Marion to plead guilty to doping!


This Forum was created to divert traffic from Current Events at the height of the BALCO scandal. It comes and goes as "needed"; it's back to being locked.

Postby DrJay » Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:43 am

Only got a quarter page article on page 7 in today's Rocky Mountain News, the rag you get on Saturday when you have home delivery on the Denver Post. In part, page 7 is courtesy of the Colorado Rockies having won 16 of their last 17 and dominating the sports section lately. AND, believe it or not, an NFL drug scandal trumped Marion's for front page coverage in today's sports section. Bronco's RB Travis Henry apparently has failed his third NFL drug test and faces a yearlong suspension. He has "filed a lawsuit to get a restraining order to prevent the league from using a urine specimen against him and making the test results public."

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/n ... 36,00.html
Last edited by DrJay on Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
DrJay
 
Posts: 5485
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Woodland Park, CO

Postby Matt » Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:49 am

Flumpy wrote:
Matt wrote:The irony!


Irony :?: :?: :?:


Sorry - can see why my post caused confusion. Was actually thinking of May being denied by Cheatingioma Ajunwa in 1996.
Matt
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 2:29 am

Postby SQUACKEE » Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:58 am

MJ- front page story and more in the sports section in todays Danbury News Times- Connecticut
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby Flumpy » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:13 am

Powell wrote:
Flumpy wrote:
Matt wrote:Only this week I have read dozens of posts from people eulogising a 'great' athlete who was known for years within US track and field circles as having been a steroid user (and for suffering from the ensuing health problems). There are very few 'amazing' performances that are not drug assisted......


Interesting, But in his time they weren't illegal, where they?


Not in 1968, but they were banned long before 1980.


But he didn't (Allegedly) do anything worth worrying about after '68.
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby DrJay » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:16 am

SQUACKEE wrote:MJ- front page story and more in the sports section in todays Danbury News Times- Connecticut


I guess the local Danbury team ain't World Series-bound. :P
DrJay
 
Posts: 5485
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Woodland Park, CO

Postby tandfman » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:16 am

I believe PED's were banned before 1968. But I don't believe the ban was backed up with testing until later.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15042
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Matt » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:21 am

Flumpy wrote:
Powell wrote:
Flumpy wrote:
Matt wrote:Only this week I have read dozens of posts from people eulogising a 'great' athlete who was known for years within US track and field circles as having been a steroid user (and for suffering from the ensuing health problems). There are very few 'amazing' performances that are not drug assisted......


Interesting, But in his time they weren't illegal, where they?


Not in 1968, but they were banned long before 1980.


But he didn't (Allegedly) do anything worth worrying about after '68.


...apart from producing one of the world's longest throws (which would have won in Osaka this year) when aged about 43 in 1980!
Matt
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 2:29 am

Postby jazzcyclist » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:23 am

Flumpy wrote:
Powell wrote:
Flumpy wrote:
Matt wrote:Only this week I have read dozens of posts from people eulogising a 'great' athlete who was known for years within US track and field circles as having been a steroid user (and for suffering from the ensuing health problems). There are very few 'amazing' performances that are not drug assisted......


Interesting, But in his time they weren't illegal, where they?


Not in 1968, but they were banned long before 1980.


But he didn't (Allegedly) do anything worth worrying about after '68.

The same also holds true for Barry Bonds. His peak years, 2001-2004, occurred before the drug testing policy went into effect.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby bennyg » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:23 am

No sane person compares drug cheating to murder.

But the issue of 7/8 years Statute of Limitations should never enable an athlete to say'' I cheated 10 years ago and had been a drug taker for years, but you people at IAAF or IOC can do nothing about my ill gotten medals due to such Statute.
bennyg
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 8:19 am
Location: cheltenham,england

Postby bad hammy » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:57 am

Benny wrote:But the issue of 7/8 years Statute of Limitations should never enable an athlete to say . . .
To stay on the extreme side, rapists can do this. So we are going to hold PED-using athletes to a stricter standard than rapists??
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby LopenUupunut » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:00 am

bennyg wrote:No sane person compares drug cheating to murder.


Very much agreed, there's a huge difference. To begin with, drug cheaters don't get elected to governments. Drug cheaters don't get away with it because of weird religious or political excuses. Drug cheaters never think deep inside their soul they're doing it for the greater good. Murder may be an evil deed but it's nothing compared to drug cheating.
LopenUupunut
 
Posts: 2511
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:20 pm
Location: Sleeping in Finland

Postby bad hammy » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:03 am

LopenUupunut wrote:Murder may be an evil deed but it's nothing compared to drug cheating.

No smiley emoticon on that to indicate you are joking??
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby LopenUupunut » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:12 am

bad hammy wrote:
LopenUupunut wrote:Murder may be an evil deed but it's nothing compared to drug cheating.

No smiley emoticon on that to indicate you are joking??


Of course I'm not being serious, I know murder does much more damage to the world than drug cheating. But it does less damage to one's public image. For a simple example, think of Angelo Taylor and all the problems he's had with the law. Despite those, the T&F community is happy about his comeback. I'm pretty sure this would be the case even if he was a murderer. Now, if he had been a drug cheater, we wouldn't welcome him back, quite the opposite...
LopenUupunut
 
Posts: 2511
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:20 pm
Location: Sleeping in Finland

Postby jazzcyclist » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:17 am

LopenUupunut wrote:To begin with, drug cheaters don't get elected to governments.

In 2004, half of the Democratic nominees for President admitted to being drug cheats, as has Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby jazzcyclist » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:20 am

LopenUupunut wrote:
bad hammy wrote:
LopenUupunut wrote:Murder may be an evil deed but it's nothing compared to drug cheating.

No smiley emoticon on that to indicate you are joking??


Of course I'm not being serious, I know murder does much more damage to the world than drug cheating. But it does less damage to one's public image. For a simple example, think of Angelo Taylor and all the problems he's had with the law. Despite those, the T&F community is happy about his comeback. I'm pretty sure this would be the case even if he was a murderer. Now, if he had been a drug cheater, we wouldn't welcome him back, quite the opposite...

Murder and child molestation don't affect the integrity of the sport. They don't cost people Olympic medals, unless of course the victim is a competitor a la Nancy Kerrigan.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

MJ Unplugged

Postby bijanc » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:30 am

What sprinters and relay teams stand to gain Oly bronzes, silvers and gold if the IOC strip her (and US relay women) of all her medals?

Does it move Ottey up in the career count?

BCB
bijanc
 
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby LopenUupunut » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:35 am

jazzcyclist wrote:Murder and child molestation don't affect the integrity of the sport. They don't cost people Olympic medals, unless of course the victim is a competitor a la Nancy Kerrigan.


I was pretty sure someone would try that one. No, I don't think that's an excuse. We take things like drug cheating very seriously. We think of a drug cheaters (pretty justifiedly, when it comes to that) as untrustworthy weasels - their image is hurt so badly we wouldn't dream of giving a major government role to, say, Marion Jones. Do we give major government roles to people who kill other people? I think the history of this planet gives you a pretty good answer even if you don't spot every detail.
LopenUupunut
 
Posts: 2511
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:20 pm
Location: Sleeping in Finland

How was Marion Covered Where U Live?

Postby bijanc » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:35 am

In D.C., all three local news affiliates led w/ her "confession" on their 11 p.m. newscasts Fri. Never seen a T & F story as lead since Ben J. Front page of Wash. Post above fold, but not the lead headline for Sat.

BCB
bijanc
 
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby SQUACKEE » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:36 am

DrJay wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:MJ- front page story and more in the sports section in todays Danbury News Times- Connecticut


I guess the local Danbury team ain't World Series-bound. :P


May a small poodle have a summer romance with your shin. 8)
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Re: MJ Unplugged

Postby tandfman » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:05 am

bijanc wrote:What sprinters and relay teams stand to gain Oly bronzes, silvers and gold if the IOC strip her (and US relay women) of all her medals?

Does it move Ottey up in the career count?

Andrea T has already done the heavy lifting on this one. See page 5 of this thread.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15042
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Flumpy » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:13 am

jazzcyclist wrote:The same also holds true for Barry Bonds. His peak years, 2001-2004, occurred before the drug testing policy went into effect.


And I have even less interest in Barry Bonds but surely when the drug testing procedures when into effect is irrelevant. It's whether they were legal at the time or not that counts.
Last edited by Flumpy on Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Cyril » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:13 am

The state of sports is really sad. Kids no longer have heros who they can try to emulate. Now, there is always a question as to whether or not a superstar athlete has cheated to gain his superstar status. It is appearing that possibly more often than not, the superstars have worked outside the rules.

Our sport is being murdered by the cheats. My 15 year-old son and his friends, many of whom are very athletic, look at t&f as though it were body-building. The view it as nothing more than a bunch of drugies. They are opting to avoid the sport, instead playing soccer. Of course, soccer is likely not clean either.

I suppose it is just a reflection of society as a whole. The "everyone is doing it, so to compete I must do it" rationale is not unique to sport. We see it commonly in business as well. Greed and ego are very powerful forces.
Cyril
 
Posts: 2277
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby bad hammy » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:19 am

Flumpy wrote:. . . but surely when the drug testing procedures when into effect is irrelevant. It's whether they were legal at the eime or not that counts/

So you are fine with any and all marks made by PED users who used PEDs prior to their being banned? It is not the use of the PED itself that bothers you, it is the arbitrary date when some governing body said 'no more'?
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby paulthefan » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:21 am

The sad thing about this latest track and field doping disclosure like all the previous ones is that it creates the false impression to the public that t&f is extraordinarily saturated in PEDS when in fact t&f testing by national governing bodies of western nations is far more rigorous testing than NFL/NBA/MLB testing in those same nations.

track and field is squeaky clean when compared to the NFL.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby Jaack » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:31 am

Littlemac wrote:
Jaack wrote:Pauline Davis Thompson is the Olympic champion!!!

She arrived at Sydney at the age of 34, dropping from the 400m to the 200m - she took. 2 off her PB of 8 years, then another to place second in the final BEHIND MJ!

At 34, the oldest sprint champion in the history of the sport(?)! Pauline Davis Thompson- What a legend.


No, I don't think so.
Have you anything more to add? You don't think she is the oldest? You don't think she's a legend? You don't think she was 34 years old or dropped her pb by .2??? :?

Why did you put half of the post in Bold?
Jaack
 
Posts: 1846
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 6:44 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby tafnut » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:32 am

paulthefan wrote:track and field is squeaky clean when compared to the NFL.

Sadly, the truth is, they're both infected. But the NFL can easily survive this mini-crisis (to them). It's the reality that this is a Major Crisis to us, that can fatally injure us at the top. We can become just like swimming and gymnastics: tons of age-group participation through age 18, and then . . . pffft . . . very little.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby bad hammy » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:39 am

tafnut wrote:But the NFL can easily survive this mini-crisis (to them).

What mini-crisis?? The NFL is skating along without a problem in sight. IF they ever implemented WADA testing, on the other hand, the league would literally close down. They couldn't even field a single full squad consisting of only punters and place kickers who are clean.
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tafnut » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:49 am

bad hammy wrote:
tafnut wrote:But the NFL can easily survive this mini-crisis (to them).

What mini-crisis?? The NFL is skating along without a problem in sight. IF they ever implemented WADA testing, on the other hand, the league would literally close down. They couldn't even field a single full squad consisting of only punters and place kickers who are clean.

Steroids, HGH, et al in the NFL is going to be a nettle in their sides for some time to come. 95% of all the 300-lb linemen that can go sub-5.0 are doping (IMO) and enterprising reporters, out to make a name for themselves at any cost, will continue to find evidence. But it WILL stay just a MINI-crisis, because the NFL is rich and powerful enough to keep the lid on it. Same with the NBA and MLB.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby George P. » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:54 am

tafnut wrote:But it WILL stay just a MINI-crisis, because the NFL is rich and powerful enough to keep the lid on it. Same with the NBA and MLB.

I hope you're not suggesting that T&F should be "keep[ing] the lid on" its current predicament. :?:
George P.
 
Posts: 2536
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Cyril » Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:01 am

I think the NFL is like body-building. The fans know the reality buy they don't care.

It may, in the end, be the only way sports that rely on as high level of athleticism (not as much skill) will survive - To have rules that aren't policed.

It may be the T&F is simply more concerned with "fair play" and enforcing fair play, than other professional sports.
Cyril
 
Posts: 2277
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tafnut » Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:07 am

George P. wrote:
tafnut wrote:But it WILL stay just a MINI-crisis, because the NFL is rich and powerful enough to keep the lid on it. Same with the NBA and MLB.

I hope you're not suggesting that T&F should be "keep[ing] the lid on" its current predicament. :?:

Not at all. Just observing how the Big Leagues do it. I agree that MOST NFL/NBA/MLB fans would just as soon ignore the problem and let sleeping dogs lie. The only reason Bonds gets so much grief is that no one likes him to begin with. When Sosa and McGwire were in the PED spotlight, the apologists were out in force.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby bad hammy » Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:14 am

Cyril wrote:I think the NFL is like body-building. The fans know the reality buy they don't care.

It may, in the end, be the only way sports that rely on as high level of athleticism (not as much skill) will survive - To have rules that aren't policed.

It may be the T&F is simply more concerned with "fair play" and enforcing fair play, than other professional sports.

So we can have the best of all worlds by legalizing all of these PEDs. Have a nice level field for athletes to play on . . .
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tafnut » Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:26 am

bad hammy wrote:So we can have the best of all worlds by legalizing all of these PEDs. Have a nice level field for athletes to play on . . .

The teensy problem with that is that ANYONE who wants to be competitive near the top would HAVE TO get on a major PED regimen. Given all the side effects that we know of, and the many ones we don't, isn't that asking a lot of the athletes? Even in the NFL/NBA/MLB there are many guys who don't want to, and don't have to be on PEDs, but the very nature of T&F is that you must be at the very top of the ladder to earn a living and EVERYONE at the top would have to be on PEDs. And then there's the problem of the Olympics being won by whoever has the best drugs. They could skip the whole T&F part and just give the medals to the winning pharmacists.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby George P. » Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:39 am

tafnut wrote:They could skip the whole T&F part and just give the medals to the winning pharmacists.

:D
George P.
 
Posts: 2536
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby bad hammy » Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:40 am

tafnut wrote:They could skip the whole T&F part and just give the medals to the winning pharmacists.

Not exactly. The PED users still has to get out there and do the work while avoiding injuries. Lazy PED users will not rise to the top.
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby CookyMonzta » Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:05 am

Any word from Gwen, Gail or Evelyn on this whole mess?
CookyMonzta
 
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby MJD » Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:28 am

bad hammy wrote:
Benny wrote:But the issue of 7/8 years Statute of Limitations should never enable an athlete to say . . .
To stay on the extreme side, rapists can do this. So we are going to hold PED-using athletes to a stricter standard than rapists??



You are making the wrong comparison. If someone admits to something illegal that exonerates someone else that is in jail, are you saying that the statute of limitations would apply and that the case wouldn't reopen? That is the more appropriate comparison.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby tafnut » Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:35 am

bad hammy wrote:
tafnut wrote:They could skip the whole T&F part and just give the medals to the winning pharmacists.

Not exactly. The PED users still has to get out there and do the work while avoiding injuries. Lazy PED users will not rise to the top.


Ah yes, but all things being equal, i.e., dedicated athletes all working very hard, who wins? He with the best drugs!
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby Littlemac » Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:47 am

Jaack wrote:
Littlemac wrote:
Jaack wrote:Pauline Davis Thompson is the Olympic champion!!!

She arrived at Sydney at the age of 34, dropping from the 400m to the 200m - she took. 2 off her PB of 8 years, then another to place second in the final BEHIND MJ!

At 34, the oldest sprint champion in the history of the sport(?)! Pauline Davis Thompson- What a legend.


No, I don't think so.
Have you anything more to add? You don't think she is the oldest? You don't think she's a legend? You don't think she was 34 years old or dropped her pb by .2??? :?

Why did you put half of the post in Bold?


I can say what I am thinking when I read these facts.
If I did, my post would be pulled. :wink:
Littlemac
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby bad hammy » Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:33 am

MJD wrote:You are making the wrong comparison. If someone admits to something illegal that exonerates someone else that is in jail, are you saying that the statute of limitations would apply and that the case wouldn't reopen? That is the more appropriate comparison.

I would think that getting a medal boost over eight years down the road is just about this close to being as useful and rewarding to the athlete as the posthumously reinstatement of the golds in Jim Thorpe's case. But that said I am starting to see that the artificial eight year statute of limitations in the case of a confessional like this does not make much sense.

On the other hand in this case (and maybe many/most cases) I have not much faith that those getting the bump ups are any cleaner than MJ.
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest