LSU women forfeit 2012 team title


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby gh » Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:04 pm

our old friend Methylhex strikes again.

Story on front page.
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Daisy » Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:10 pm

And yet no college football team has ever had to forfeit a national championship?
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby TrackBeef » Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:35 pm

http://www.lsusports.net/ViewArticle.db ... =205745374


its quite unfortunate! very humbling and such a huge burden for her to have to bear. Ive actually never heard of Methylhex. But damn, the consequences suck
TrackBeef
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 11:40 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby nodnarb » Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:46 pm

They should have kicked her off the team when she got her 6 month ban for testing positive. Everybody knows that she was a cheat claiming that she took a drink from somebody. This really scars the great image of LSU Track and Field. Hind sight is always 20/20 but you could look at her and tell she was a cheat and not a typical LSU sprinter..
nodnarb
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:38 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Pego » Fri Nov 16, 2012 2:39 pm

nodnarb wrote:you could look at her and tell she was a cheat


How? What imprint does a mild stimulant/bronchodilator leave on one's body?
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby ATK » Fri Nov 16, 2012 2:41 pm

"...and the individual members of the winning 4x100-meter relay team, of which Hackett was a member, will be required to return their individual event awards."

As in their awards from events that they individually medaled in, or their individual 4x1 medal?
ATK
 
Posts: 3804
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby gh » Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:21 pm

nodnarb wrote:They should have kicked her off the team when she got her 6 month ban for testing positive. ......


This is an important facet that the LSU story doesn't mention (probably because NCAA people do their best to ignore meddling by outside organizations). The 6-month ban referred to was for a methylhex positive at the '11 Trini Champs.

So she's a 2-time loser, which is going to translate into a significant setdown.
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby cladthin » Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:42 pm

Maybe I missed it but why is this coming out in November, months after the fact? Have they sat on this info. for a while?
cladthin
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Right there.

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby gh » Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:56 pm

May be no "sitting" at all. Unless somebody knows that NCAA tests are turned around on short order.

And if it was known long ago, there must be some kind of due-process protocol that needs to be followed.

You can't just barge out the door on things with the legal ramifications like this carry.
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby cladthin » Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:39 pm

5 mos.+ seems (to me anyway) like much more than they should need even with an appeals process to play out.
cladthin
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Right there.

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby 26mi235 » Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:11 pm

When UTEP was DQed in Cross Country (mid-80s), Wisconsin was the second place team; they were not awarded the first place recognition.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Blues » Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:14 pm

gh wrote:
nodnarb wrote:They should have kicked her off the team when she got her 6 month ban for testing positive. ......


This is an important facet that the LSU story doesn't mention (probably because NCAA people do their best to ignore meddling by outside organizations). The 6-month ban referred to was for a methylhex positive at the '11 Trini Champs.

So she's a 2-time loser, which is going to translate into a significant setdown.


I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt if possible, but it's hard to show any mercy for Hackett here... Her first ban for testing positive for methylhexaneamine ended on March 16th. Less than 3 months later in June she tests positive for the same PED AGAIN, eventually costing LSU the NCAA championship... Despite testing positive in June, she was able to run the anchor leg on T&T's Olympic 4x100 team in London two months later, but T&T botched the first exchange in the final and was DQ'd, after having the second best qualifying time in the heats... If T&T had medaled in August, would they be eventually DQ'd for her NCAA violation in June?
Last edited by Blues on Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby gh » Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:00 am

to tell the truth, I have no idea if the NCAA shares its testing results with anybody else. I can easily imagine their citing "privacy concerns of a student-athlete" and not doing so. I'm unaware of their being signatories to any USADA/WADA agreements.

if that's so (and I repeat that I have no idea if it is), then I wonder if USADA/WADA could legally do anything without more evidence than just reading that the NCAA had taken such an action. What if all the chain-of-custody requirements don't come up to snuff?
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Pego » Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:09 am

gh wrote:I'm unaware of their being signatories to any USADA/WADA agreements.


I am getting increasingly more confused. In all those cycling/Armstrong threads, people pointed out all sorts of federations/leagues not being signatories. I can understand why they would opt out. What I don't understand is what is the benefit to those that became signatories. I had thought that in order to have your athletes participate in OG/WC, you have to be but that is evidently not a case.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby tandfman » Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:14 am

Pego wrote:
gh wrote:I'm unaware of their being signatories to any USADA/WADA agreements.

I had thought that in order to have your athletes participate in OG/WC, you have to be but that is evidently not a case.

That last time I looked, the NCAA did not enter athletes in the OG or WC.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Pego » Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:55 am

tandfman wrote:
Pego wrote:
gh wrote:I'm unaware of their being signatories to any USADA/WADA agreements.

I had thought that in order to have your athletes participate in OG/WC, you have to be but that is evidently not a case.

That last time I looked, the NCAA did not enter athletes in the OG or WC.


A distinction, only a lawyer would appreciate :wink: . In that case, only the OC's/individual sport federations need to be signatories. Can you answer my primary question, why should anybody else sign?
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby nodnarb » Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:24 am

Pego wrote:
nodnarb wrote:you could look at her and tell she was a cheat


How? What imprint does a mild stimulant/bronchodilator leave on one's body?


well everybody will have a different "imprint", but in this case, it looked like a man with some ladies :?
nodnarb
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:38 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Pego » Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:42 am

nodnarb wrote:
Pego wrote:
nodnarb wrote:you could look at her and tell she was a cheat


How? What imprint does a mild stimulant/bronchodilator leave on one's body?


well everybody will have a different "imprint", but in this case, it looked like a man with some ladies :?


Methexamine does not do that. That is my point entirely.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Blues » Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:59 am

nodnarb wrote:
Pego wrote:
nodnarb wrote:you could look at her and tell she was a cheat


How? What imprint does a mild stimulant/bronchodilator leave on one's body?


well everybody will have a different "imprint", but in this case, it looked like a man with some ladies :?


Listen to Pego. He knows what he's talking about.

If you're basing your opinion that she cheated on what you feel is a "masculine" appearance, then you're evidently making an assumption that she used other PED's besides methylhexaneamine, even though she never tested positive for them... Methylhex is a stimulant not an anabolic agent, and it won't make a woman look more like a man.

And from the NCAA website, it appears that Methylhexaneamine is only tested for at NCAA championships, not during the random year round NCAA testing. I realize that NCAA drug testing isn't governed by or administered by WADA or USADA, but as far as WADA is concerned, athletes can use methylhexaneamine as much as they want out of competition, as long as they DON'T have it in their systems during competitions... If there was any evidence that it had anabolic and masculinizing effects, its use would be banned "out of competition" before you could bat an eyelash...
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby tandfman » Sat Nov 17, 2012 12:28 pm

cladthin wrote:5 mos.+ seems (to me anyway) like much more than they should need even with an appeals process to play out.

Apparently not. From story linked on front page:

He [Coach Shaver] said LSU learned about the positive test in late June, and that university and athletic department officials had been working since then with the NCAA to reach a decision in the case.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby tandfman » Sat Nov 17, 2012 12:35 pm

Pego wrote:
tandfman wrote:
Pego wrote:
gh wrote:I'm unaware of their being signatories to any USADA/WADA agreements.

I had thought that in order to have your athletes participate in OG/WC, you have to be but that is evidently not a case.

That last time I looked, the NCAA did not enter athletes in the OG or WC.

A distinction, only a lawyer would appreciate :wink: . In that case, only the OC's/individual sport federations need to be signatories. Can you answer my primary question, why should anybody else sign?

Certainly, national agencies responsible for doping control (such as USADA) should sign. Organizations involved in sports (or quasi-sports) that are not currently in the Olympic movement may also think it's in their interest to sign. Here's a list of signatories:

http://www.wada-ama.org/en/World-Anti-D ... cceptance/
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby cladthin » Sat Nov 17, 2012 4:33 pm

tandfman wrote:
cladthin wrote:5 mos.+ seems (to me anyway) like much more than they should need even with an appeals process to play out.

Apparently not. From story linked on front page:

He [Coach Shaver] said LSU learned about the positive test in late June, and that university and athletic department officials had been working since then with the NCAA to reach a decision in the case.


It does not change my opinion that it seems like an excessively long time for that process to have played out given the late June notification to LSU. It seems to me that the NCAA would have rendered a final decision before mid November.
cladthin
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Right there.

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Pego » Sat Nov 17, 2012 4:44 pm

tandfman wrote:

That last time I looked, the NCAA did not enter athletes in the OG or WC.[/quote]
Pego wrote:A distinction, only a lawyer would appreciate :wink: . In that case, only the OC's/individual sport federations need to be signatories. Can you answer my primary question, why should anybody else sign?

tandfman wrote:Certainly, national agencies responsible for doping control (such as USADA) should sign. Organizations involved in sports (or quasi-sports) that are not currently in the Olympic movement may also think it's in their interest to sign. Here's a list of signatories:

http://www.wada-ama.org/en/World-Anti-D ... cceptance/


Thank you, but my confusion about how this system works (or should, or doesn't) remains.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby nodnarb » Sat Nov 17, 2012 5:00 pm

so dr pego,

is this the same stimulant that she had already tested positive for and received the 6th month ban?
nodnarb
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:38 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Pego » Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:57 pm

nodnarb wrote:so dr pego,

is this the same stimulant that she had already tested positive for and received the 6th month ban?


I don't know. What difference does it make?
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby nodnarb » Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:02 pm

Methylhexaneamine is NOT in any nasal sprays or any other over the counter medications, at least not here in the USA, nor is it in any popular energy drink you find on the shelf in your local supermarket..

Hackett tested positive for methylhexameamine at the Trinidad and Tobago championships last September and served a 6 month sanction that ended in March. It seems that one would have to be pretty dumb (or have a lot of brass balls) to use it again during the NCAA championships two and a half months after their ban for using it just ended.. USADA and WADA have gone to great lengths to make sure athletes are aware of the different names that the ingredient methylhexaneamine can be listed as in supplements, and to make sure athletes are aware they need to be extremely cautious before taking any supplements to avoid taking a banned substance. Methylhexaneamine is only banned by WADA during competitions, and I think it's only tested for by the NCAA at championships, but not year round. How hard is it to just not use the stuff starting a couple days before those events? If Semoy isn't a cheat, then at least you have to admit that her intelligence seems to be questionable.
nodnarb
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:38 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Blues » Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:56 pm

nodnarb wrote:Methylhexaneamine is NOT in any nasal sprays or any other over the counter medications, at least not here in the USA, nor is it in any popular energy drink you find on the shelf in your local supermarket..

Hackett tested positive for methylhexameamine at the Trinidad and Tobago championships last September and served a 6 month sanction that ended in March. It seems that one would have to be pretty dumb (or have a lot of brass balls) to use it again during the NCAA championships two and a half months after their ban for using it just ended.. USADA and WADA have gone to great lengths to make sure athletes are aware of the different names that the ingredient methylhexaneamine can be listed as in supplements, and to make sure athletes are aware they need to be extremely cautious before taking any supplements to avoid taking a banned substance. Methylhexaneamine is only banned by WADA during competitions, and I think it's only tested for by the NCAA at championships, but not year round. How hard is it to just not use the stuff starting a couple days before those events? If Semoy isn't a cheat, then at least you have to admit that her intelligence seems to be questionable.


nodnarb, if you're going to copy and paste a post from letsrun, you should at least give letsrun credit. :?

From what I can see, Pego was just trying to explain to you that the stimulant methylhexaneamine isn't a drug that would cause the type of muscular appearance that you feel provides visual evidence that Semoy Hackett cheated. Maybe it wasn't what you intended in your initial post, but to some people, your initial comment seemed to imply that you felt that the drug she tested positive for (methylhex) may have been responsible for her muscular physique.

Pego is a physician and I have some pharmaceutical experience too, and we're both familiar with the drug. If her muscular appearance does have something to do with cheating as you feel it does, it isn't from using methylhexaneamine, and you wouldn't be able to tell she was using methylhexaneamine as an energy supplement by looking at her unless she was chronically overdosing on the stuff, in which case I imagine she'd look more like a skinny meth head than an extremely muscular athlete... It's the drugs like anabolic steroids, growth hormone, SARMs, etc. that would make her look the way you think she does, not stimulants like methylhexaneamine, and so far, methylhexaneamine is the only PED she's tested positive for.
Last edited by Blues on Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Pego » Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:58 pm

I did not say she was not a cheat. My question was how you could tell? As Blues elaborated, these are not steroids/HGH that make you look like Popeye.

Edit. After I posted this, I see that Blues elaborated on this point some more.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby nodnarb » Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:18 pm

Go back and look at any relay picture of an LSU 4x1 relay team with Hackett in it...
I could show that picture to anybody outside the track world and ask them to pick out the runner you would suspect that was not like the rest. Game over Bro
My disappointment is that LSU didn't dismiss her after the first positive test, because it hurts LSU and what the program is all about. I never thought I would ever hear that LSU was in any way involved in cheating...
nodnarb
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:38 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby 26mi235 » Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:39 pm

nodnarb wrote:Go back and look at any relay picture of an LSU 4x1 relay team with Hackett in it...
I could show that picture to anybody outside the track world and ask them to pick out the runner you would suspect that was not like the rest. Game over Bro
My disappointment is that LSU didn't dismiss her after the first positive test, because it hurts LSU and what the program is all about. I never thought I would ever hear that LSU was in any way involved in cheating...


So, if you show it to someone that does not have a clue about what the real facts are they are likely to give you the answer you want and, whether it is relevant or not. Since she is a world-class athlete (how many of her teammates were competing in the OGs) and older, you might expect her to be more muscular, plus sprinters differ in 'type' from Felix to VCB to take two pretty similar athletes in terms of history of results.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Blues » Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:11 am

nodnarb wrote:Go back and look at any relay picture of an LSU 4x1 relay team with Hackett in it...
I could show that picture to anybody outside the track world and ask them to pick out the runner you would suspect that was not like the rest. Game over Bro
My disappointment is that LSU didn't dismiss her after the first positive test, because it hurts LSU and what the program is all about. I never thought I would ever hear that LSU was in any way involved in cheating...


I can understand your frustration.. But since the authorities of the National Association of Athletics Administrations of Trinidad and Tobago (who conducted the investigation of her first positive test) concluded that the first positive was due to inadvertent use with no intent to cheat, and they thus showed leniency and gave her only the minimum 6 month ban which the IAAF also accepted, then maybe people felt that LSU was warranted in giving her the benefit of the doubt too.

The situation with stimulants isn't always as cut and dried as far as intent goes, when compared to anabolic agents, HGH, EPO, blood doping, etc... As far as WADA and USADA are concerned, having stimulants like methylhexaneamine in your system is perfectly legal as long as you aren't competing in a meet at the time... If you forget to stop taking the stuff far enough in advance of the meet, you're screwed if you're selected for testing during the competition. So it's a lot easier to accidentally test positive for stimulants than it is to accidentally test positive for steroids, HGH, EPO, and lots of other drugs that are banned both in and out of competition. Athletes who use supplements containing methylhex or other banned stimulants during workouts are taking more of a risk though, since they might have a steep price to pay if they forget and ingest the supplement too close to a competition, resulting in a positive test and the sanctions that follow.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Pego » Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:58 am

Blues, are you familiar with any studies that conclusively indicate PED benefits of the stimulants? They have been used since time immemorial and "everybody knows" they are PED's, yet everything I have seen uses words like "may", "some think" and similar.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby polevaultpower » Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:00 am

Blues wrote:If you forget to stop taking the stuff far enough in advance of the meet, you're screwed if you're selected for testing during the competition. So it's a lot easier to accidentally test positive for stimulants than it is to accidentally test positive for steroids, HGH, EPO, and lots of other drugs that are banned both in and out of competition. Athletes who use supplements containing methylhex or other banned stimulants during workouts are taking more of a risk though, since they might have a steep price to pay if they forget and ingest the supplement too close to a competition, resulting in a positive test and the sanctions that follow.



Don't most stimulants clear the system pretty quickly?
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4531
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Blues » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:24 pm

polevaultpower wrote:
Don't most stimulants clear the system pretty quickly?


Not always as quickly as we'd assume. The effects usually wear off in a few hours, but the drug is still detectable for quite a while longer. Most of you guys know this stuff already but I'll post it anyway... Pego or anyone else can please correct me if needed, or add anything important that I might skip.

Clearance of the stimulant depends on various factors including physiological variations in the user's body, whether chronic use is involved, the dosage used, etc...There's not a lot of published data on the half life of methylhexaneamine, but I've seen figures stating a half life ranging from 4 to 12 hours... I've also seen half lives for other stimulants like ephedrine and pseudoephedrine ranging from 3 to 19 hours, depending on various factors, including the acidity of the user's urine.

A drug's half life is the time it takes for half of the substance to be cleared from the body, so it'll take multiple half lives before a substance is no longer detectable in the urine. (for the type of elimination for most drugs, if the half life is 12 hours and you take a 100mg dose, after 12 hours 50mg will remain, after 24 hours 25mg will remain, after 36 hours 12.5 mg will remain, etc, etc..) An approximation is that it takes about 4 to 5 half lives for the drug to be essentially eliminated from the body, but how long it takes until you no longer test positive for a substance also depends on the sensitivity of the testing, and on how efficiently your individual body metabolizes the drug. I've read articles that suggest that to be safe athletes should make sure there are at least 3 days between their last dose of a stimulant and the start of a competition where they might be tested... I honestly don't know if there's much scientific data on how long stimulant supplements like methylhex remain in the urine, so I don't really know how accurate the 3 day suggestion is, but I've seen it used as an estimate several times.

Athletes need to remember that drugs can be detected long after they're no longer therapeutically active, because the levels of the drug (and the drug's metabolites) still in the blood are below the minimum level needed to cause the therapeutic effect of the drug, but are still being eliminated by the body into the urine... So in that case the banned substance won't do anything for performance, but can still result in a positive drug test and sanctions. Depending on various factors, that could very well be the case if a pre-workout stimulant supplement that may only have a duration of action of a few hours is inadvertently taken prior to practice a day or two before a meet. WADA has threshold levels for pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, methylephedrine, and cathine, where certain sub-therapeutic levels during a drug test are permissable, but that isn't the case for methylhexaneamine and other in-competition banned supplements.
Last edited by Blues on Sun Nov 18, 2012 9:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby polevaultpower » Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:41 pm

Thanks Blues!
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4531
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby preston » Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:16 am

gh wrote:to tell the truth, I have no idea if the NCAA shares its testing results with anybody else. I can easily imagine their citing "privacy concerns of a student-athlete" and not doing so. I'm unaware of their being signatories to any USADA/WADA agreements.

if that's so (and I repeat that I have no idea if it is), then I wonder if USADA/WADA could legally do anything without more evidence than just reading that the NCAA had taken such an action. What if all the chain-of-custody requirements don't come up to snuff?


What would it matter? If USADA can ban Chryste Gaines and Tim Montgomery on Kelly White's say so and other athletes on emails, and Lance Armstrong on even weaker evidence then it would seem that "custody" would be of lesser concern. Also, Shaver obviously knew, yet she was allowed to run at the Olympics. At what point does someone who has served as a coach for USATF have an obligation to the IAAF family to report that one of his athletes has tested positive in another jurisdiction? Didn't this used to happen in the past where an athlete was banned for IAAF but able to compete in NCAA...how is this different? Doesn't Trinidad have a responsibility in this as well and countries should be just as liable as athletes when something like this happens.

This girl should be a looking at a life ban (though I could see her arguing in for 4 years since a precedent was set with Gatlin)! This sport does NOT need someone like her.
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby gh » Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:12 am

If the Trini federation knew and let her run anyway, then they're incompetent beyond belief.

As to Shaver, my guess is, given the NCAA's obsession with privacy for its athletes, that so long as the outcome was a matter of debate (which Shaver is quoted as saying earlier in the thread), then his obligation was to follow the rules of his school first, before worrying about any outside group. (no matter how noble or righteous their cause might be)

Indeed, I'd go so far as to guess that if Shaver outed her before the process was done that it might be grounds for termination. Not an easy place for a college coach to be put.
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:52 pm

Legal requirements as such a hassle; do we really have to follow them or can we do what we think ....
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby dj » Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:34 pm

26mi235 wrote:Legal requirements as such a hassle; do we really have to follow them or can we do what we think ....


Sorry, but you MUST follow the requirements. If you don't and you're repudiated, everything else you've done can be brought into question.

I that a gamble you're willing to take?
dj
 
Posts: 6199
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:35 pm

Sorry, I thought that the italicized portion (following the previous remarks) would indicate that I am not in disagreement with dj's comments.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: beebee, olorin and 10 guests