Olympics 2008

Lord Kangana · Post by **Lord Kangana** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:12 pm

communistworkethic wrote:
Lord Kangana wrote:
As an ordinary member of society, we have an obligation to not take drugs form a legal perspective. But we aren't required to have a breath test every time we enter a car, or a drugs swab every morning we get up. That can only be done when suspicion is aroused, or indeed an illegal act has already taken place.

you're just plain wrong. it's obviously escaped you but the police perform random breath testing of drivers in this country and have 'stop and search' powers. random testing exists for the public.

the point is that it has been asserted that the position of christine ohurugu is inconclusive as to her having taken drugs or not, I put it to anybody to show me how you can be conclusive about innocence if you are going to deny the evidence of clean tests or indeed the lack of evidence of guilt?

Are you required by law in advance to provide dates that you are available for these random breath test?

Do they do them when you are not in, haven't been in and have no intention of getting in your car?

You're comparison doesn't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

keveh · Post by **keveh** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:32 pm

The Olympics will have finished before you lot shut the feck up.

communistworkethic · Post by **communistworkethic** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:39 pm

care to explain to me how random tests accomodate your assertion that testing can only occur when a suspicion that a crime has been committed exists? Care to explain the number of employers who have random drug testing plans in the City of London?

Your suggestion that only athletes have to prove their innocence in advance of a direct accusation of guilt is wrong and is juxtaposed to your continued position that basically they're all guilty it just hasn't been proven yet and none of them can ever actually be innocent, just presumed so because they could have cheated the test itself. One asks, why even bother testing then? And why no questions about our cyclists? Cycling is rife with drugs and all the cycling team are always talking about being given every advantage.

In fact, lets just cancel the games now and take all the medals back, they could all be on drugs that can't be detected or fiddling the testing procedure and we'll never know unless they tell us so let's just fill in the blanks where it suits us. Hmmm like a witch trial.

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:40 am

A question for those who think that undetectable drugs are ubiquitous, that the testers are losing the race, and that athletics has no credibility anymore - how come, in that case, it was only one athlete that was beating (or indeed coming anywhere near) a 12-year old world record today?

Lord Kangana · Post by **Lord Kangana** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:38 am

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:A question for those who think that undetectable drugs are ubiquitous, that the testers are losing the race, and that athletics has no credibility anymore - how come, in that case, it was only one athlete that was beating (or indeed coming anywhere near) a 12-year old world record today?

The athletes who were taking the drugs just weren't very good in the first place?

ratbert · Post by **ratbert** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 am

Lord Kangana wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:A question for those who think that undetectable drugs are ubiquitous, that the testers are losing the race, and that athletics has no credibility anymore - how come, in that case, it was only one athlete that was beating (or indeed coming anywhere near) a 12-year old world record today?
The athletes who were taking the drugs just weren't very good in the first place?

Like Diane Modahl?

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 10:10 am

Lord Kangana wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:A question for those who think that undetectable drugs are ubiquitous, that the testers are losing the race, and that athletics has no credibility anymore - how come, in that case, it was only one athlete that was beating (or indeed coming anywhere near) a 12-year old world record today?
The athletes who were taking the drugs just weren't very good in the first place?

Is this what you honestly believe though? With ever-improving sports science etc, you still think it's more likely than not that the other 7 athletes in the race needed undetectable drugs to finish so far behind Bolt and Johnson's time?

Anyway, what's worth looking out for today?

Well, Idowu goes in the triple-jump final... hoepfully he'll produce his best and deliver another gold. And it's the first round of the men's 4x100, before the final tomorrow night. Can the Jamaicans find some agricultural way to get the baton round and win on account of their raw speed?

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 10:38 am

Looking forward to seeing Wariner in the 400m, and hopefully Rooney can sneak a medal

Lord Kangana · Post by **Lord Kangana** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 10:39 am

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Lord Kangana wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:A question for those who think that undetectable drugs are ubiquitous, that the testers are losing the race, and that athletics has no credibility anymore - how come, in that case, it was only one athlete that was beating (or indeed coming anywhere near) a 12-year old world record today?
The athletes who were taking the drugs just weren't very good in the first place?
Is this what you honestly believe though? With ever-improving sports science etc, you still think it's more likely than not that the other 7 athletes in the race needed undetectable drugs to finish so far behind Bolt and Johnson's time?

Anyway, what's worth looking out for today?

Well, Idowu goes in the triple-jump final... hoepfully he'll produce his best and deliver another gold. And it's the first round of the men's 4x100, before the final tomorrow night. Can the Jamaicans find some agricultural way to get the baton round and win on account of their raw speed?

If you'd just finished 2nd, 3rd or 4th to a Marion Jones, Dwain Chambers,Katerina Thanou, Costas Kenteris, Ben Johnson et al, you'd be less flippant.

some interesting reading:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_q ... _n14826355

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/beijin ... oly,101544

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/20/ ... eece20.php

Theres clearly a problem out there. I'd prefer it if there wasn't, and to be frank get driven insane by people saying it just spoils things to go on about it. It doesn't, it needs sorting, otherwise the whole event is tarnished far more.

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:17 am

LK, I absolutely love my sport, and the last thing I would be about the drugs problem is flippant.

I'm not prepared to give up on something I love, so presuming that athletes are clean unless they are proven not to be is the only way I can get by and the only way the sport can exist.

Of course it's something we should take seriously, and I can only imagine the bitterness of the kind of athletes you speak of who have been robbed of careers by drugs cheats. I even feel sorry for some of the drugs cheats themselves for buckling under the pressure to take drugs in a way I can understand, but not, of course, condone.

I have to say though, there's a world of difference with being committed to rooting drugs out of sport and taking that very seriously, and making unhelpful comments as you have done repeatedly in this thread, to the effect that "they're all cheating and we can trust nobody".

No, I'm sorry, slinging things like that around without any foundation whatsoever is the kind of "going on about it" that does indeed spoil things and that we can do without.

Anyway, I return to my original point which is that we would expect a different pattern of performance amongst all the athletes and not just exceptional performances from the likes of Bolt if what you are saying were true.

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:45 am

Women's beach volleyball...... in the rain. Tremendous.

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:47 am

I've heard it all now - 4 showjumping horses have failed drugs tests.

Lord Kangana · Post by **Lord Kangana** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:56 am

Crazy Horses Waahh! waahhh!

And hurray!!

Someone being banned...but not for drugs!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympic ... 573809.stm

ratbert · Post by **ratbert** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:33 pm

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I've heard it all now - 4 showjumping horses have failed drugs tests.

I'd like to see how they inject themselves.

CrazyHorse · Post by **CrazyHorse** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:41 pm

ratbert wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I've heard it all now - 4 showjumping horses have failed drugs tests.
I'd like to see how they inject themselves.

Using their hands....

KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab · Post by **KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:33 pm

Anyone else see the US Relay team? Hahahahahahaha.

Lord Kangana · Post by **Lord Kangana** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:34 pm

Weren't taking enough drugs, if you ask me....

Lord Kangana · Post by **Lord Kangana** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:37 pm

KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab wrote:Anyone else see the US Relay team? Hahahahahahaha.

Instant karma?

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:37 pm

KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab wrote:Anyone else see the US Relay team? Hahahahahahaha.

You might be laughing too soon....

KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab · Post by **KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:37 pm

Aw, crap. Spoke too soon. Seems like GB are out as well. Pickering (Craig, not Ron) set off far too early.

Connect with your social network account

Olympics 2008

Who is online