Jump to content
zekekelso

Russian Doping Scandal = BIG Olympic Threat

Recommended Posts

I see Gamesbids twitter being trolled by a propaganda account called, predictably, StopRussophobia.

The perpetrators pretending to be the victims of xenophobia. Don't know why he's is arguing with pillocks like this, but fair play to Rob for trying to reason with them!

Edited by Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/07/2016 at 7:41 PM, JMarkSnow2012 said:

Agreed. What I wonder is whether machinations will start, after Rio, to have a fairly nasty clean-up of top IOC management.

 

 

Call me cynical but I won't be holding my breath on that one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mainad said:

 

Call me cynical but I won't be holding my breath on that one!

I was thinking in terms of external action, like what the US did to FIFA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, JMarkSnow2012 said:

I was thinking in terms of external action, like what the US did to FIFA.

Only if laws were broken w/in US territory.  This is really something for the IOC to deal with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IWF has just banned Russia. It doesn't look like it will be as drastic as 50%+ of Russians not allowed to compete, but it is at 150ish of 387.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Only if laws were broken w/in US territory.  This is really something for the IOC to deal with. 

The IOC appears to disagree with your second sentence. My question is, might the USA, or even newly anti-European Britain, decide to dig out some evidence it's been saving for a rainy day?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you assume there is evidence of corruption. Political backscratching is not illegal per say, as long as money or gifts don't exchange hands. The IOC was stuck in a very difficult position and yes, the size and importance of Russia geopolitically made a difference. 

There have been a number of legal experts that have said that a blanket ban would not have held up and some in the sports community point to the impending WADA Code renegotiation as the true marker of how this scandal is going to be handled. If the IOC and WADA get more punitive sanctions approved through the Code it would be a major victory. 

Also you need to remember that in general the IOC and the Federations are beholden to CAS, but as the IOC is an organization that is based in Switzerland, it is also beholden to Swiss Labour Laws. That is something that a Swiss civil court might have gotten involved in if a blanket ban was challenged on the breaching of those laws.

Edited by Faster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2016 at 0:10 PM, Faster said:

, it is also beholden to Swiss Labour Laws. That is something that a Swiss civil court might have gotten involved in if a blanket ban was challenged on the breaching of those laws.

 

I don't see how Swiss labour laws would come into play.  The doping offenses were committed in China, the UK and Russia, and elsewhere; so even though the IOC is a non-profit registered in SWZ; the offenses in question occurred outside of Swiss borders; so those would have no bearing on the case.  And all this doping business is really administrative stuff, which is why the highest court of resort is CAS, the Court of Sports Arbitration -- NOT a sovereign Supreme Court or Int'l Court of Justice,  or something like that.   The FIFA officials who were extradited to the US face charges in the US because their names come up in transactions done in US banks.  So there, they obviously broke US laws, plain and simple.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

I don't see how Swiss labour laws would come into play.  The doping offenses were committed in China, the UK and Russia, and elsewhere; so even though the IOC is a non-profit registered in SWZ; the offenses in question occurred outside of Swiss borders; so those would have no bearing on the case.  And all this doping business is really administrative stuff, which is why the highest court of resort is CAS, the Court of Sports Arbitration -- NOT a sovereign Supreme Court or Int'l Court of Justice,  or something like that.   The FIFA officials who were extradited to the US face charges in the US because their names come up in transactions done in US banks.  So there, they obviously broke US laws, plain and simple.  

From what I understand, athletes that compete in Federation sanctioned events are something like contract workers. There was a lot of legalese in what I read, but basically the Olympics are classified as contract work, the IOC/Federations being the contractor. Swiss law requires Swiss based organizations to follow Swiss labour laws. And there is a higher authority to CAS, the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland. Because of Swiss arbitration laws, it will generally only hear cases based on legal error or technicality. But violations of laws and codes not within the purview of Swiss sports law could be challenged in Swiss courts.

I just used Swiss far too much in that paragraph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is also something to think about. Multiple reports have every Kazakh medalist in weightlifting from London 2012 has tested positive for steroids. Those 4 positions should mean that Kazakhstan is banned from 2016. But they are not. Same is true of Belarus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Faster said:

This is also something to think about. Multiple reports have every Kazakh medalist in weightlifting from London 2012 has tested positive for steroids. Those 4 positions should mean that Kazakhstan is banned from 2016. But they are not. Same is true of Belarus.

But was the Kazakh doping concealed with the aid of the state security service?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not that, its IWF doping regulations. If a national federation has so many positives in a given time frame, they are excluded from the next Olympics. It is just an example of weird selective application of rules. Bulgaria and Russia get banned, Belarus and Kazakhstan don't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Faster said:

Its not that, its IWF doping regulations. If a national federation has so many positives in a given time frame, they are excluded from the next Olympics. It is just an example of weird selective application of rules. Bulgaria and Russia get banned, Belarus and Kazakhstan don't. 

Do you have a reference for that? Looking at the online pdf of the current IWF doping regulations I find that Article 11, "Consequences to Teams" is:

"... intentionally left blank"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia to be banned outright from Paralympics, IPC confirms

Quote
Russia will not have any competitors in Rio next month
Sir Philip Craven ‘disgusted’ by government’s ‘catastrophic’ failure

The International Paralympic Committee have confirmed that Russia has been banned outright from next month’s Paralympics, as exclusively revealed by the Observer.

The decision to provisionally suspend Russia was made in the wake of the McClaren report but after the IPC board met Russian representatives on Wednesday to consider its arguments, a decision was made to ban them outright.

“The Russian Paralympic Committee will not be able to enter athletes into the Rio 2016 Paralympic Games,” said the IPC president, Sir Philip Craven, at a press conference in Rio on Sunday. “It is our responsibility to ensure fair competition. That is vital to the integrity and credibility of Paralympic sport.

“I believe the Russian government has catastrophically failed its athletes. The medals over morals attitude disgusts me.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike Bach, Craven had the balls of doing what was right instead of being intimidated by Putin Russia. The sole presence of Russia in the Olympics was a huge blow against the IOC credibility and the IPC didn't wanted to get dragged in . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Philip Craven deserves major props for having the courage to do what Thomas Bach didn't. In one fell swoop, he has assured the credibility of the Paralympics, exposed Bach's utter lack of character and demonstrated how true leaders make the tough calls. Now I know there is no impeachment procedure for the IOC President, but is there any way to get Sir Philip on the ballot for the IOC presidency somehow? He is an ex officio IOC member, if I'm not completely mistaken - Craven for President, as far I'm concerned! We need more like him, people with integrity and the strength to do what's right. Good move!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is unbelievable after this doping scandal that 300 of the doping Russians are allowed to waltz in among clean athletes as if its business as usual with full support of Thomas Bach. If this is the example of the Olympic Values it is prof positive the IOC has completely lost all credibility; if he is not pushed out the organization should be isolated and ignored. The cancer will grow as the world processes the corrupt tactics the IOC is a part of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No don't praise the IPC for this decision. This reeks of settling to appease the world media. Russia wants to protect their medal count for the Olympics, so they let the IPC throw its paralympic athletes under the bus and bans them. This sort of reminds me of the Chinese women's gymnastics team controversy. NO ONE believes that all of those athletes were of age to compete, so instead of stripping their gold medal they agreed to strip the bronze medal for their 2000 gymnastics team just so the US can get their bronze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LatinXTC said:

No don't praise the IPC for this decision. This reeks of settling to appease the world media. Russia wants to protect their medal count for the Olympics, so they let the IPC throw its paralympic athletes under the bus and bans them. This sort of reminds me of the Chinese women's gymnastics team controversy. NO ONE believes that all of those athletes were of age to compete, so instead of stripping their gold medal they agreed to strip the bronze medal for their 2000 gymnastics team just so the US can get their bronze.

This aint settling or giving concessions, the IPC and IOC are still run separately. The IPC simply did what the IOC should've done but didn't. If the IPC did nothing or passed the buck we'd be worse off.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LatinXTC said:

No don't praise the IPC for this decision. This reeks of settling to appease the world media. Russia wants to protect their medal count for the Olympics, so they let the IPC throw its paralympic athletes under the bus and bans them. This sort of reminds me of the Chinese women's gymnastics team controversy. NO ONE believes that all of those athletes were of age to compete, so instead of stripping their gold medal they agreed to strip the bronze medal for their 2000 gymnastics team just so the US can get their bronze.

You've nailed it well.. In fact this is a risky decision for the future of Paralympic Movement since they still need some help from IOC no matter how rotten to the core IOC is today thanks to that Bach-ass...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×