Colonel Green
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 14,152
0%.It's almost March. The Paris Olympics begin in July. What are the chances this will be decided by then?
0%.It's almost March. The Paris Olympics begin in July. What are the chances this will be decided by then?
You're correct. It was still in ISU hands when the IOC stepped in. I'm still surprised the IOC stepped in. There have certainly been other controversial decisions. The 1972 Olympics mens basketball final is still being debated.There were no CAS cases at the time the decision was made in SLC. A double gold would contradict what Canada is asking for in its case. A double bronze would contradict what Russia is asking for in its case.
There were no CAS cases at the time the decision was made in SLC. A double gold would contradict what Canada is asking for in its case. A double bronze would contradict what Russia is asking for in its case.
This interview with Vincent was GREAT. He speaks so well.You can listen to more from Vincent in the latest "This Week in Skating" podcast episode as well:
These appeals are to the ISU, not against the actual doping ban, which was handed down by CAS. The only issue here is the final team rankings. So on what basis do the Russians have for their appeal? Valieva has been banned, the decision is final (no appeals left for Russia, right?), so ROC/RusFed/athletes are basically asking the ISU to count her scores anyway even though she was ineligible to compete? Yeah, OK.
Can't CAS just throw out their appeal and only hear the one from the Canadians?
It's funny to read that Valieva couldn't say no. Let me remind you that Valieva is the most innocent girl in the world, the most terrible victim of the West. Valieva can do EVERYTHING she wants and russia cannot do ANYTHING to her. They themselves made her a holy martyr, so now is the time for her to collect dividends. So she could definitely refuse, but why would she?I feel so sorry for her. She's being used as a propaganda pawn to show how "terrible the evil west" is. Tarasova has been spouting this for weeks and now she's being paraded out as exhibit A. And, before anybody says she could refuse, remember Navalny. Subtle hints to her family is all it takes. She looks absolutely miserable. This has nothing to do with sports or doping or her. Putin couldn't care less about her. It's all him.
I suspect the ROC/RFSF is trying to say that the TE rules don't clearly state that Valieva's scores should be tossed once she was DQed.These appeals are to the ISU, not against the actual doping ban, which was handed down by CAS. The only issue here is the final team rankings. So on what basis do the Russians have for their appeal? Valieva has been banned, the decision is final (no appeals left for Russia, right?), so ROC/RusFed/athletes are basically asking the ISU to count her scores anyway even though she was ineligible to compete? Yeah, OK.
Can't CAS just throw out their appeal and only hear the one from the Canadians?
What else does DQ mean? (Rhetorical question)I suspect the ROC/RFSF is trying to say that the TE rules don't clearly state that Valieva's scores should be tossed once she was DQed.
Heh. Good luck with that, ROC.I suspect the ROC/RFSF is trying to say that the TE rules don't clearly state that Valieva's scores should be tossed once she was DQed.
Well, in my neck of the woods it also means Dairy Queen. Fun fact - younger niece's first part-time job was at a DQ.What else does DQ mean? (Rhetorical question)
I think ROC will argue based on some of the track and field relay cases where athletes who raced on a relay team and won gold didn’t lose their medals when team members were later found to be doping.
The big difference is that those track and field athletes who doped only ran preliminary heats and were not in the semifinals or finals.
So I don’t know…maybe they are just throwing things at the wall and seeing what sticks at this point?
When Marion Jones was found to have used PEDs, the relay team was stripped of their medals. There have been others, that's just the first one that came to mind. There is no preliminary round in the figure skating TE, so there's no comparison the ROC can make.The big difference is that those track and field athletes who doped only ran preliminary heats and were not in the semifinals or finals.
When Marion Jones was found to have used PEDs, the relay team was stripped of their medals. There have been others, that's just the first one that came to mind. There is no preliminary round in the figure skating TE, so there's no comparison the ROC can make.
All members of the U.S. relay teams except Nanceen Perry then appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport who on 16 July 2010 ruled in favor of them due to the fact that, according to the rules at the time, a team should not be disqualified because of a doping offense of one athlete. The rule that an entire team be disqualified and required to vacate medals on the instance of one offender was imposed in 2003. [2] Their medals were then restored to them because the penalty was based on a policy imposed ex post facto, which is prohibited by the CAS.
Except that the other key difference here is that the IOC never awarded the medals in the first place and both the IOC and ISU stated that the results were provisional pending the CAS appeal process. It's not comparable even if the Russian government recognized them as the Olympic champions when they got home from Beijing.Apparently, in the Marion Jones case, the rest of the team's medals were later reinstated (and it didn't relate to the fact that Jones did not compete in the finals, because she did):
Thanks for the info. But an official rule was implemented in 2003, so it would apply here (I'm assuming it doesn't just apply to track/athletics?).Apparently, in the Marion Jones case, the rest of the team's medals were later reinstated (and it didn't relate to the fact that Jones did not compete in the finals, because she did):
Thanks for the info. But an official rule was implemented in 2003, so it would apply here (I'm assuming it doesn't just apply to track/athletics?).
On top of CAS handling this case as opposed to the IOC, who directed Speedy to come up with a solution, and he came up with a quick one in order to not keep the Olympic games burdened with that dark cloud.
I think the last thing the IOC wants is a double award of medals. The incident at SLC seems to be something they do not want to repeat, and was due to a pressured-filled circumstance when the French judge's scores was stricken; only for Berezhnaya/Sikharulidze and Sale/Pelletier and not the entire competition, thus leaving them with a 4-4 decision. It seemed like they had decided to not go with the referee or back-up judge or whatever his title was where he voted for S/P.
Here, there is a DQ due to illegal PED found in one of the team competitors' drug sample aka wrongdoing on the part of a competitor herself. The situations are totally different.
The controversy raised questions not only about cheating and fairness but also about how an athlete who was just 15 at the time, and considered a minor, could have been drawn into a doping scheme.
Russia would have invaded Czechia again...They could've used the substitute judge in SLC 2002; Czechia judge Jarmila Portova and yes, she went with S/P..
Dairy Queen @Karen-W beat me to itWhat else does DQ mean? (Rhetorical question)