Jump to content

Doping Bans


Guardian

Recommended Posts

Hardly a scoop actually.

He is one of the ver very few IOC members who dared criticize Samaranch while he was President (in Budapest in 1995 when Samaranch managed to push the age limit so that he could seek another term two years later).

I know he pisses a lot of people off, but that's what I've always liked about Pound, he speaks his mind!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

MADRID (Reuters) - Juan Antonio Samaranch has refuted suggestions from World Anti-Doping chief Dick Pound that he was soft on doping during his tenure as IOC president and said the criticism was a result of frustrated ambition.

"I am not surprised by Mr Richard Pound's comments as, since the year 2001, when the elections for the Presidency of the International Olympic Committee were held, there has been no personal relationship between us," Samaranch said in a statement sent to Reuters.

"That year Jacques Rogge was elected as the new president by a majority. He won by 59 votes whereas Mr Pound obtained 22 and reached the third position ... Mr Pound still has not forgotten his defeat, which definitively prevented him achieving the IOC's presidency."

Pound, who is stepping down as WADA chief this year, told Reuters in a recent telephone interview that Samaranch had not been interested in taking concerted action against doping until after the 1998 Festina scandal at the Tour de France.

But Samaranch, who was IOC chief between 1980 and 2001, said it was Pound who had taken an equivocal attitude to the issue of doping when Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson tested positive at the 1988 Olympics.

"I clearly remember the first time I heard Mr Pound talking about the doping issue," said Samaranch. "It was in September 1988, during the Seoul Olympic Games.

JOHNSON CASE

"The Executive Board I presided over back then was debating whether to suspend the Canadian athlete Ben Johnson and whether to take his medal away.

"During those meetings, Mr Pound defended him and claimed that Johnson had been sabotaged, as he was forced to drink a liquid intoxicated with the kind of drug later detected by the tests against doping.

"Naturally his claims were ignored and Ben Johnson was suspended and his gold medal taken away."

Samaranch reminded Pound that WADA was created at his personal suggestion in 1999 while he was IOC president.

"We realized that the anti-doping fight could not be delivered only by the IOC, the International Federations or the National Olympic Committees. And so it was done, and that's the truth about the creation of WADA.

"Under my presidency the Court of Arbitration for Sport was also founded. It has proven to be very successful and it is the last legal resort to solve many doping cases," added Samaranch.

"I rarely reply to comments regarding my career as the president of the IOC, but I would like to declare that I deeply regret that Mr Dick Pound, on whom I relied as a member of the Executive Board and as the vice-president, has given such comments."

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, he's already done a book _ "Inside The Olympics" _ quite good reading too. Don't know if he's got another one coming up, though.

I know he has some more ambitious projects but the man is also quite busy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Whoa! That sure got under His Excellency's skin!:P

Well,it was a direct personal attack on him by Dick Pound.In his position,I too would have felt no alternative but to state my case!

C'mon Dick, you're not gonna take that are ya!

It was a rather good and detailed retort from El Jefe.The ball is back in Dick's court,I think.Of course it will now boil down to which man you choose to believe! Or who can provide witnesses or documentary proof to back up his version of events!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well,it was a direct personal attack on him by Dick Pound.In his position,I too would have felt no alternative but to state my case!

It was a rather good and detailed retort from El Jefe.The ball is back in Dick's court,I think.Of course it will now boil down to which man you choose to believe! Or who can provide witnesses or documentary proof to back up his version of events!!

Pound's record at WADA speaks for him (and yeah, he defended Ben Jonhson as the lawyer appointed by the Canadian Olympic Association... Big deal!).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pound's record at WADA speaks for him (and yeah, he defended Ben Jonhson as the lawyer appointed by the Canadian Olympic Association... Big deal!).

Bit embarrassing though when you are arguing the case for stronger anti-doping measures and you are on record as having defended a (later) acknowledged drug-cheat! Was he obliged to take on Johnson's case or did he volunteer? Either way,I do wonder why nobody foresaw a potential conflicting of interest at the time with Pound juggling his IOC hat with his lawyer's hat!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bit embarrassing though when you are arguing the case for stronger anti-doping measures and you are on record as having defended a (later) acknowledged drug-cheat! Was he obliged to take on Johnson's case or did he volunteer? Either way,I do wonder why nobody foresaw a potential conflicting of interest at the time with Pound juggling his IOC hat with his lawyer's hat!

As I said, Pound's term at WADA speaks for itself. Ask FIFA and UCI how they feel about Pound approach to dopping (these 2 federations must be thrilled he is leaving)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bit embarrassing though when you are arguing the case for stronger anti-doping measures and you are on record as having defended a (later) acknowledged drug-cheat! Was he obliged to take on Johnson's case or did he volunteer? Either way,I do wonder why nobody foresaw a potential conflicting of interest at the time with Pound juggling his IOC hat with his lawyer's hat!

But that was his job at the time, it was what he had to do. As a lawyer, he had to make sure the allegations at the time went through due process. and if you read his account in his book of what happened in Seoul, he also says he himself felt utterly betrayed when the sample results came out positive, though Johnson swore to him that he was innocent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
ATHENS, Nov 7 Reuters - The International Olympic Committee (IOC) will award the five Sydney 2000 Olympics medals returned by Marion Jones only to athletes who are clean, its president Jacques Rogge said today.

``This is not going to be merely an automatic upgrade,'' Rogge told reporters in a teleconference.

``Every potentially upgraded athlete will be scrutinised on her merit.''

Rogge said the top five finishers were automatically tested by the IOC, along with three random finishers, and their results were stored for eight years so they would be cleared before being awarded medals.

``We want to upgrade athletes that we know are absolutely clean,'' Rogge said.

Jones, the first woman to claim five medals at a single Olympics, won gold in the 100 metres, 200 metres and 4x400 metres relay in Sydney. She took bronze medals in the long jump and 4x100 metres relay.

Among those in the running for a gold medal is Greek sprinter Katerina Thanou who finished second to Jones in the 100 metres. Thanou was herself banned for two years after she failed to appear for a drugs test at the Athens 2004 Olympics.

Nice, and correct, sentiment, but how do they, after all this time, prove the others were clean as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Sir Roltel, it looks like that spat from Jean-Francois Lamour made former Australian finance minister, John Fahey, the new WADA president "by default", with 4 abstentions from the 35 voting members. In fact, according to this CBC article, the European group wanted Guy Drut as a last-minute candidate to challenge Fahey. But, why would they choose him, with the history Drut has with the IOC? Didn't Drut had his IOC membership suspended pending a corruption allegation against him earlier?

Link: CBC: Australian Succeeds Pound as WADA President

fahey-john071106ap.jpg

Australian John Fahey was elected the new president of WADA on Saturday.

(Mark Baker/Associated Press)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Roltel, it looks like that spat from Jean-Francois Lamour made former Australian finance minister, John Fahey, the new WADA president "by default", with 4 abstentions from the 35 voting members. In fact, according to this CBC article, the European group wanted Guy Drut as a last-minute candidate to challenge Fahey. But, why would they choose him, with the history Drut has with the IOC? Didn't Drut had his IOC membership suspended pending a corruption allegation against him earlier?

I am glad this whole ridiculous circus is over and that WADA has a new President. I am sure that John Fahey will be up to the job.

Drut has never been charged for corruption.

He has been investigated for getting paid for a job he didn't actually performed (unfortunately a common thing for French politicians in the 90s), sentenced and then pardoned by the President.

With respect to his IOC status, he is not suspended but is forbidden to chair any commission for 5 years.

Interesting thing about the whole Guy Drut story is how Mike Lee orchestrated a double round victory in PR relation against Paris 2012:

  • first, make sure that the international press talks a lot about Drut, the "disgraced" IOC Member, and how it will handicape Paris -> create negative buzz around Paris 2012 and put pressure on Drut so that he doesn't come to Singapore for the IOC Session
  • then, and that's the most brilliant part, when in Singapore, wonder out loud whether the fact that Drut is not in Singapore means that France is not supportive of its former Olympic champions. Does this country really have "L'Amour des Jeux"?

I have absolutely no idea whether this whole story costed Paris a single vote but I have to say it was well managed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Roltel, it looks like that spat from Jean-Francois Lamour made former Australian finance minister, John Fahey, the new WADA president "by default", with 4 abstentions from the 35 voting members. In fact, according to this CBC article, the European group wanted Guy Drut as a last-minute candidate to challenge Fahey. But, why would they choose him, with the history Drut has with the IOC? Didn't Drut had his IOC membership suspended pending a corruption allegation against him earlier?

Agreed.Why should the election have been suspended just because the Europeans couldn't come up with a rival candidate of their own? Lamour pulled out.End of story! :huh:

Let's hope Fahey will have as much impact on the fight against doping (if not more) as Pound has had!! B)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting thing about the whole Guy Drut story is how Mike Lee orchestrated a double round victory in PR relation against Paris 2012:
  • first, make sure that the international press talks a lot about Drut, the "disgraced" IOC Member, and how it will handicape Paris -> create negative buzz around Paris 2012 and put pressure on Drut so that he doesn't come to Singapore for the IOC Session
  • then, and that's the most brilliant part, when in Singapore, wonder out loud whether the fact that Drut is not in Singapore means that France is not supportive of its former Olympic champions. Does this country really have "L'Amour des Jeux"?

I have absolutely no idea whether this whole story costed Paris a single vote but I have to say it was well managed.

Have you heard this from IOC sources? I know Mike Lee would like everyone to think he won 2012 for London almost single-handedly (judging from his book,The Race For The 2012 Olympics),but are you perhaps crediting him with more influence than he really possessed?

I'm sure that most IOC members are not that gullible.They would have surely known and understood about the corruption charges against Drut in France and why it prevented him from being present in Singapore.(Incidentally,Lee makes just one passing reference to Drut in his book in connection with the IOC's visit to Paris prior to the vote).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you heard this from IOC sources? I know Mike Lee would like everyone to think he won 2012 for London almost single-handedly (judging from his book,The Race For The 2012 Olympics),but are you perhaps crediting him with more influence than he really possessed?

I'm sure that most IOC members are not that gullible.They would have surely known and understood about the corruption charges against Drut in France and why it prevented him from being present in Singapore.(Incidentally,Lee makes just one passing reference to Drut in his book in connection with the IOC's visit to Paris prior to the vote).

I heard the stories from multiple sources within IOC and Paris 2012 bid team.

I certainly don't think that Mike Lee delivered the Games to London by himself. Seb Coe and Craig Reedy prestation during the whole campaign and in particular in Singapore were key to London winning the Games.

Lee has been much more efficient attacking the other bids (and it particular Paris which was widely seen as the favourite) through the media. Example:

  • the Drut story was covered in the media in an excessive way (I am not saying the carges against Drut were not founded but compare the number of articles about it and the number of articles about other "disgraced" IOC members from Korea for example)
  • when the Olympic Flame came to Paris as part of the Athens global Torch Relay, Paris, like every other candidate cities had to remove banners promoting the bid from the torch route. It was presented in some British newspapers as "a major setback for Paris bid",
  • the Stade de France has been time and again criticised as "not appropriate for track and field". Now, I am not saying the Stade de France is the best stadium for track and fields but it proved it could do the job well during the Paris 2003 World Champs
  • the legacy of Paris 2012 was labelled as non-existent. Again, Paris project was not as ambitious as London's, but there was a legacy (Olympic Village, Swimming Pool, Velodrome...)

I don't think all this costed a lot of votes for Paris but it sure made Paris 2012 being always on the defensive, playing it safe.

So I would say Lee was instrumental in keeping Paris and the other bid under control while Coe, Reedy were promoting London.

BTW, I am not naive. I am positive that Paris, as well as the other candidate cities, behaved in more or less the same way but obviously with less success.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...