Fast and Furious group needs fire extinguisher


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.

Fast and Furious group needs fire extinguisher

Postby Speedbuff » Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:54 pm

Mo needs to break out the fire extinguisher again for sure now.

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/athletics/t ... 06,00.html
Speedbuff
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 3:48 pm

Postby dakota » Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:53 am

Larry's Rectus humongus [sic]


Does this mean Brutal is famous, LOL.

Amusing how The Guardian's copy editors spotted that "Pete" can't spell "humongous" but not that they weren't working on the original text.

Observer Sport has seen a copy of the letter


Yeah right.
dakota
 
Posts: 1413
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tandfman » Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:28 am

dakota wrote:
Observer Sport has seen a copy of the letter

Yeah right.

No reason to think they hadn't. Copies have been all over the web (and perhaps still are).
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby peach » Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:30 am

I read this article today...2 pages of text and not a single thing we hadn't read in the past week on here...

Rubbish
peach
 
Posts: 822
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 2:10 am

Postby tandfman » Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:37 am

I rarely read things about T&F in newspapers that I hadn't already read here, either on the Boards or in articles linked from the home page.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby dakota » Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:52 am

I'm not sure "has seen a copy of the letter" is quite how I'd attribute the sourcing for that article if I had to run it by an editor, lol.
dakota
 
Posts: 1413
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Flumpy » Sun Apr 20, 2008 1:30 pm

Why wouldn't Duncan Mackay have seen a copy of the letter??? I've seen it, there's no reason why he shouldn't have.
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby AthleticsInBritain » Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:37 pm

Are we talking about seeing a hard copy (actual sheet of paper), a photograph/scanned digital copy, or just the text posted on a message board? I've seen the latter, but to write a newspaper article I'd want to see the first.

I could believe it was an email fired off in the heat of the moment, but I can't believe it was an actual posted letter.

I think the new things in that article (to me) were the Charlie Francis allegations that were subsequently denied.
AthleticsInBritain
 
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:01 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Postby gh » Sun Apr 20, 2008 3:57 pm

As far as I know, there is ZERO EVIDENCE that there's anything but an anonymous e-mail message that's being circulated.
gh
 
Posts: 46333
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby tandfman » Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:33 pm

AthleticsInBritain wrote:Are we talking about seeing a hard copy (actual sheet of paper), a photograph/scanned digital copy, or just the text posted on a message board? I've seen the latter, but to write a newspaper article I'd want to see the first.

And what, do you suppose is the ratio of written letters to e-mail messages these days? When was the last time you wrote a personal letter, especially one of any length? Why would you expect whoever wrote that communication to have done so by any means other than e-mail?
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Speedbuff » Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:37 pm

gh,

Why do you think Ato is not talking? Ya think it might be based upon the advice of legal counsel? His formal denial in emails to the media as been very weak. Zero evidence? This reminds me of Mo jumping up and down at the USATF meeting a couple of years back chanting "Zero Tolerance, Zero Tolerance." It seems that you are hoping that the allegations against Mo will be found to be untrue. I don't think that is very likely. Do you? What is likely is that this is just the tip of the iceberg regarding Mo and company. I guess we will all find out soon enough.
Speedbuff
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 3:48 pm

Postby stallion » Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:51 pm

Speedbuff wrote:gh,

Why do you think Ato is not talking? Ya think it might be based upon the advice of legal counsel? His formal denial in emails to the media as been very weak. Zero evidence? This reminds me of Mo jumping up and down at the USATF meeting a couple of years back chanting "Zero Tolerance, Zero Tolerance." It seems that you are hoping that the allegations against Mo will be found to be untrue. I don't think that is very likely. Do you? What is likely is that this is just the tip of the iceberg regarding Mo and company. I guess we will all find out soon enough.

I am not gh, but I would like to address the above. First of all, why does Ato's talking or not talking necessarily signify anything in relation to whether he authored the letter? Second, what constitutes a weak denial? Third, gh appears to be more objective than you. Fourth, you appear to be conflating two issues, the first of which relates to this letter and Boldon's potential involvement in concocting it, and second, allegations regarding Maurice Green, which apparently exist independently of this letter you are so convinced Boldon authored. The fact that one does not necessarily believe everything one reads is not tantamount to a lack of objectivity. What evidence do you have that Boldon wrote this letter?
stallion
 
Posts: 744
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest