Aug 2008, AussieInDubs wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 433. At 3:25pm on 20 Aug 2008, Board14 wrote:

    Congratulations to Christine, she won. However why has she got so upset when people have questioned her? She missed the tests that she knew she had to take, and missing three in a row is more than careless, now she has to live with the consequences.

    I have no problem with her representing our country, nor Chambers for that matter as both have served their time. But while Dwain seems to accept that some people will never believe him Christine has taken a holier than thou attitude when ultimately the problem was her mistake for which i have very little sympathy.
    Maybe she should've gone to Nigeria, I'm sure they'll give her the same funding, coaching and facilities. We have plenty of real sportspeople who have done fantastically, many in the face of adversity, not least our domination of track cycling, rowing and sailing, these are our true champions as they have by far a better attitude to sportsmanship.

    As for SPOTY, anyone who cannot accept criticism of their own fallibility shows a poor personality in my book, she shouldn't even make the shortlist.

    Complain about this comment

  • 434. At 3:26pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    Totally off toic - but Usain Bolt then was simply awesome.

    Into a 0.9 m/s headwind too.

    Astonishing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 435. At 3:28pm on 20 Aug 2008, shinyAllspark wrote:

    AussieInDubs - again I ask, what about teaching our kids the values of learning from mistakes, for working hard to make up for mistakes.

    Plus, she wasn't convicted of cheating.

    Complain about this comment

  • 436. At 3:30pm on 20 Aug 2008, scallopsaregreat wrote:

    threedegreesrandom (408) - totally agree, I was just getting carried away (ahem!) as they clearly get tested less than our athletes out of competition. I also wasn't suggesting that Jamaican athletes were on drugs (and nor do I believe they are despite the fact that Usain Bolt has whipped everyone's butt - he's just awesome!!), only that they don't have to jump through the stringent hoops our funded athletes do. By the logic of some people on this site that is OK because they haven't actually broken any of their rules. The problem being, it is each country that makes it's own rules and drugs policy for out of competition testing, not the IOC and so athletes are measured by different standards.

    Complain about this comment

  • 437. At 3:45pm on 20 Aug 2008, KenFingerlove wrote:

    She says "I don't care what people think or say. I'm happy - I've won a gold medal, and that's all that matters to me."

    I'm sure that's exactly what Marion Jones, Ben Johnson, etc. thought.

    Complain about this comment

  • 438. At 4:16pm on 20 Aug 2008, fleurcarpediem wrote:

    For pete's sake..

    WHY is this happening at the grandest moment of british athletics? why is everybody so intent on ruining what is supposed to be a glorious day for GB and Christine!

    So she forgot / missed/ avoided three tests.. If we were all shot down like this for forgetting three important appointments, I think half of you wouldn't be here writing what you are writing on this blog. lest be honest, none of you are saints.. and she did not test positive for drugs.. so why don't you lay off her for a bit.

    Take one look at that happy face and the sheer brilliance of that 400 meter race and tell me if you do not think she is a sincere and more importantly FANTASTIC athlete!

    Well done Christine! You are Brilliant!

    Complain about this comment

  • 439. At 4:24pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    halfwheeler my intention was not to offend really...

    Just having a bit of fun to be honest. After reading some of the posts on here, and seeing the comments made with regards to Christine as a person, it is not too hard for one to assume that people on this blog will be able to take statemens made regarding them without too much trouble. I mean if Christine can take it and people have really gone to great lengths to pass comments here about her, then I do not see why other folks cannot take a little disagreement here or sarcasm there. See where I am going with this. Do not dish it out if you cannot take it.

    Although I must say you really hurt my feelings by calling me a fanboy :'o( say sorry.

    Oh well I guess you are a really nice guy and did not mean to. :o)

    Complain about this comment

  • 440. At 4:36pm on 20 Aug 2008, halfwheeler wrote:

    Young master Jaymore,

    I was actually quite happy that you adhominemed me so soon after my post number 420 - it was a QED moment.

    I've never been offended by a post on the internet (That's no true, once someone said I was antisemitic and I really went to town on them) and was certainly not offended by yours - you do not know me so it can't possibly be personal. I was just happy you illustrated my point so succinctly and quickly.

    Fangirl? ;)

    Complain about this comment

  • 441. At 4:39pm on 20 Aug 2008, spartansutd wrote:

    ZZZZZZZZyawn debate until the cows come home. But with Blonska testing positive i am just waiting for the big doping scandal for this olympics. It will come it always does.

    Complain about this comment

  • 442. At 4:58pm on 20 Aug 2008, halfwheeler wrote:

    fleur,

    3 failed tests = 1 positive test. 1 positive test = lifetime olympic ban. (unless you are likely to win a medal and threaten to run for someone else)

    Now, the British Olympic Commitee unilaterally imposes these rules on our athletes - in other countries there would have been no lifetime ban and so no embarrasing debate. But those are the rules and if we didn't have rules, where would we be?

    France.

    Complain about this comment

  • 443. At 5:13pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    halfwheeler I am happy that you are happy. But do tell where do you get your intellect from, because you really do amaze me with your awe-inspiring write ups. I personally believe your skill and genius is wasted on a mere BBC blog.

    If you read my post and I am sure you did hence your comment, you would have noticed I made reference to logic and simply extended the use of such logic in putting forward a position however out of step with actual facts it is.

    I am not in anyway attempting to defend Christine's missed drug tests, I am simply following on from a post of mine. It just so happened I was easily able to use your post conveniently to put forward my argument.

    Fangirl why I never, that really hurts stop it....

    Next you're gonna tell me I'm letting my emotions overcome me and I am a die hard Christine supporter.... Hold on you said that already.. wow.. you really can see the future.. oh gosh halfwheeler you know so much.... hey are you a professor or something.. go on ... go on... go on... admit it

    :o).....................

    Complain about this comment

  • 444. At 5:35pm on 20 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    How embarrassing for all those posters trying to highlight Blonska and asking where the difference was? Well, I think we saw the difference today..She is a drugs cheat..she has failed twice.

    Now, given that everyone in the Athletics world seems to say that the testing regime at these olympics are so rigorous that they are almost certain to catch cheats out, we shall have to wait and see..but I look forward to a huge amount of humble pie being eaten..people should be utterly ashamed of themselves spouting spurious claims

    The facts are there for everyone to see why she missed those tests but people don't want to hear the facts. When she missed those 3 drugs tests, why was Becky Lynn on 2 missed drugs tests and over a hundred..i repeat a hundred..on one missed drugs test..why?? I find that so difficult to understand..and yet the anti-Christine mob seem to suggest that missing 3 is unacceptable but yet they could understand missing 1..!? erm no i'm sorry..you can't have it both ways..you're saying how could you miss something which your career depens on, you just don't forget that sort of thing..so given that line of argument no one should ever miss a test..ever!! so that begs the question why had over ONE HUNDRED athletes missed a test? Was the system so flawed that it seemed to lead to missed tests?

    Ohuruogu is a superb, clean athlete who deserves all the success she has got..look at the times:

    2006 PB 50.28
    2008 PB 49.61

    erm hardly a major improvement..anyone with a head and a bit of knowledge about the sport knew she was going to be big when she came on to the scene.

    One other thing, she missed her interview with a newspaper journalist by 30 mins..she'd forgotten..interesting.

    Complain about this comment

  • 445. At 5:52pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    My two cents for what it's worth.

    I think anyone forming an opinion should do so based on the facts of the case, and not on what their friend who is an athlete said, or what they would do in that situation.

    Looking at the facts of the case and taking it for what it is, and not letting personal emotion come into it, you would have to go a long way to prove that she in anyway used illegal drugs. On the other hand it does call into question her organisational skills, and also the organisation of her coach and UK athletics as a whole.

    Complain about this comment

  • 446. At 5:52pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    Now to those people that hold the opinion that if this was what she wanted to do all her life she would have made sure she didn't miss any test, one would have to then conclude that these athletes are robotic and are infallible. On this point I can talk from experience, a good friend of mine who represents GB in the high jump has on occasions missed training sessions or meets. One such situation occurred when we all went clubbing it was a good night, at the end of the night you can say we got lucky and went back to some girls apartment. To cut a long story short, he had a meet/training session in Loughborough. Now he decided there was no way in hell he was going to be able to get from London to Loughborough in time for this event so he did what we all do sometimes and called in sick well kind of. Now if on that day the testers had decided to turn up, then that would have counted as one missed test, so you see it is actually quite easy to miss a test. Three times is still much though, but that as we all know is an arbitrary number it could easily be two in six months or five in twenty months or one in three months etcetera. The point I am making, is that for those ready to disregard the rules that saw her fit to race, it is just as easy then to apply that logic to all those who missed two and even those that missed one because as somebody mentioned some drugs can clear your body in seven days. Using that logic we can rightly say anyone that has missed any drugs test is tainted in that there may be a new drug that only needs to be used once, and that once is the one test they missed alas as has already being explained earlier in the debate the testing is random and as such cannot be planned for. I for one feel that testers need to come and meet you wherever you are really it just makes sense. Basically call you up say two hours before and find out where you are training and turn up there. Lets not forget that as an athlete she has been continuously tested in-between missing tests since the start of her career, so if indeed she is taking something and has not been found out, then by that reasoning everyone else is taking something and have not being found out.

    Complain about this comment

  • 447. At 5:53pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    In opining on this issue I can say I was very impressed by Christine's performance. Now I know in terms of beauty she is not the most attractive out there so it is easy for commentary to be made of her muscular structure et al and for people not to like her right of the bat. But if you analyse the race, she did not win because she was muscular, she won because she executed her gameplan quite resolutely despite what others around her were doing, if you cannot bring yourself to applaud even that. Then I am sorry but I will have to reserve my right to freedom of speech to conclude based on the information in front of us all that you are quite hateful or uninformed.

    To those that back Christine, you have to take into consideration that for a sport tainted by drug use Christine did herself no favours and so you should not really get upset at anyone posting negative comments about her medal. What I find difficult is having known she missed two tests and a third would mean a ban, why did she not simply ask the school to move their sports day to another location as she did not want to potentially miss another test. I know an idiotic statement but alas that is actually the way some people's minds work.

    Complain about this comment

  • 448. At 5:53pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    To those people on here claiming to be former four hundred metres runners and high jumpers et al, I put it to you that you were drugs cheats and should be ashamed of yourself or worst still you were absolutely rubbish at your chosen sport and as such shows that bar missing any drugs test, you just did not work hard enough knowing this would change your life as some have claimed they would have done regarding the missed drugs test. I have no hard facts to back this up however, but using supposition and a bit of personal opinion I can make a case for you being tainted. It is possible for example for me to make an allegation that you used performance enhancing drugs and you only quit sports because you were close to getting caught, now I have no proof of this but heck it sure sounds like a convincing argument to me. Again baseless suggestions not based on fact can be made about any athlete just by implying certain things i.e she is tanned because she is using drugs, or she is smaller and slimmer because she is using drugs, or she has longer hair now because she is using drugs, although she has been going to the gym and working out the muscle definition is because she is using drugs.

    Complain about this comment

  • 449. At 5:53pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    All in all I can only based my position on the facts leaked to the Telegraph and other such reputable newspapers, as I do not know Christine directly. But based on the information before me including Victor Conte's letter to Dwain it would be cruel or sinister even for me to suggest that she used drugs. I have to commend the achievement for what it's worth, a very remarkable and dogged display. To those that begrudge her, remember don't be blinded by your personal disapproval of Christine apply your stern position to those that have missed one and two drug tests as well, because by the logic expressed they also may have doped and were just avoiding the testing. About the fact she was going to run or not run for Nigeria, anyone who remembers the episode, would note this was put to her by the interviewer and I recollect she mentioned she was looking at all her options. But using that logic, we have ex Jamaicans, Americans, et al representing us only a few years after leaving their federation so I guess we should give their medals back really.

    Complain about this comment

  • 450. At 5:55pm on 20 Aug 2008, halfwheeler wrote:

    mrmichael,

    if over 100 athletes have missed at least one test, then this indicates a flawed and abusable system - I am unsure as to why you think this gives credence to CO's story?

    No-one suggested the other athletes who have missed tests were beyond criticism - that was a strawman that you just made up in order to make the spurious point that you wanted to tell us about.

    Complain about this comment

  • 451. At 6:00pm on 20 Aug 2008, GoCyprus wrote:

    Post #383 says it all.

    The sceptics do have one advantage over CO's supporters and that is that they can never be proved wrong.

    Think about it:
    if CO one day tests positive then the sceptics will say they were right all along.

    if CO never tests positive then the sceptics will just say she either beat the system or the missed tests in 2005/6 show that she can't be trusted.

    Those who believe CO is clean can never be proved right.

    Is there anything to debate? The only person who knows the truth is CO.

    If you want to believe she is a cheat then go ahead. But then why pick on her? Every athlete must be in the same boat.

    Complain about this comment

  • 452. At 6:12pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Halfwheeler - you been stitched there mate. I always try and start my arguments defending the defensible. Obviously you like a challenge, at least you have stamina anyway. But don't let the use of logic derail your argument. Just call out fanboy and floor the opposition with your wit and incisiveness. Bravo.

    Well done Christine again. A gold medallist in the track against world class opposition despite the loss of a year of competition. A pity we can't all enjoy it. Who cares I can and will.

    Complain about this comment

  • 453. At 6:13pm on 20 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    450

    I think you'll find that many people have said during this debate that they can undertand missing one but not three..1welshbloke for example..you really ought to read all the posts before speaking with such authority.

    My point is simple and not hard to grasp. The fact that so many people were missing tests suggests either a) they were all drug cheats and wanted to avoid being tested or b) the system was flawed and in fact was so inflexible that it seemed to 'encourage' missed tests. Now, the first scenario seems highly unlikely so given that so many people missed tests, then it was surely a matter of time and not beyond the realms of possibility given the poor system that people would miss 2 (Becky Lynn) and 3 (Christine Ohuruogu).

    How many of the 100, let's hope clean, athletes and thought "there but for the grace of God go I" when the Ohuruogu situation came about. There haven't been any further situations of people missing tests because of the highlighted nature of Ohuruogu but ALSO because the system realised it was poor, has changed and is now much more flexible.

    Complain about this comment

  • 454. At 6:16pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Jaymore-Sterling did you just resubmit your original post in three parts? Superb.

    Complain about this comment

  • 455. At 6:18pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    Yes I did. I got an email from the beeb suggesting I try truncating it so I did.

    Complain about this comment

  • 456. At 6:19pm on 20 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Admit it. You just wanted to let everyone you know you got lucky in Loughborough.

    Complain about this comment

  • 457. At 6:32pm on 20 Aug 2008, halfwheeler wrote:

    "My point is simple and not hard to grasp. The fact that so many people were missing tests suggests either a) they were all drug cheats and wanted to avoid being tested or b) the system was flawed and in fact was so inflexible that it seemed to 'encourage' missed tests."

    So many people missing tests could just be complacency or contempt for a toothless system, it could be a series of unfortunate coincidences, one of a million other things or a combination of all of them.

    I stand corrected on the what people have said about missing one test.

    Whilst I am a self-confessed deeply cynical person, I do not have any kind of conviction that CO missed any tests because she was using. My problem with this affair is the arbitrary nature in which rules are always applied to the letter - except when they are not.

    Complain about this comment

  • 458. At 6:37pm on 20 Aug 2008, twinspeed wrote:

    As someone who actually does know Christine, I am absolutely delighted for her. Her run is one of the highlights of the track and field competition for me (still behind Usain Bolt though!!)

    Having been involved (as both athlete and coach) in British athletics for a while, I can honestly say that Christine is one of the most naturally gifted athletes I have ever met. There are certain athletes (and not as many as you would believe) who have a God-given gift for their discipline. She also has the mental and emotional faculties that are necessary to be a champion - and those are to be applauded. History is littered with athletes of supreme ability who never made Olympic champion (Asafa Powell, Leroy Burrell, Merlene Ottey, to name but a few).

    She is (whatever the nay-sayers might say) also a fantastic person - and it's not often you can say that about someone so successful.

    Some of the negative comments on this blog are expected (even Michael Johnson said that for the rest of her career, she may have to carry the weight of her mistake with her); some are vaguely hypocritical - is there anyone out there who hasn't turned up to work hungover, or late for a meeting, or just made a professional error? Yes - I suspect most of us have, even though we may depend on our work for our livelihood. It amounts to much the same thing. A few of the comments on this blog have bordered on the ignorant and just plain stupid, and should be treated with the contempt they deserve.

    However, I would urge Christine to continue to have faith in her own ability and to pray for the superhuman grace she will need to answer the repetitive, inane questions she will encounter from the press - without becoming sullen and angry. Goodness knows I couldn't do it.

    Well done, Christine - Olympic Champion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 459. At 7:00pm on 20 Aug 2008, MrsJohnMurphy wrote:

    458 - Hurrah for the old 'I know her and I am an athlete' defence for your attempt to defend CO.

    The point is that if I failed to perform a crucial part of my job then I would be sacked. Missing dope tests is not comparable with turning up late for work with a hangover. Performing regular dope tests is part and parcel of her job. She got off lightly with her ban and to try to defend her personality despite her threats to run for Nigeria if she didn't get her own way shows exactly what kind of person she is.

    Complain about this comment

  • 460. At 7:05pm on 20 Aug 2008, Tonynar wrote:

    A race that was won with tactics!
    Was missing 3 dope tests one of those tactics?
    Oh while I'm here can anyone remind me as to Dame Kelly's ban?
    Sorry I never have condoned cheats.

    Complain about this comment

  • 461. At 7:11pm on 20 Aug 2008, wallruss wrote:

    If she were no good - they wouldn't have changed the rules for her. However because she won the world championships, she was allowed through. One missed test is forgetful, two is careless in the extreme, three is inexcusable. It's a disgrace!

    Complain about this comment

  • 462. At 7:12pm on 20 Aug 2008, playunextyear wrote:

    In the late 80s, the BBC carried out something called the "landlady test", where a black journalist phoned about a vacant bedsit, was told that it was free, but when he turned up an hour later, the room was "let". A further hour later, a white journalist did exactly the same, and got the room.

    On the basis of this factual evidence, the BBC speculated that about 30-33% of Britons might be racist.

    In the intervening years, thank heavens, this figure is thought to have fallen to below a quarter, as more and more people get lovely in-laws, fantastic team mates etc. of other ethnic background, and learn from reality instead of prejudice.

    Would this justify a claim that a fifth to a quarter of the negative comments about CO are, to use the term the knockers themselves so love, "tainted"?

    I myself don't think so, because to arrive at such a conclusion, I'd have to use the same logic that these negative posters apply.

    To quote 1welshbloke, I'm 99% certain that these posters are "clean", but "slap my wrist" there does remain that tiny doubt about them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 463. At 7:26pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    One of the things about posting on the internet it its far too easy to try and make a point which doesn't always reflect the exact nature of what you are trying to say.

    Indeed the context of your views are often lost as we make sometimes deliberately provocative comments.

    I am certainly guilty of this as I don't often take the time to fully explain my position in the light of everything that influences my views on a particular issue. Why? Because it would simply take too long!

    At the moment in the context of World Athletics, I think the achievements of any athlete always beg the question "are they on drugs too?". I want to believe they are not - Usain Bolt for example - I want to believe and yes I guess I do believe he is clean.

    For example, the 100m record over the last 20 years is littered with drugs cheats. We still have records that have stood since the days of the Eastern Block.

    The same thing has happened with other sports. Cycling and the Tour de France. Weightlifting at the Olympics.

    So when I use words like tainted its in light of what has been happening in athletics in recent times. Cynical? Maybe?

    I was shouting for Ohuruogu to win. She has served her ban. She has every right to run.

    But do I find it as easy to celebrate her win as say Chris Hoy? No I don't.

    And I think that is the issue with performance sport at the moment. Everywhere is to a degree tainted with drugs. Are some sceptical of Armstrong's achievements? Yes they are. Go to France and they are convinced he is despite no evidence to the contrary.

    Missing three tests for me is just inconceivable. Missing one I can understand. Scatty and disorganised she may be. It just raises eyebrows.

    E.g. my career once depended on driving - I was within one offence on a ban. I was vigilant for a period of 2 years - and it was extremely hard work always driving below the speed limit for example. Obviously everyone is different but thats how I dealt with my situation.

    Do I believe any of our medal winners have taken performance enhancing drugs? No I don't.

    But it is a belief isn't it. Its not like having a faith. And its about how much your trust your belief in light of the evidence that is there and your own personal experience.

    And personal experience does come into it. In any system where we are asked to put our beliefs on the line that is what you ask yourself. Jurors for example do this when asked to make decisions as difficult as murder trials "what would I have done in that position", "is it the act of a reasonable person".

    And that sums it up for me - "is it reasonable for her to have missed three tests" - no. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt but that does not mean I have 100% faith in her. Perhaps tainted is too strong a word for it.

    What a great race. I just wish I wasn't in the position where I question what you did in the past.

    Complain about this comment

  • 464. At 7:55pm on 20 Aug 2008, scallopsaregreat wrote:

    I am sure Christine wishes the same too

    Complain about this comment

  • 465. At 8:02pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    scallopsaregreat

    I'm sure she doesn't care one jot of what I as an individual think!

    your belief system says "she missed three tests - so what, its understandable"

    my belief system says "she missed three test - I cannot comprehend how she could let that happen"

    The question raised by many is "does that mean her result is tainted in any way".

    I think that question is answered purely by the number of posts not just on here but on several other discussion boards.

    As I've said previously I am more than happy if people come to a diferent conclusion than me - others (on both sides of the debate) aren't happy and just diss others as a result.

    Complain about this comment

  • 466. At 8:20pm on 20 Aug 2008, mrmichaelh wrote:

    465

    I'm sorry you can't have it both ways - you can't say missing a test is understandable but missing 3 is inconceivable..because as we keep hearing that these tests are so crucial, so pivotal to their careers that it should be 'inconceivable' that anyone misses 1 test, let alone 3...and yet we had a situation where over ONE HUNDRED athletes had missed a test..how can that be? Now, were they all drug cheats trying to avoid being tested or were they partly victims of an inept system that 'encouraged' missed tests..surely the testers must have asked themselves "why are so many people missing these crucial tests"? Becky Lynn was on 2 missed tests..for all we know there could have been more..and when you consider that so many had missed one, it's perfectly resonable to think that sooner or later someone was going to fall foul of the poorly managed system and miss 2 or 3.

    The testing regime at these Olympics is by far the most rigorous, so rigorous that they are very confident that if anyone has taken drugs, they will be able to detect it. Blonska tried and failed..now as a previous drugs cheat, i'm sure she tried all ways possible to disguise her cheating and she failed.

    So if there is nothing on Ohuruogu and given the fact that she has passed every single test, tests which she took within a matter of days of the 'missed' tests, then please can we stop with this utter tripe and accept that we have a world class athlete on our hands and celebrate it..She was world-class before this saga and she's world class after it..simple..she didn't come out of nowhere, though I accept to those who haven't followed her career you may think that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 467. At 8:44pm on 20 Aug 2008, MartinDFerry wrote:

    C'mon you miserable people, let's celebrate Christine! And while we're at it can we also celebrate my pet whippet, who can run one lap of the track faster than she can, has never missed a drug test, nor threatened to join the Nigerian team when accused of cheating. Surely they're both worthy of high praise from this forum?

    Complain about this comment

  • 468. At 8:47pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    I bet your whippet also managed to give you a urine sample on demand!

    Hee hee

    Complain about this comment

  • 469. At 9:31pm on 20 Aug 2008, DorsetDipper wrote:

    there seems to be some strange logic going on here, in particular there is a confusion of ethical and legalistic issues.

    Christine Ohuruogu broke the rules. those rules come with a punishment. She took the punishment and is now competing again. This was sanctioned by the authorities, so she is competing entirely properly.

    The notion that she shouldn't compete because she broke the rules is strange; I never heard anyone say "Shane Warne comes on to bowl, of course he broke the rules so he shouldn't even be playing", and unlke Christine Ohuruogo he actually tested positive for banned substances.

    Then there is the ethical question about being implicated in drug taking. She missed three tests; was she a drug cheat after missing just one test? (Sally Gunnell amongst many others missed a test); after two? after three?

    And has been pointed out here, many drug cheats passed many tests when they were taking drugs; so there is a chance that supposedly "clean" competitors are taking banned substances. So everyone is under suspicion!

    and how come I havent seen any reference to Tim Don's ban for missing three tests?

    It was a great run from Christine, I've been watching it all day and still get goose bumps. If people want to complain about it that's their loss.

    Complain about this comment

  • 470. At 9:37pm on 20 Aug 2008, HaileG wrote:

    How can anyone argue that the likes of Linford Christie won their medals clean?
    The only true fact is that Christie wasn't caught for taking drugs at the time he won his gold.

    Personally I struggle to understand the logic in training and racing all career ....and then achieveing Olympic gold without taking drugs to then start taking drugs once you are retired as what is suggests with Christie. To me that situation stinks and raises so much suspicion that he should be stripped of his gold and banned from going anywhere near athletics again in any capacity be it as a coach, uk delegate or journalist

    Complain about this comment

  • 471. At 9:44pm on 20 Aug 2008, HaileG wrote:

    Post 138 - Volley

    Bringing it down to a race argument is a disagrace, you should be banned fom using these blogs, attitudes like yours are the cause of racism

    Cab you really not see that this argument is about drugs tests and not race?

    Complain about this comment

  • 472. At 10:46pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    I quote "I'm sorry you can't have it both ways - you can't say missing a test is understandable but missing 3 is inconceivable"

    Yes and I stand by that comment - after one missed test you would be extra vigilant - how many people had two missed tests exactly?

    So out of the 100+ who missed one test how many went on to miss two?

    And out of the people who missed two tests how many went on to miss three?

    Every time you would expect an athlete to become more and more vigilant. So you would actually expect the probability of missing another test to go down.

    If you think the number of missed tests is irrelevant you might as well argue that any missed test means nothing so let them miss as many as they want.

    How many test exactly would YOU think is significant? One? Two? Three? Or does it not matter to you because in your words "You cannot have it both ways".

    Complain about this comment

  • 473. At 10:57pm on 20 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    Iwelshbloke as much as I do not agree with your logic on Christine's missed drugs test, I can applaud the fact that you seem to have analysed the case and reached a conclusion. On the other hand some people like wallruss do not have the ability of putting forth coherant arguments.

    1 missed test, 2 missed test, 3 missed test, 4 missed test, 5 missed test, see this is where your argument breaks down. If you agree that the number 3 is some arbitrary number and it could easily be 2 or 4, by arbitrary I mean there is no mathematical model to suggest any body missing 3 tests is automatically using a substance. So the 3 test rule is not scientific but more on the administrative side, so really anyone missing a test whether 1 or 3 or 5 based on your logic is tainted. For if missing 3 tests raises doubts with you then missing 1 should surely do the same why you ask well because you are not supposed to miss any period. As you have clarified that you are not accusing her of taking drugs I will stop there with regards to yourself.

    Regarding other people that insist she is taking some substance, all I can say is you guys seriously need to get involved with UK athletics. Seriously because you people know so much about this case, much more than the ordinary people know. I am sure if we really begged you people, you will be able to tell us about other drugs cheats.. What was that Ben Johnson, Dwain Chambers.... oh my how do you guys do it.. well I never... wow there must be stuff about Christine's case that you guys must know, that the arbitration panel must not have known about please share.

    Complain about this comment

  • 474. At 11:24pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    Jaymore_Sterling - I have never argued that mssing three tests or more means an automatic - and I acknowledge that you recognised that.

    But for every missed test there becomes increased suspision. So i disagree my argument breaks down because if the number of missed tests is irrelevant we might as well say feel free to miss as many as you want.

    Where would you draw the line? Or wouldn't you?

    Is it one test, two, three or more? I guess we can never know. We can only decide what we feel comfortable with.


    Complain about this comment

  • 475. At 11:31pm on 20 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    oops start of post - means an automatic acceptance that they are doping

    Complain about this comment

  • 476. At 11:52pm on 20 Aug 2008, omaghjoe wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 477. At 11:54pm on 20 Aug 2008, omaghjoe wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 478. At 00:01am on 21 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    Okay lets look at this from a logical perspective lwelshbloke.

    If we take an arbitrary number say 1, 2 or 3, and focus solely on the numerical aspect 3 is obviously greater than 1. To the layman or the uneducated say that is simple enough to grasp.

    Now lets start to flesh it out, 2 silvers will carry more weight than 3 bronzes, pushing that further 1 gold carries more weight that 2 silvers. Now this is where analysis comes into it.

    The circumstances of Christine's 3 missed tests, will be different from say the circumstances of Becky Lynn's 2 missed tests. But as you have chosen or maybe you haven't actually, but for the sake of the debate as you have chosen to ignore the circumstance of the missed tests and focus on the numerical value of the numbers, then any missed test will raise suspicion.

    Now as you quantified the significance by stating 3 more suspicious than 1. Then by implication all the athletes that have missed tests should also have varying degrees of suspicion associated with them. So athletes that have missed one test will have 1/3 the suspicion of Christine, and athletes that have missed two tests will have 2/3 the suspicion of Christine. Now there lies the problem in ignoring the facts of the case as it stands. If you feel that there was a rule broken in missing three drug test, then you should also be able to agree that having reviewed it's rules and seen the short comings the BOC agreed that Christine's case involved circumstances beyond her control and thus the ban should not stand.

    Unless you are a conspiracy theorist and some how you can theorize that she conveniently arranged for a school to have a sports event on the day she was supposed to be tested, even though she would have had no idea she was going to be tested that day.

    If you still disagree, can you at least follow the reasoning I have put forward?

    Complain about this comment

  • 479. At 00:13am on 21 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    I do follow your reasoning - though I will disagree with your maths.

    It does not follow that one test has 1/3 the significance of three. I won't go into the maths in detail but basically on your logic if it has 1/3 the significance you would expect the number of people missing three tests to be 1/3 the number missing one. Well clearly that is not the case. (All things being equal).

    Anyway I'm not theorising anything with regard her final missed test. We will never know the full circumstances. Don't forget she only had to give the testers her whereabouts for one hour that day - she could have stayed at that stadium for that period and then gone somewhere else.

    Complain about this comment

  • 480. At 00:39am on 21 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    I will have to correct your mathematical supposition here. Based on a numerical rating where you have 3 as the maximum scenario, and 1 as the minimum. Where you have correlated the number of missed tests with the level of suspicion as in your post 474 where you state and I quote "that for every missed test there is an increased level of suspicion". A mathematical relation based on that correlation would equate the 3 missed tests with the current level of suspicion that you currently express about Christine, so by simply implementing a ratio principle in this scenario(remember we are not looking at circumstances or facts even, just merely the number of missed tests from a numerical standpoint), it is correct then that 2 missed tests relates to 2/3 the suspicion of Christine and 1 missed test equates to 1/3 of the suspicion.

    Note this has nothing to do with the number of people missing the test, I have not put forward a mathematical model for that, I have merely related your comment about suspicion and the number of missed test.

    I hope there is more clarity now as you may have missed that, or that's the impression I get from your post.

    Complain about this comment

  • 481. At 06:49am on 21 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    But you are assuming that the level of suspicion and the number of tests have a linear relationship. What if that relationship isn't linear and say is logarithmic or exponential?

    I am not making that assumption. You are the one who has implemented a scenario where suspicion increases proportionally to number of failed tests.

    So "correct" me all you like. Yes there is a lot more "clarity".

    ;-)





    Complain about this comment

  • 482. At 07:34am on 21 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    And if you want the maths behind this here it is. Now this is a very simple model but one which I hope demonstrates where I am coming from.

    Lets assume that the expected number of missed tests is actually 1.

    Lets assume we can use the poisson distrubition.

    If someone gets one missed test we think this is perfectly reasonable - we have a level of suspicion but not much. The probability of one missed test is the same as the probability of no missed tests 0.36

    What is the probability of two missed tests? 0.18 ----- hmmm seems linear so far, so am I shooting myself in the foot?

    Lets look at the probability of three missed tests. 0.06.......one sixth of the probability of one missed test and clearly not a linear relationship.

    Now if our expected number of missed tests is actually one every two years what does this do to the figures in a twelve month period.

    P(No missed tests) = 0.6
    P(one missed test) = 0.3
    P(two missed tests) = 0.07
    P(three missed tests) = 0.01

    In other words you are 30 times less likely to miss three tests as you are one.

    Hence the increased level of suspicion.

    Of course the assumption here is that the events are independent - I actually don't think they are - I think that one missed test would actually mean it is less likely you will miss another and less likely still that you will miss a third. The significance of this is that the model you would use for this would make the above figures even worse.

    Now I really don;'t want to prolong this mathematical debate but if you insist on "correcting my mathematial supposition" then carry on.

    Complain about this comment

  • 483. At 11:29am on 21 Aug 2008, darkvalleysboy1978 wrote:

    As for the constant race implications that is farcical. I for one will be watching the Triple Jump and sincerely hope to see Idowu get gold as he deserves it.

    The topic is regarding her Olympic lifetime ban by the BOA being overturned simply because she threatened to run for Nigeria. Perhaps the BOA should keep some consistency.

    Unfortunately with so many big names doping recently, and now athletes in this games, suspicion is going to be around for a while....I mean come on! Even the HORSES are doped up to the hilt! O_o

    Complain about this comment

  • 484. At 12:01pm on 21 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    I really applaud your work, I actually do. But you appear to be crossing your wires and you are also constantly shifting your position. Although I will state I clearly left an opening for you to exploit, really smart nice.

    Now correct me if I am wrong here but you completely disregard the circumstances of Christine's missed tests, this can be deduced from your posts. Now if you have not, and you actually are looking at each missed test as unique and prepared to weight them accordingly then one missed test has the potential to carry more suspicion than three missed tests that is very logical.

    However if you choose to introduce the probability of an event taking place into the mix and use a poisson distribution model as your basis, then you will agree that for this model to work the events have to be random and independent over a fixed time-frame. Now why is this a problem I hear you ask. As you decided to use poisson distribution for Christine's, I cannot remember exactly the time period over which Christine's missed tests occurred. But if we say three missed tests in twelve months for Christine, and another athlete has one missed test in three months, maybe we can throw in another athlete with two missed tests in one month. We know that the poisson distribution is determined by lambda, and lambda is a function of the expected number of occurrences of an event in a given timeframe you start to see how it becomes hard to apply in the case of Christine and the hundred or so athletes that have missed one, two, or three tests. So really one missed test may well carry more suspicion than three missed test based on what you have put forward.

    If as you later go on in your post 482 to then try and re-integrate personal circumstance into the argument then surely someone of your calibre would be able to understand that a completely new mathematical model would have to devised to accommodate this. You would have to involve all these values, a can be the number of missed tests, b can be weighted to give the arbitration panel's judgement, y can be a weighting given to the manner in which the tests were missed, x can be the time period over which the tests were missed, z can be the number of times tested (assume negative), c is the reasonably expected number of missed test, and then all this should give you a value for the level of suspicion.


    Hence either you look at the facts of the case and base it on that which is what was done by the arbitration panel, or you look at the simple relation of the number of missed tests and have suspicion based on that which implies logically that there should be a ratio involved in the suspicion level i.e. 1/3, 2/3 etcetera, or you develop a model that involves all three. But you cannot have it both ways or all ways even.

    But hey to be honest and I am actually enjoying this post, if you have a bit of time on you post a reply I'll have a look at it on my lunch break.

    Complain about this comment

  • 485. At 12:28pm on 21 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    Interesting discussion guys but it does raise one point. There is a degree of arbitrariness with the automatic ban being triggered by three missed tests. As 1welshbloke says we need to draw the line somewhere. However, it seems curious that people are (not necessarily 1welshbloke) happy to accept the authorities' application of this rule but are not happy to accept the authorities' (ok slightly different authority but principles presumably consistent) ruling on Ohuruogu's right to resume her Olympic career.

    I find myself wondering for what reason their view of the competence of the said authories was changed.

    I find myself leaning towards the view given in post 462 for certain posters.

    Complain about this comment

  • 486. At 12:40pm on 21 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    By the way two other Olympians also had their bans overturned in exactly the same circumstances. Tim Don was one, can't remember the other one's name. Its not like there wasn't a precedent. But some people just can't stand seeing others happy especially if she's not one of their "own".

    Complain about this comment

  • 487. At 12:46pm on 21 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    Excellent analysis - and as I stated I was explaining why three positives gives rise to a greater degree of suspicion. I was not proposing this as an actual model - I said it demonstrates where I am coming from and indeed I go on to say that the model would indeed be more complex. The probability of you being chosen for a test is random - however yes you are correct the probability you will be in the wrong place or forget to inform the testers is I think obviously dependent on whether or not you are being more vigilant and hence is not independent .

    If you really think its as simple as a linear relationship where a is the level of suspicion raised that if one missed test = a, 2 missed tests = 2a, and three missed tests = 3a then that is your choice. But this surely misses out the fact that the probability of you missing your test has decreased and as I stated that it has been shown to be a linear correlation. Now I suspect that we would both agree that that is something impossible to measure. However if level of suspicion (whether factually based or not) is based on the number of people casting doubts on the various fora I think a linear relationship is highly unlikely. Note I do say IF not that we SHOULD.

    I don't think at all it implies logically that its a straight ratio for the reasons I have mentioned. You haven't disproved this have you? But even if you are right I shall address that later in my post.

    Neither have I shifted my position. I have said you relate it to your own personal experience. All I am doing here is relating this to my own personal experience. The argument above is the result of the maths being criticised not an attempt to contextualise it in the case of Ohuruogu.

    Am I disregarding - no - why? Because I've said time and time again that I believe she is clean but I have a nagging doubt. A doubt that is increased because she has missed three tests and did so in what I believe is a ten month period. That doubt is greater for the other athletes that I am aware of.

    Now when it comes to the court of arbitration - how do they judge? Is it on the balance of probabilities?

    I'll have to go and check this out.

    Now - if I have stated that Ohuruogu shouldn't even be at the games or that my belief is she is a drugs cheat I would understand your criticism. What I have stated is that for me (old cynic that I am) - the more tests you miss the higher the degree of suspicion - how we calculate that is impossible as everyone's circumstances are different, especially time frame - though I was of the understanding that in Ohuruogu's case when certain figures were released it was for the same time frame as Ohuruogu.

    In any event by your logic you are saying 1 missed test = 1/3 of the suspicion, 2 missed tests = 2/3 of the suspicion.

    Ergo - 3 missed tests is more suspicious than 2 which is more suspicious that one - which is in other words the same as saying her 3 missed tests leads to an increased level of suspicion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 488. At 12:51pm on 21 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    And on that note - I shall sign off - happy in the knowledge that if nothing else, my value added GCSE result should a healthy positive!

    Complain about this comment

  • 489. At 12:57pm on 21 Aug 2008, Ash_And_Claire wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 490. At 1:02pm on 21 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    One last point - its all very well looking at the arbitrariness of the missed tests but its a bit pointless really. The truth is if you take more precaution you are less likely to miss even one and the higher the penalty the higher the precaution you will take. Witness the plummet in the number of false starts in the 100m when the ruling changed to instant disqualification after one false start.

    So missing one test will never be treated seriously by an athlete hence the high number. The second test may be looked at a lot more seriously given the chance of things happening that cannot be avoided like in the instance of Ohuruogu's third test so because one test may be failed unavoidably athletes will tend to keep one in the bag for a rainy day.

    I think they should penalise athletes on a penalty scale for every missed test to put in their mind their tally is ramping up. Say a fine for the first test, a three month ban and a fine for the second etc.

    Also in her mind may have been the fact that two Olympians already overturned bans so this may have lessened slightly her view of the seriousness of missing the third otherwise I'm sure that not missing a test would have been her overriding priority even before her training schedule. I am sure it is now at any rate.

    At the end of the day the aim is to modify behaviour so that athletes know that the risk of taking drugs is too high and part of that is also to make sure that the administrative procedures are also fair and don't spoil someone's life disproportionate to their crime.

    Certainly both happened as a consequence of CO's ban because both the testing procedures have been improved and CO has not missed another test(!). However, it is time to move on and accept that what the arbitration panels ruled when allowing CO back into the Olympics it was a fair and proper decision and had precedent and as a result testing has improved.

    Complain about this comment

  • 491. At 1:22pm on 21 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    lwelshbloke I think you have not correctly understood my post judging from your response.

    I was not in any way suggesting the relationship between the number of missed tests and the suspicion was linear. I was merely pointing out that to disregard personal circumstance and the nature of each missed offence, and solely focus on the number of missed tests, basing suspicion on that would have to be linear because facts of the case et al have been disregarded so we cannot complexly model the relationship.

    Now regarding the level of suspicion issue, I was bringing to peoples attention that Christine was not the only athlete to miss three tests and be re-instated, but also there were about a hundred athletes that had missed at least one test. I was merely pointing out that if people really had a problem with her missing the test and nothing personal or envy or jealousy et al, then they should have no problem applying that to other athletes that have also missed tests in proportion of course.

    Now it is actually possible to devise a mathematical model for the level of suspicion. If I have a bit of time I can put a simple one together. You will notice that in my fourth paragraph I mentioned some values that would have to be taken into account in devising the relationship between missed tests and the level of suspicion.

    Honestly though I do actually understand your point, I can appreciate that you are basing your position on more than just tabloid headlines and negative for the sake of being negative responses. So it is actually possible to explore your logic unlike some people who put out posts without actually giving some thought.

    Funny thing is I am not actually an ardent fan of Christine's, it was the negativity and the vitriole directed at her in some of the posts that made me add my two pence. If you see some of my earlier posts on this blog I mention that her supporters should not really get upset, because to miss three is a lot. But I also state that if you look at some of the information leaked, you would have to go a long way to refer to her a cheat or a drugs cheat as that, or even as having planned it to happen that way.

    Think about it if a sports day is scheduled at your training location, bearing in mind that you have no idea either way whether you are going to be tested on said day. You would think hell I'll just get my training in somewhere else they'll come here and see the sports day and understand right, one would think.
    This really speaks to the incompetence of the people that set up the system that there was no flexibility. If you take perfomance enhancing drugs, being in north london or south london will not change the fact that there are drugs in your system. So if Christine was banned for twelve months, then whoever set up the system should be banned for twelve years. Think three athletes missed three drug tests and were re-instated. So borrowing your logic, one is understandable, two not so good, but three come on how many lives would they have potentially ruined by their crass system. Not to mention the folks on two.

    But must admit good discussion much enjoyed.

    Complain about this comment

  • 492. At 1:30pm on 21 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    "So if Christine was banned for twelve months, then whoever set up the system should be banned for twelve years. Think three athletes missed three drug tests and were re-instated. So borrowing your logic, one is understandable, two not so good, but three come on how many lives would they have potentially ruined by their crass system. Not to mention the folks on two."

    Excellent application of logic. You have to wonder about the mindset of the testers themselves though who refused to meet her at the different venue knowing that a test fail would be an instant ban.

    Complain about this comment

  • 493. At 1:52pm on 21 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    united_dreamer

    Reminds me of the ticket inspectors who hide around the corner and wait for you to come out of your car and head for the ticket machine then they jump out give you a ticket and run back and hide.

    They want to look good doing their job so they need people to fail, see now I'm being cynical, it's so easy being cynical aint it. It actually requires more mental fortitude to be more understanding and accpeting of facts as they are.

    :o)

    Complain about this comment

  • 494. At 2:11pm on 21 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    jaymore_sterling - I could refer you to an earlier post where you mention a simple ratio linking the degree of suspicion with number of tests missed.

    Which would imply a linear relationship would it not?

    If you were just using an example fair enough. But in any event it is time to move on is it not?

    Anyway, the crux of my whole argument has always been is it tainted in any way. Do the missed tests give rise to an increased level of suspicion.

    My conclusion was yes. If this debate was about Tim Don my conclusion would still be yes.

    I'm not for one minute saying they are drugs cheats for that is a serious allegation. Just that the doubts increase because of their actions. But again in the context in Ohuruogu's case it is sadly against a background of a sport that many suspect is riddled with drug abuse. In other words we are sadly almost in the position where any athlete is suspected of drug abuse.

    The sport has to re-establish itself in the eys of the public - much in the same way cycling had had to go through that process.

    And perhaps Ohuruogu will in time be the way to re-establish that belief - by the constant testing she now undertakes.

    Even the likes of Michael Johnson make references to what happened in the past, and the quality (not gutter press) have done so too. Perhaps with good reason in the light of the reputation Athletics has.

    Interestingly I find the whole drugs issue to a joke. If I may go off topic I'll explain why.

    Creatine is a naturally occuring substance found in meat. It allows for the muscle development and decreased recovery times.

    In its synthesized form it may be taken orally and typically athletes take a dosage equivalent to the amount of creatine you could get from eating 5Kg of red meat daily.

    Testosterone is also a naturally occuring substance produced by you own body. It may also be absorbed into the body through the use of synthesized testosterone cream.

    The only real differences here as far as I am aware are:

    1) Creatine isn't banned and testosterone is
    2) You can't eat anything natural that gives you a testosterone increase that would put you into the aribtary penalty zone for testosterone levels.

    A lot of current athletes who have criticised Chambers (Colin Jackson for example) - were Creatine users. They took a synthesized product as part of their programme. It just wasn't and still isn't a banned substance despite it satisfying 2 of WADA's criteria. (I believe for WADA to consider a product as doping it has to satsify 2 out of 3 criteria).

    Technically cheating? No. Ethically? Well thats a very tricky one isn't it because I guess everyone was using Creatine cos it was legal so a level playing field.

    Similarly you can get oxygen tents that allow you to sleep in them - increasing the red blood cell count as they mimic conditions at high altitude. I believe Paula Radcliffe has used one. The result is the same as using EPO.

    One product (EPO) is illegal - the oxygen tent isn't.

    It just goes to show what a mindfield it is!

    Complain about this comment

  • 495. At 2:16pm on 21 Aug 2008, lwelshbloke wrote:

    Oh god - spelling - MINEFIELD!!!

    Its the result of too much posting on here when I should be analyzing the value add from my GCSE results.

    Now that is a statistical nightmare! LOL

    Complain about this comment

  • 496. At 2:36pm on 21 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    "Reminds me of the ticket inspectors who hide around the corner and wait for you to come out of your car and head for the ticket machine then they jump out give you a ticket and run back and hide. "

    Well it did remind me of ticket inspectors for sure. The council put a yellow line in front of my driveway when they applied parking controls to our area presumably to stop people parking in front of the unmarked driveways. So when I parked in front of my driveway with my permit with address on it they ticketed me anyway. So long as they follow the rules thats the main thing. What's 50 quid (or a twelve month ban) to someone else eh?

    Complain about this comment

  • 497. At 3:11pm on 21 Aug 2008, dneilw wrote:

    If some of you (I’m Welsh too) spent a similar amount of effort doing something useful as you have quarrelling like children, you may have been able to actually contribute to the medal tally too. (Being pretentious doesn’t make you clever).

    Complain about this comment

  • 498. At 3:21pm on 21 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    Back to work folks seems like your arguing is a wasteful exercise.

    Complain about this comment

  • 499. At 3:23pm on 21 Aug 2008, Sir-Jaymore-Sterling wrote:

    lwelshbloke and with that post 494 we can safely move on.

    It's not black or white but grey. For some folks grey is seen as being closer to black for others it is seen as being closer to white and for some they see it for what it is grey.

    Complain about this comment

  • 500. At 5:33pm on 21 Aug 2008, United Dreamer wrote:

    I prefer to think of it as silver:-0

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites