GDAWG wrote:Is there a statute of limitations on when the IOC makes a decision on the stripping of medals? Because the Russians want that 4 x 400 relay gold from 2004. When that decision is made, no doubt it'll be talked about on Twitter. The IOC was smart in not announcing a decision on that before the London Olympics as it would have been a major distraction for the two members of the relay squad that were competing in London (SRR and DeeDee Trotter). That decision needs to be made pretty soon though as it doesn't need to be a distraction for both SRR and Trotter if a decision is held off until late Summer, especially in a World Championships year.
There shouldn't be much if anything to think about. If a member of a relay team tests positive (or later admits that they were using PED's during that event or even during that season) - even if they ran in the rounds/qf/sf - then the entire team must be disqualified.
It is hard enough to get back Gold (or other) medals from those that are DQed. It is much harder to get them back from those that did not do the doping. Note that Johnson gave his back, but I think that was a result of the rule being different or at least not spelled out until somewhat later.
GDAWG wrote:Is there a statute of limitations on when the IOC makes a decision on the stripping of medals? Because the Russians want that 4 x 400 relay gold from 2004. When that decision is made, no doubt it'll be talked about on Twitter. The IOC was smart in not announcing a decision on that before the London Olympics as it would have been a major distraction for the two members of the relay squad that were competing in London (SRR and DeeDee Trotter). That decision needs to be made pretty soon though as it doesn't need to be a distraction for both SRR and Trotter if a decision is held off until late Summer, especially in a World Championships year.
There shouldn't be much if anything to think about. If a member of a relay team tests positive (or later admits that they were using PED's during that event or even during that season) - even if they ran in the rounds/qf/sf - then the entire team must be disqualified.
Of course Nelson should get his gold but as Nevets pointed out earlier it gets more complicated after that. I don't think anyone would object to `manuel Martines getting the bronze in SP but do we want Tihon's fellow cheat Devyatovsky upgraded to Bronse in the HT ? or the delightful Ostapchuk getting her hands on a SP bronze. At least Cechlova's upgrade in the DT after Yatchenko's DQ means one medalist will be without suspicion
And people still tell me we're biased towards countries like BLR
gh wrote:I don't think I've seen anywhere that the IOC says medals will be reassigned. One certainly hopes so, but they haven't been consistent in that area.
Well Nelson sure thinks he's getting it, and is calling it a career.
Seems to me a condition for an upgrade is no histories of drug penalties, or at least none longer than six months (often minor or 'inadvertent'). That takes care of several of the problematic cases.
gh wrote:I don't think I've seen anywhere that the IOC says medals will be reassigned. One certainly hopes so, but they haven't been consistent in that area.
Well Nelson sure thinks he's getting it, and is calling it a career.
Leyden says this <<(Or perhaps, if IAAF deigns to give Nelson his medal, they could do it at the world championships in Moscow). >>
I could be wrong, but believe the IAAF is completely powerless in this situation. I think they can change the official results of the competition by fiat, but the power over the medals proper remains w/ the IOC.
mump boy wrote:Of course Nelson should get his gold but as Nevets pointed out earlier it gets more complicated after that.
It does get complicated, but I am very much of the opinion that once an athlete has had a sanction for a steroid or Class A drug, whether they have failed a test or whether it be from some other evidence, then they forfeit all their previous medals.
It sickens me when I look back at results and see where proven cheats have managed to keep their medals. Look at someone like Bronwyn Thompson, 4th in the Athens LJ, her best ever competition on the biggest platform, and she is denied a medal by Simigina, who since failed a test (and I am not convinced by any of the other women above her, what with the recent Russian positives, but they remain innocent for now) Then of course we have all the medals Marion Jones cheated others out of; Christine Arron would have added to her medal collection in 97 (though in other years such as 99 the results are just a whole big mess) A returning Lysenko denying Heidler gold in 2011 and Włodarczyk in 2012, the mess the women's SP and men's HT has caused....I really would like all proven cheats to be taken off the medal books.
mump boy wrote:And people still tell me we're biased towards countries like BLR
Yes, you are biased against countries like BLR...we know that. However, when the IOC does NOT test all of the samples and not just target a select few, then it opens the mind to whether a GBR LONG, long distance runner was or an American sprinter or a caribbean sprinter or a European field eventer or a Aussie LJ...; basically, everyone gets tarred. So why the concentration on BLR? Think about this: a sprinter tested positive at the NCAA champs and was still allowed to compete in the Olympics for their country. That was in America...and you want to concentrate on BLR? Test everyone, everywhere and terminate their sporting careers when they test positive.
There has been some precedent of re awarding medals and ceremonies in situations like this in the past. in 2000 a us wrester received the gold medal in NYC in rockefeller plaza and the us anthem was heard after the original winner, a german athlete tested positive. this was a few weeks after the OG had ended. i know this situation (men's 2004 shot put) is over 8 yrs later and it seems like a long time ago (for example my daughter aptly named Athena was a baby then and now is in 3rd grade). However, someone like Adam Nelson who has been in the sport for over 15 yrs and has nothing so classy deserves that recognition even though it is just USATF that gives him that honor. btw i still fondly remember watching the qualifying round of the men's SP live on my large projector (just after midnight pacific time here in so cal) when all three of my kids were in diapers and sleeping in various parts of the house !
Gabriella wrote:It does get complicated, but I am very much of the opinion that once an athlete has had a sanction for a steroid or Class A drug, whether they have failed a test or whether it be from some other evidence, then they forfeit all their previous medals.
You mean cocaine here? I don't think cocaine takers are cheats, just idiots.
bushop wrote:Give it to Nelson at the Super Bowl. Jay-Z could present it while Beyoncé sings her (shortened) version of the anthem.
I think presenting it at half time of the Super Bowl would be perfect. And presented by Obama even better. Val Adams had her gold presented by the Governor General, our head of state, at a relatively small non-public gathering organised by politicians, NZIOC and Athletics NZ. All in all a pretty disappointing low key event that excluded the NZ public. I hope the Americans take the opportunity to give Nelson the public recognition he deserves.
Gabriella wrote:It does get complicated, but I am very much of the opinion that once an athlete has had a sanction for a steroid or Class A drug, whether they have failed a test or whether it be from some other evidence, then they forfeit all their previous medals.
You mean cocaine here? I don't think cocaine takers are cheats, just idiots.
I thought this initially, but I think that there is some potential PEDs effect; can someone clarify?
Why would the NFL allow it to be presented at the Super Bowl? That makes no sense. A more sensible/possible suggestion would be at the white house or in some other Government function. The only other relevant venue would be a track meet (USATF?) or Association conference. That said, if history is a guide it won't be at the WC's either. However, at least one athlete has had their Olympic medal presented by an IAAF council member.
The NFL wouldn't allow anything like it even if involved football. Their spin doctors are far too smart—unlike track's suits—to wash dirty laundry on the day of their biggest event.
gh wrote:The NFL wouldn't allow anything like it even if involved football. Their spin doctors are far too smart—unlike track's suits—to wash dirty laundry on the day of their biggest event.
Good grief, yes. The NFL wouldn't touch the subject with a ten foot pole. A topic best left unsaid.
And why airing this to a wider audience is good for the sport is bewildering. In 1989 on Sportscenter in ESPN when it was announced by Chris Berman that Barnes and Reynolds had tested positive, did Berman say, wow track and field is really on top of this drug thing. No, he said, 'track, now there is a dirty sport!' I still vividly remember watching that.
preston wrote:Why would the NFL allow it to be presented at the Super Bowl? That makes no sense. A more sensible/possible suggestion would be at the white house or in some other Government function. The only other relevant venue would be a track meet (USATF?) or Association conference. That said, if history is a guide it won't be at the WC's either. However, at least one athlete has had their Olympic medal presented by an IAAF council member.
I would imagine quite a few have had that happen. Olympic medals are always presented at the Games by IOC members, but there are several IOC members who are also IAAF Council members, including the President of the IAAF. (Others currently include Bubka, El Moutawakel, Fredericks, and Szewinska.)
preston wrote:The only other relevant venue would be a track meet (USATF?) or Association conference. That said, if history is a guide it won't be at the WC's either. However, at least one athlete has had their Olympic medal presented by an IAAF council member.
I would imagine quite a few have had that happen. Olympic medals are always presented at the Games by IOC members, but there are several IOC members who are also IAAF Council members, including the President of the IAAF. (Others currently include Bubka, El Moutawakel, Fredericks, and Szewinska.)
Hersh present Nelson with gold at 2013 USATF champs. Ceremony to happen during live network coverage.
preston wrote:The only other relevant venue would be a track meet (USATF?) or Association conference. That said, if history is a guide it won't be at the WC's either. However, at least one athlete has had their Olympic medal presented by an IAAF council member.
I would imagine quite a few have had that happen. Olympic medals are always presented at the Games by IOC members, but there are several IOC members who are also IAAF Council members, including the President of the IAAF. (Others currently include Bubka, El Moutawakel, Fredericks, and Szewinska.)
Hersh present Nelson with gold at 2013 USATF champs. Ceremony to happen during live network coverage.
Make it happen Max.
I like the idea of doing it at the USATF champs, but I hope that whoever makes that decision will first ask Adam Nelson where HE would like to have it presented. In any event, better protocol would be to have the medal presented by one of the US members of the IOC. At the Olympic Games, IOC members present the medals; IAAF Council members present the flowers.
The NZIOC arranged for the ANZ bank to foot the bill for the Valerie Adams medal ceremony. Evidently it cost $250,00 NZ dollars, most of which was spent on the private exclusive cocktail like function for the "luminaries". You know the "stuff the public" mentality that often reins supreme within the ruling committees of sporting bodies. The medal itself was presented by NZ's Head of State and not by an IOC member. So, I believe it would be great for Obama to present it. Maybe at a Dartmouth basketball game, given GH is right that the NFL would never want to let TnF share the Super Bowl limelight
The Kiwi analogy is a complete non-starter. The Adams medal was a source of monster national pride that made headlines for weeks. The Nelson thing is a bit of ho-hum so low down on the national scale of priorities that if Obama took time to do something that meaningless he'd be excoriated (and perhaps rightfully so) for dereliction of duty.
