Farah to defend Olympic 10k title

robinph

KSU wrote: »

For me the fact that his interview at weekend where he admitted to lying about Jama Aden as well as the USADA interview shows a consistent pattern of lying as well as the host of lies previously makes me less likely to give benefit of the doubt

Missed the first one you mentioned,, but the USADA one which I assume is the one where he came back and changed his story I'm not particularly bothered about. That the USADA people who were specifically looking for dirt and presumably even more dubious about everything they are ever told by anyone left that interview happy with the explanation seems OK to me. Yes the partial transcript they read in the Panama program made things sound dodgy, but if USADA were happy then there is presumably a fair chunk of the transcript missing from what we've been told.

If the people charged with the job of catching people out thought nothing of it then I'd be inclined to agree with their interpretation as we've nothing else to go on.

BarryD2

robinph wrote: »

Athletes are all idiots, Magness, Goucher, other Goucher, other female who's name I forgot and Farah all said they they were given injections of stuff which they had no idea about what it was and why and never really seemed that bothered at the time. They had all been "groomed" to just do whatever the Dr/ coach told them without question.

With respect, that's a lazy defence. Sorry judge, I just took this 'stuff' because I was told to. Athletes do have brains like the rest of us, one presumes?? They are responsible for their own actions and decisions, like the rest of us.

If it were some East German or allegedly Russian or Chinese 'training camp', maybe some excuse.. but in Western Europe. Nah.

KSU

robinph wrote: »

Missed the first one you mentioned,, but the USADA one which I assume is the one where he came back and changed his story I'm not particularly bothered about. That the USADA people who were specifically looking for dirt and presumably even more dubious about everything they are ever told by anyone left that interview happy with the explanation seems OK to me. Yes the partial transcript they read in the Panama program made things sound dodgy, but if USADA were happy then there is presumably a fair chunk of the transcript missing from what we've been told.

If the people charged with the job of catching people out thought nothing of it then I'd be inclined to agree with their interpretation as we've nothing else to go on.

USADA weren’t charged with going after Farah though they were after Salazar so getting the changed statement is music to their ears.

Also putting faith in the investigators not always the wisest in this case, just look at those in UKA who were assigned to investigate Salazar who didn’t do any due diligence

robinph

BarryD2 wrote: »

With respect, that's a lazy defence. Sorry judge, I just took this 'stuff' because I was told to. Athletes do have brains like the rest of us, one presumes?? They are responsible for their own actions and decisions, like the rest of us.

If it were some East German or allegedly Russian or Chinese 'training camp', maybe some excuse.. but in Western Europe. Nah.

Absolutely.

But why do you think that Farah is the only athlete who was aware of exactly what was going on when all the others interviewed in the programme admitted they had no idea and just went along with what they were told to do?

robinph

KSU wrote: »

USADA weren’t charged with going after Farah though they were after Salazar so getting the changed statement is music to their ears.

Also putting faith in the investigators not always the wisest in this case, just look at those in UKA who were assigned to investigate Salazar who didn’t do any due diligence

Doubt they would have turned down the chance to catch a Chicago winner though as a bonus prize to their investigation.

average_runner

robinph wrote: »

Doubt they would have turned down the chance to catch a Chicago winner though as a bonus prize to their investigation.

Be even better if they could catch the previous female world marathon holder.

KSU

robinph wrote: »

Doubt they would have turned down the chance to catch a Chicago winner though as a bonus prize to their investigation.

Was this not during the USADA investigation. Might have missed if they had this in the doc but I though this interview took place prior to his 2018 win

robinph

KSU wrote: »

Was this not during the USADA investigation. Might have missed if they had this in the doc but I though this interview took place prior to his 2018 win

Not sure on the timings, but thought the questions were being asked in relation to the 2017 London Marathon. Thought it was a fairly recent questioning though.

KSU

robinph wrote: »

Not sure on the timings, but thought the questions were being asked in relation to the 2017 London Marathon. Thought it was a fairly recent questioning though.

No it was his 2014 debut AFAIK

robinph

KSU wrote: »

No it was his 2014 debut AFAIK

I thought he only ran half way in 2014, did the full in 2015, skipped 2016 for the Olympics then got the 3rd in 2017? ... which is why I was thinking it was in relation to the 2017 run I expect.

Probably got all my years wrong, but remembering stuff is tricky.

BarryD2

robinph wrote: »

Absolutely.

But why do you think that Farah is the only athlete who was aware of exactly what was going on when all the others interviewed in the programme admitted they had no idea and just went along with what they were told to do?

Maybe they're all lying? Passing the buck, not taking personal responsibility. Deceiving themselves. Ignoring the inconvenient truth?

Murph_D

robinph wrote: »

If we are believing the whistle blowing athletes that they were innocently manipulated into doing dodgy activities though, then why do we suddenly have to think that Farah was somehow different from them and he knew exactly what was being given to him and or directing things himself?

The whistleblowers are different because they realised what was going on was wrong and blew the whistle - regardless of whether they willingly cooperated or not, they redeemed themselves by lifting the lid. The other fella didn’t.

robinph

Murph_D wrote: »

The whistleblowers are different because they realised what was going on was wrong and blew the whistle - regardless of whether they willingly cooperated or not, they redeemed themselves by lifting the lid. The other fella didn’t.

Yes and they get a pass for having blown the whistle, but that doesn't change that they are trying to hold Farah to a higher standard than they held themselves to at the time it was happening to them. If it was possible for them to be fooled then why do they think it's not possible for others to be fooled and manipulated?

If Farah as done wrong then grab the book and throw it, but there is a far greater responsibility that should be placed on the people running the system and who should have been protecting the athletes. Not that Farah can use the naivete excuse, but plenty of other athletes can who have clearly been manipulated over the years, yet they then get blamed when caught but the coaches just find someone else and carry on as before.

Yes, sport is all about hero worship and so it is the star athletes names that we know and who then get publicised when caught. The real problem is generally the people in the background, but they get ignored. I think very few of the athletes who get caught are actually in a position to have had much of a say over anything, it's only the real top superstars who would. Most are just pawns in someone elses game.

Farah would have been one of the few athletes of such a standing that they could have easily dumped Salazar at the first sniff of the investigation, and UKA should have told him to.

average_runner

robinph wrote: »

Yes and they get a pass for having blown the whistle, but that doesn't change that they are trying to hold Farah to a higher standard than they held themselves to at the time it was happening to them. If it was possible for them to be fooled then why do they think it's not possible for others to be fooled and manipulated?

If Farah as done wrong then grab the book and throw it, but there is a far greater responsibility that should be placed on the people running the system and who should have been protecting the athletes. Not that Farah can use the naivete excuse, but plenty of other athletes can who have clearly been manipulated over the years, yet they then get blamed when caught but the coaches just find someone else and carry on as before.

Yes, sport is all about hero worship and so it is the star athletes names that we know and who then get publicised when caught. The real problem is generally the people in the background, but they get ignored. I think very few of the athletes who get caught are actually in a position to have had much of a say over anything, it's only the real top superstars who would. Most are just pawns in someone elses game.

Farah would have been one of the few athletes of such a standing that they could have easily dumped Salazar at the first sniff of the investigation, and UKA should have told him to.

But the whistle blowers came out in 2015, Farah continued to stay after that and take stuff legal or not for London in 2017 which he lied about ?

Why did he lie about it ?

robinph

average_runner wrote: »

But the whistle blowers came out in 2015, Farah continued to stay after that and take stuff legal or not for London in 2017 which he lied about ?

Why did he lie about it ?

Think that comes back to an idiot being advised by idiots.

If Farah was knowingly up to something dodgy in 2015 then there is still the question of why didn't he dump Salazar? If you knew you were doing something wrong, and someone you work with has just been caught then the most sensible thing to do would be to cut ties and claim you knew nothing. Likewise if you were not doing anything wrong, but someone you work with has just been caught then the most sensible thing to do is to cut ties and state that you know nothing.

And if you are the national governing body and your top star is working closely with someone who has just be caught for doing something then the first thing you should be doing is get them to cut ties and state that they know nothing.

Instead what we have is an idiotic national governing body advising an idiot to do something idiotic and stay with someone who has just been accused of cheating. Nothing in that screams conspiracy to me, just stupidity from both UKA and Farah regardless of if Farah was knowingly taking banned or dodgy substances.

Only an idiot would stay with Salazar, regardless of if they were knowingly doing anything dodgy themselves. In either scenario Salazar should have been dumped by anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together.

KSU

average_runner wrote: »

But the whistle blowers came out in 2015, Farah continued to stay after that and take stuff legal or not for London in 2017 which he lied about ?

Why did he lie about it ?

Whistle blowers first raised the alarm long before that. Danny Mackey raised concerns not too long after Farah joined the group with USADA when he was working as a Nike lab researcher back in 2009.

Steve Magness was another in 2011 who raised the alarm with the Rupp medical records as well as his own personal experiences.

KSU

robinph wrote: »

nd if you are the national governing body and your top star is working closely with someone who has just be caught for doing something then the first thing you should be doing is get them to cut ties and state that they know nothing.

Instead what we have is an idiotic national governing body advising an idiot to do something idiotic and stay with someone who has just been accused of cheating. Nothing in that screams conspiracy to me, just stupidity from both UKA and Farah regardless of if Farah was knowingly taking banned or dodgy substances.

The elephant in the room in that scenario is the fact that UKA also had Salazar working for them as a consultant so implications exceed the impact of just Farah.

Laura Muir for one was pushed to work with NOP staff as well as a number of athletes following guidance on L-Carnitine supplementation.

robinph

KSU wrote: »

The elephant in the room in that scenario is the fact that UKA also had Salazar working for them as a consultant so implications exceed the impact of just Farah.

Laura Muir for one was pushed to work with NOP staff as well as a number of athletes following guidance on L-Carnitine supplementation.

Yes and that is concerning how embedded NOP was within controlling UKA potentially. An athlete can be ignorant and stupid, a national governing body not so much as there should be a lot of people involved and no one single person able to command things.

average_runner

robinph wrote: »

Think that comes back to an idiot being advised by idiots.

If Farah was knowingly up to something dodgy in 2015 then there is still the question of why didn't he dump Salazar? If you knew you were doing something wrong, and someone you work with has just been caught then the most sensible thing to do would be to cut ties and claim you knew nothing. Likewise if you were not doing anything wrong, but someone you work with has just been caught then the most sensible thing to do is to cut ties and state that you know nothing.

And if you are the national governing body and your top star is working closely with someone who has just be caught for doing something then the first thing you should be doing is get them to cut ties and state that they know nothing.

Instead what we have is an idiotic national governing body advising an idiot to do something idiotic and stay with someone who has just been accused of cheating. Nothing in that screams conspiracy to me, just stupidity from both UKA and Farah regardless of if Farah was knowingly taking banned or dodgy substances.

Only an idiot would stay with Salazar, regardless of if they were knowingly doing anything dodgy themselves. In either scenario Salazar should have been dumped by anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together.

Or was there something else at play. Who manufactures the uk kit?

skyblue46

average_runner wrote: »

Or was there something else at play. Who manufactures the uk kit?

You're not suggesting that the N in NOP have undue influence in UKA? Or in WA to get shoe rules rewritten? Or see a reason to back Salazar's defense?

average_runner

skyblue46 wrote: »

You're not suggesting that the N in NOP have undue influence in UKA? Or in WA to get shoe rules rewritten? Or see a reason to back Salazar's defense?

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: God no

walshb

The amount of 'want' in people here as regards an athlete who has never ever tested positive for PEDs.....sad vindictiveness.

Farrah won't retain his gold. That should be enough for you!

OOnegative

walshb wrote: »

The amount of 'want' in people here as regards an athlete who has never ever tested postie for PEDs.....sad vindictiveness.

Farrah won't retain his gold. That should be enough for you!

Back from another ban with more nonsensical babbling!!

yerwanthere123

walshb wrote: »

The amount of 'want' in people here as regards an athlete who has never ever tested positive for PEDs.....sad vindictiveness.

Farrah won't retain his gold. That should be enough for you!

Arent you the poster rubbishes the idea that doping exists in tennis, and questioned if doping could even help tennis players? And the one who thinks there's absolutely nothing suspicious about Sifan Hassan's 2019? :pac:

And whatever about anyone's thoughts on doping, can we please stop with the "they've never failed a test" line? Neither did Lance Armstrong.

walshb

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Arent you the poster rubbishes the idea that doping exists in tennis, and questioned if doping could even help tennis players? And the one who thinks there's absolutely nothing suspicious about Sifan Hassan's 2019? :pac:

And whatever about anyone's thoughts on doping, can we please stop with the "they've never failed a test" line? Neither did Lance Armstrong.

No, I'm the poster who says doping exists, when it actually exists, as opposed to saying it exists when there is no actual verifiable proof...I have standards and character......and don't sully the name of people like others.....It's in my rearing!

IvoryTower

can we just not....

Itziger

Good God, they're coming out of the woodwork.

walshb

On a more serious note, anyone thinking he has a good chance to medal?

yerwanthere123

walshb wrote: »

On a more serious note, anyone thinking he has a good chance to medal?

His only chance is if the field allow a slow race, and surely they wouldn't be dumb enough to let that happen. And even if they did I very much doubt he's out-kicking Cheptegei and Kejelcha at 37.

NIMAN

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

His only chance is if the field allow a slow race, and surely they wouldn't be dumb enough to let that happen. And even if they did I very much doubt he's out-kicking Cheptegei and Kejelcha at 37.

If he's juiced up enough he might!!:D

I'll get my coat.