posted Apr 2, 2008

You know sometimes you just have to take a stand for what is right. How can it be right for someone who has cheated the system, cheated other athletes, other teammates, the people who sponsored him, supported him and cheered for him to run in the olympics. Dwain seems to think that a legal challenge will allow him to win a place in the GB team. Not much of a victory though is it. When he won that 60 metre to qualify by right for the british team recently he turned and faced down the media and teh officials as though some great injustice had been done to him and he had overcome it. What it told me was that he had built himself up as some sort of victim when quite clearly he had left a string of victims behind through his persistant and calculated cheating. Just because he may have a legal right to be in the olympic team doesn't mean he should exercise it. Ask yourself this. If you had done what he had done could you look the other athletes in the face? Would you have the right to share the track with clean athletes?
Can you look at oscar pretorius who isn't allowed to run and say, "yeah I deserve to be here."

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 3, 2008

Wow, is this a new Aths thread.

Lot's of unaligned things.

Bringing in Oscar at the end too. Oscar shouldn't be able to run, he has a mechanical advantage (Less weight below the knee allows him to slow down less and run faster over the 400m.)

And DC has served his time. Now he is only being held back by the BOA rules, not the Olympic rules. This is all a POM thing.

The drugs are only useful while you are taking them, they do not hold value years after the dosing.

And allowing someone who missed a test to compete and not a failed test. shows lack of knowledge around doping. Why do you think they missed the test? Because they knew they were going to be positive! Tests are random. If you are in your dosing cycle and the testers call, you just miss the appointment and apologize. At least that's what many do.

This subject has been done to death. Its the BOA that is keeping DC from the Olympics, not the doping rules.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 3, 2008

You make it sound like the BOA put these rules in place specifically to hold back DC. These rules have been in place for quite some time.

I agree they probably have missed the test for that reason but there is a little thing called evidence, without it's just an accusation. Until the rules are changed to say a missed test is the same as failed test it's not really worth debating. Add to this that the testing system in this country has been shown to be seriously flawed at least until recently, and you are in danger of banning people who don't deserve it.

I'd love to see your scientific evidence to back up your statement about doping not having long term benefits? As far I'm aware this has neither been proven or disproven conclusively but I would certainly hedge my bets it does have a long term benefit.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 3, 2008

I’m pleased to have provoked this conversation. I think the various contributions show the hackneyed thinking that makes the problem difficult to solve

As I have already stated I am not an excuser for Chambers, I really couldn’t give a monkeys about him personally. My opinion is based on common sense, (the taking of drugs will never be stopped), and a dislike for the hypocrisy that sees people defending the establishment line without examining the logic behind it. I don’t think taking drugs that allow you to recover quicker and therefore train harder is intrinsically bad and Sportingknowledge, defending the establishment line, nervously accusing me of introducing religion into the question puzzled me but if you want to see examples of this type of dishonest thinking you need look no further than the history of the catholic church, the basis of the Church of England or the people who have hijacked the Muslim religion and are issuing irreligious edicts, which would have appalled its founder, in its name.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 3, 2008

I’m pleased to have provoked this conversation. I think the various contributions show the hackneyed thinking that makes the problem difficult to solve


As I have already stated I am not an excuser for Chambers, I really couldn’t give a monkeys about him personally. My opinion is based on common sense and a dislike for the hypocrisy that sees people defending the establishment line without examining the logic behind it.

A logical look at history will lead a reasonable person to believe the taking of drugs will never be stopped. It will also lead you to beware of the unusual sight of an establishment spokesman worrying about justice. There is a law which prohibits a person being deprived of the basic human right of earning a living

I don’t think taking drugs that allow you to recover quicker and therefore train harder is intrinsically bad,(what about taking pain killers?).

Sportingknowledge, defending the establishment line, nervously accusing me of introducing religion into the question puzzled me but if you want to see examples of this type of dishonest thinking you need look no further than the history of the Roman Catholic church, the origins of the Church of England or the people who have hijacked the Muslim religion and are issuing irreligious edicts, which would have appalled its founder, in its name.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 3, 2008

Ok I admit that I deliberately used the use of the word heretic to ridicule you, and given it can be used loosely in other terms, this was incorrect. But I don't see what solution you are offering? I agree 100% you can not stop the drugs cheats but I don't see how that means you shouldn't do everything in your power to make the sport as clean as possible. The sport is already a laughing stock along with cycling, surely the only way to gain back some respect for the sports image is attempting to clean it up.

Like you I'm not interested in Chambers personal situation, he is just one in a long line that should be banned. He gave up his right to earn a living from the sport when he took the risks he took. This does relate to a crime being committed and being given a second chance. It's his job. So it relates better to employment. If you were in the army and failed a drug test, would you be allowed back in? The answer quite simply is no, so why should athletes get preferential treatment in their job?

Pain killers and the types of drugs which these athletes are using is a whole different ball game. Yes I understand where your coming from in terms of recovery from injury, but because that would open loopholes to other kinds of performance enhancing drugs to be used I can understand why the list of banned substances includes these substances also.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 3, 2008

The simple fact is you can't stop it. The yaks have thrown trillions at it and it still continues. Banning drugs just makes the pushers richer. It's called supply and demand; reduce the supply, increase the demand, push up the price, increase the rewards for the law-breakers.

If you can't beat them....,and you can't, make it legal and put some controls in place.

Spend the money futiley wasted on trying to stop it into research so you can warn off the drugs that will cause long term medical harm.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 3, 2008

sorry! I just deleted this comment to edit it

The simple fact is you can't stop it. The yanks have thrown trillions of dollars at it and it still continues.

Banning drugs just makes the pushers richer. It's called supply and demand; reduce the supply, increase the demand, push up the price, increase the rewards for the law-breakers. If you can't beat them....,and you can't, make it legal and put some controls in place. Spend the money futiley wasted on trying to stop it into research so you can warn off the drugs that will cause long term medical harm.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 3, 2008

someone spends too much time on 606 methinks....well i like dwain chambers, and even if he is only pretending to crackdown on drugs in sport (probably) i think his case is a good lesson to young athletes = get caught and it aint much fun - so dont bother.


maybe a british sprint medal in the olympics, that would be nice

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 3, 2008

For someone so convinced of your own opinion, you sure don't let facts get in your way.

There are other threads that have confirmed the short term effectiveness of drugs. Certainly 3-4 yrs leaves no doubt.

And you lived up to your name - what a hypocritical comment about the people who miss their tests. To quote you - the rules are the rules. 3 missed tests gains the same penalty as a failed tests. No matter the reason, no matter the evidence. On appeal it may be reduced, as can a positive test.

add comment | complain about this comment