rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
What escapes you is that if WADA had afforded grounds for Houlihan's innocence on the grounds she argued - and she was innocent - then CAS would have acquitted her. It didn't. Yet it applied the WADA rules.
Let’s see what escapes you.
It was within the WADA rules to declare the result as an ATF.
At least a minority of the CAS Panel agreed that the WADA Lab did not follow procedure.
If nothing else, it highlights some ambiguity in the WADA process, and how much discretion rests with the ADAs and ADOs when the evidence is lacking.
No one said that the WADA rules were the ideal benchmark of justice and fairness to all athletes.
In fact, the chief of USADA says it is not, and publicly lobbies for reform.
The WADA Code was crafted and amended to make prosecution easier, and sanctions longer.
-
#581
This post was removed.
-
#1: Top-rated Training Shoe: Brooks Ghost 15 for $99Get a top 1%-rated shoe right now for $99 (30% off) -
#582
This post was removed.
-
#583
This post was removed.
-
#584
This post was removed.
-
00
-
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
What escapes you is that if WADA had afforded grounds for Houlihan's innocence on the grounds she argued - and she was innocent - then CAS would have acquitted her. It didn't. Yet it applied the WADA rules.
Let’s see what escapes you.
It was within the WADA rules to declare the result as an ATF.
At least a minority of the CAS Panel agreed that the WADA Lab did not follow procedure.
If nothing else, it highlights some ambiguity in the WADA process, and how much discretion rests with the ADAs and ADOs when the evidence is lacking.
No one said that the WADA rules were the ideal benchmark of justice and fairness to all athletes.
In fact, the chief of USADA says it is not, and publicly lobbies for reform.
The WADA Code was crafted and amended to make prosecution easier, and sanctions longer.
An ideal outcome. Except for the doper.
00 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Let’s see what escapes you.
It was within the WADA rules to declare the result as an ATF.
At least a minority of the CAS Panel agreed that the WADA Lab did not follow procedure.
If nothing else, it highlights some ambiguity in the WADA process, and how much discretion rests with the ADAs and ADOs when the evidence is lacking.
No one said that the WADA rules were the ideal benchmark of justice and fairness to all athletes.
In fact, the chief of USADA says it is not, and publicly lobbies for reform.
The WADA Code was crafted and amended to make prosecution easier, and sanctions longer.
An ideal outcome. Except for the doper.
I think they said the same about the dipping stools for those they wished to define as witches.
Why accept a flawed system?
00 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Let’s see what escapes you.
It was within the WADA rules to declare the result as an ATF.
At least a minority of the CAS Panel agreed that the WADA Lab did not follow procedure.
If nothing else, it highlights some ambiguity in the WADA process, and how much discretion rests with the ADAs and ADOs when the evidence is lacking.
No one said that the WADA rules were the ideal benchmark of justice and fairness to all athletes.
In fact, the chief of USADA says it is not, and publicly lobbies for reform.
The WADA Code was crafted and amended to make prosecution easier, and sanctions longer.
An ideal outcome. Except for the doper.
It would not be so ideal for the 27 athletes Tygart talks about here:
“the Code in certain cases, railroads innocent athletes into four year sanctions. At our last count, we recorded 27 cases where athletes did absolutely nothing wrong but were treated like intentional cheats.”
00 -
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
An ideal outcome. Except for the doper.
I think they said the same about the dipping stools for those they wished to define as witches.
Why accept a flawed system?
Sorry, where in the rules does it refer to dipping stools?
00 -
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
An ideal outcome. Except for the doper.
It would not be so ideal for the 27 athletes Tygart talks about here:
“the Code in certain cases, railroads innocent athletes into four year sanctions. At our last count, we recorded 27 cases where athletes did absolutely nothing wrong but were treated like intentional cheats.”
On 27 occasions a Court or the anti-doping authorities disagreed with him. Those athletes all would have either tested positive or failed their whereabouts obligations. I'll go with the authorities on this.
00 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
It would not be so ideal for the 27 athletes Tygart talks about here:
“the Code in certain cases, railroads innocent athletes into four year sanctions. At our last count, we recorded 27 cases where athletes did absolutely nothing wrong but were treated like intentional cheats.”
On 27 occasions a Court or the anti-doping authorities disagreed with him. Those athletes all would have either tested positive or failed their whereabouts obligations. I'll go with the authorities on this.
Again you miss or avoid the point.
The rules cause what he felt from his vast experience was a miscarriage of justice.I can’t believe you can’t grasp this sort of this but then you think the urethra is in the digestive system.
00 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
I think they said the same about the dipping stools for those they wished to define as witches.
Why accept a flawed system?
Sorry, where in the rules does it refer to dipping stools?
Hello Mr Urethra in the Colon.
Do some reading to make up for your lack of education.
Oh you have refused this advice before.
00 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
It would not be so ideal for the 27 athletes Tygart talks about here:
“the Code in certain cases, railroads innocent athletes into four year sanctions. At our last count, we recorded 27 cases where athletes did absolutely nothing wrong but were treated like intentional cheats.”
On 27 occasions a Court or the anti-doping authorities disagreed with him. Those athletes all would have either tested positive or failed their whereabouts obligations. I'll go with the authorities on this.
You will be pleased to know that despite all 27 athletes testing positive, the anti-doping authorities agreed with him and all 27 athletes were found innocent on the balance of probability.
00 -
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Sorry, where in the rules does it refer to dipping stools?
Hello Mr Urethra in the Colon.
Do some reading to make up for your lack of education.
Oh you have refused this advice before.
So dipping stools aren't in the rules?
00 -
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
On 27 occasions a Court or the anti-doping authorities disagreed with him. Those athletes all would have either tested positive or failed their whereabouts obligations. I'll go with the authorities on this.
You will be pleased to know that despite all 27 athletes testing positive, the anti-doping authorities agreed with him and all 27 athletes were found innocent on the balance of probability.
I'm relieved to know it was on the balance of probability. That was the test that Shelby failed. So you only like acquittals according to that test, not convictions. Figures.
00 -
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Sorry, where in the rules does it refer to dipping stools?
Hello Mr Urethra in the Colon.
Do some reading to make up for your lack of education.
Oh you have refused this advice before.
I do know that stools can be found where your brain should be.
00 -
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
On 27 occasions a Court or the anti-doping authorities disagreed with him. Those athletes all would have either tested positive or failed their whereabouts obligations. I'll go with the authorities on this.
Again you miss or avoid the point.
The rules cause what he felt from his vast experience was a miscarriage of justice.I can’t believe you can’t grasp this sort of this but then you think the urethra is in the digestive system.
What I like about the rules is that they can help catch dopers. Like Shelby. 4 years.
00 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Again you miss or avoid the point.
The rules cause what he felt from his vast experience was a miscarriage of justice.I can’t believe you can’t grasp this sort of this but then you think the urethra is in the digestive system.
What I like about the rules is that they can help catch dopers. Like Shelby. 4 years.
Tautology!
00 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Hello Mr Urethra in the Colon.
Do some reading to make up for your lack of education.
Oh you have refused this advice before.
I do know that stools can be found where your brain should be.
More vile excrement based insults.
Should be banned.
00 -
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
What I like about the rules is that they can help catch dopers. Like Shelby. 4 years.
Tautology!
Nope. 4 years. For doping.
00