Jump to content

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, StefanMUC said:

Just that this time, it will end with a gold medal.

Protecting athletes‘ rights (as surely CAS argues here) also means taking them out of competition to prevent them from harm. They could have suspended her for the fact that she failed a drug test and only have given her a symbolic ban for a short period, aiming at long bans for her entourage instead.

Now Russia (which cares little for athlete wellbeing obviously) gets one ir even two golds for such despicable behaviour.

It is absolutely disgusting and basically kills off any serious fight against doping - and child abuse in sports.

CAS and the IOC (which was very lukewarm in this affair, to say the least) clearly are in Putin‘s hands, as has never been shown so evidently.

And it's also about protecting others from harm because if we find out later she should have been suspended, someone else missed a chance at the Olympics.  Which goes above and beyond the fact this is all involving Russia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

            The full response by the IOC Executive Board to the decision by CAS:

 

IOC EB decides no medal ceremonies following CAS decision on the case of ROC skater

“The Executive Board (EB) of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) takes note of the decision by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to allow figure skater Kamila Valieva (Russian Olympic Committee) to continue to compete at the Olympic Winter Games Beijing 2022.”

“The IOC has to follow the rule of law and will therefore have to allow her to compete in the Women’s Single Skating competition on Tuesday, 15 February 2022 and, if qualified, on 17 February 2022.”

“The CAS has clearly expressed that the decision taken by the Ad-hoc Division today is not a decision on whether Ms Valieva violated the anti-doping rules. It was limited to the sole question of whether Ms Valieva could be provisionally suspended from the Olympic competition following a positive A-sample taken on 25 December 2021.”

“The management of the case after this positive A-sample has not yet been concluded. Only after due process has been followed can it be established whether Ms Valieva infringed the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC) and would have to be sanctioned.”

“This inconclusive situation led the IOC EB to the following decisions, after having had initial consultations with the National Olympic Committees (NOCs) concerned:

“In the interest of fairness to all athletes and the NOCs concerned, it would not be appropriate to hold the medal ceremony for the figure skating team event during the Olympic Winter Games Beijing 2022 as it would include an athlete who on the one hand has a positive A-sample, but whose violation of the anti-doping rules has not yet been established on the other hand.”

“Should Ms Valieva finish amongst the top three competitors in the Women’s Single Skating competition, no flower ceremony and no medal ceremony will take place during the Olympic Winter Games Beijing 2022

“The IOC requests the International Skating Union (ISU), for reasons of fairness, to allow a 25th competitor to participate in the Free Skating part of the competition on 17 February, in case Ms Valieva is ranked in the first 24 of the short programme on 15 February.”

“The IOC will, in consultation with the athletes and NOCs concerned, organise dignified medal ceremonies once the case of Ms Valieva has been concluded.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IOC needs to raise the age limit on who can compete at the Olympics. 15? seriously? The ROC has a skier in aerials that's 16. How about skateboarding last year in Tokyo? The competitors looked like they just came out of elementary school. 18 and under, go to the Youth Olympics!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, StefanMUC said:

CAS and the IOC (which was very lukewarm in this affair, to say the least) clearly are in Putin‘s hands, as has never been shown so evidently.

It’s incorrect to say the “IOC was lukewarm in this affair”.

Fact:  The IOC appealed against the earlier decision of RUSADA to lift the ban in Valeiva.

That’s all they can do.  It’s a court of law.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FACT: 

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1492916253597569029?s=21

So the IOC spread arguments of the defence in a case they called for themselves while the hearing was going on. If that doesn‘t look suspicious…also very lukewarm the decision to not hold any medals ceremonies for now. They clearly know that this is going to get uglier still.

But continue with your IOC glorification - maybe that‘s part of New Norm too: for cost saving, medal ceremonies are skipped and winners get theirs by post 8 years after once retests have finally cleared everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, StefanMUC said:

FACT: 

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1492916253597569029?s=21

So the IOC spread arguments of the defence in a case they called for themselves while the hearing was going on. If that doesn‘t look suspicious…also very lukewarm the decision to not hold any medals ceremonies for now. They clearly know that this is going to get uglier still.

But continue with your IOC glorification - maybe that‘s part of New Norm too: for cost saving, medal ceremonies are skipped and winners get theirs by post 8 years after once retests have finally cleared everyone.

 

What did you want the IOC to do, storm the court like the Capitol Building in Washington?

It’s a court case.

The IOC wanted the ban on Valieva to stay in place and so they appealed to CAS do this.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, krow said:

it's hard to read the full IOC statement as anything but "lukewarm." 

forget outrage, it's tough to read much disappointment. 

What did you want the IOC to do, storm the court like the Capitol Building in Washington?

It’s a court case.

The IOC wanted the ban on Valieva to stay in place and so they appealed to CAS do this.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a statement like this would not exactly be 'storming the capitol' or whatever nonsense metaphor you just used. 

Quote

The US Olympic and Paralympic Committee released a statement Monday in response to the decision to allow Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva to continue to compete at the 2022 Winter Games in Beijing.

“We are disappointed by the message this decision sends,” USOPC CEO Sarah Hirshland said. “It is the collective responsibility of the entire Olympic community to protect the integrity of sport and to hold our athletes, coaches, and all involved to the highest of standards.

“Athletes have the right to know that they are competing on a level playing field. Unfortunately, today that right is being denied. This appears to be another chapter in the systemic and pervasive disregard for clean sport by Russia.”

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, krow said:

a statement like this would not exactly be 'storming the capitol' or whatever nonsense metaphor you just used. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, FYI said:

Now, now. Nobody "stormed" the Capitol building. It was all "peaceful political discourse". 

It’s a court case.

The International Olympic Committee appealed for Valeiva to stay banned.

WADA appealed for Valeiva to stay banned.

The International Skating Union appealed for Valeiva to  stay banned.

 

The question now is, what is the next higher court to CAS to appeal CAS’s decision?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again you don't understand anything.

There is no higher court than CAS for sports matters, that's the way it was set up by IOC et al to stop proper juridical procedure and interference in their glitzy world.

And you also did not understand that actually CAS only ruled on the participation/suspension in Beijing but did not rule on the actual question if a doping offense exists and whether the team medal will be lost. That is why the IOC got scared away from holding medal ceremonies for the team event and won't have any for the ladies' (or rather: girls') event either if/when Valieva finishes on the podium. They don't want to give away medals and in a few months/years when this case is decided against Russia/Valieva, need to redistribute medals again.

So the case it not yet closed at all, it just leaves everyone but the Russians in a very awkward situation that they created by simply not taking strict and stringent action against Russia years ago already.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, StefanMUC said:

Again you don't understand anything.

There is no higher court than CAS for sports matters, that's the way it was set up by IOC et al to stop proper juridical procedure and interference in their glitzy world.

And you also did not understand that actually CAS only ruled on the participation/suspension in Beijing but did not rule on the actual question if a doping offense exists and whether the team medal will be lost. That is why the IOC got scared away from holding medal ceremonies for the team event and won't have any for the ladies' (or rather: girls') event either if/when Valieva finishes on the podium. They don't want to give away medals and in a few months/years when this case is decided against Russia/Valieva, need to redistribute medals again.

So the case it not yet closed at all, it just leaves everyone but the Russians in a very awkward situation that they created by simply not taking strict and stringent action against Russia years ago already.

I agree that Russia should have been banned entirely from the Games.

I agree, I do not know if there are any appeal mechanisms to CAS’s decisions.    That’s why I was asking.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, StefanMUC said:

What does this have to do with anything really? Is that some sort of whataboutism, bringing transgender into a debate about doping, of minors even?

It's about how the IOC itself has already stretched the boundaries of what physical conditions an athlete may or may not have in order to compete.

A male body naturally produces hormones that gives it an advantage over a female body. So the IOC now declaring that's no big deal is a case of whataboutism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Olympics2028 said:

It's about how the IOC itself has already stretched the boundaries of what physical conditions an athlete may or may not have in order to compete.

A male body naturally produces hormones that gives it an advantage over a female body. So the IOC now declaring that's no big deal is a case of whataboutism?

do you have any evidence valieva has such a condition? or else i too fail to see the connection, which is tenuous at best. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Olympics2028 said:

It's about how the IOC itself has already stretched the boundaries of what physical conditions an athlete may or may not have in order to compete.

A male body naturally produces hormones that gives it an advantage over a female body. So the IOC now declaring that's no big deal is a case of whataboutism?

You really don't know what you're talking about.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have much to comment about the Valieva situation, other than she definitely should have been disqualified and removed from competition, so I'll just be watching the situation to see what happens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SkiFreak said:

The IOC needs to raise the age limit on who can compete at the Olympics. 15? seriously? The ROC has a skier in aerials that's 16. How about skateboarding last year in Tokyo? The competitors looked like they just came out of elementary school. 18 and under, go to the Youth Olympics!

You forget -- they had 12- and 13-year olds competing and winning at, I forget, what event in Tokyo 2020.  But then again, if you break your bones as a youngster in doing all those tricks, you heal faster rather than having a 31- or a 32-year old person doing the same.  If the IOC imposes stricter age limits -- what about those born on February 29?  How will they be classified??  :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...