It's just masters, who cares.
Is this really the way you feel about USMS?
If so, then why bother going to the meet at all? Why should USMS even have meets? Why should there be top 10 lists, NQTs, and everything else that gets people all heated up on here? Heck, why even have USMS forums?
Whether or not you believe or agree with it, an athlete was banned from participating in any organized athletic competition for the rest of his life. I don't know how more specific it can get. Aren't USMS meets organized athletic competitions? Why the heck would you--and many others--fly across country to swim in a meet if you felt, "it is only masters swimming?"
As I said in an earlier post, he tried entering the Chicago marathon last year, and they rejected his application. Nearly any competition has a clause when you enter saying that it is up to them to determine if you're allowed in or not.
I for one am happy that FINA stepped in and put a stop to the madness. But I am disappointed that USMS didn't do anything without being scolded first.
Whether or not you believe or agree with it, an athlete was banned from participating in any organized athletic competition for the rest of his life.
What I'm not sure I agree with is the WADA believing they have the authority to impose such a mandate. They are now the judge and jury for all of sport? Apparently they believe they are.
actually, they are.
please go read 10.10.1 and 10.10.2 from the WADA code.
here let me help:
stage.wada-ama.org/.../WADA_Anti-Doping_CODE_2009_EN.pdf
pages 73 and 74.
and it's only bicycling for the rest of his life. its a conditional 4 years on all other sports.
now, if you read 10.10.2, it clearly says that if you re-violate the Ineligibility that 4 years restarts.
soooooo, if LA trained for the stlmsc meet on say april 02 2013, his 4 years will be up on april 02 2017.
if he continues to swim in any usms masters (or any other governed sports) practice/clinic/camp/.... his 4 years starts anew and all over again.
I have no love for FINA. Between the tech suit debacle and the breaststroke/dolphin kick abomination,they have generally been a bunch of gutless :censor: .This time though,I think they are right.LA is banned from all WADA sanctioned groups.Ultimately USMS falls under FINA which is a WADA signer.FINA didn't care if USMS allowed tech suits in SCY meets.They do care about this,so USMS really had no choice if they want to stay a member of FINA.
As I said though,I think FINA was right.LA was banned from competition and USMS is part of the international group of masters swimming that follows FINA.If we are to have credibility on the international stage I think banning LA is the right thing to do.If he wants to swim summer league or with some other group that has no international standing then I don't care,but I care about the image USMS projects and I think that image should include good sportsmanship,not "anything goes."
Thanks, Allen. You have verbalized my feelings better than I could.
actually, they are.
please go read 10.10.1 and 10.10.2 from the WADA code.
here let me help:
stage.wada-ama.org/.../WADA_Anti-Doping_CODE_2009_EN.pdf
pages 73 and 74.
See, this is the kind of thing I find slightly irksome:
Further, an ineligible Athlete may not compete in a non-Signatory professional league (e.g., the National Hockey League, the National Basketball Association, etc.)
So even though the NHL and NBA are not signatories of WADA, WADA still feels they can tell athletes they are ineligible to participate in those leagues, as well?
We do need organizations such as USADA and WADA, but you know the saying: "absolute power corrupts absolutely."
USADA is part of WADA. and i am pretty sure that the NHL and NBA are under USADA.
i fail to see how this can be troubling. you seem to condone doping by the means that you say if you can be banned in 1 sport but not others....come on over ladys and gents step right up try and beat the doper. he's been banned in 3 others sports but not this one. give it a try, 1 swing $10.
i fail to see how this can be troubling.
It's troubling because they can do whatever they want. Simple as that.
USADA is part of WADA. and i am pretty sure that the NHL and NBA are under USADA.
Nope. Pro sport leagues are not USADA signatories--at least not the big four pro sports:
In October 1999, the USOC created USADA to begin operation in October 2000. USADA's status and alleged independence from the USOC contrasts the norm in the United States in which most professional sport organizations (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL) manage the anti-doping aspects of their sports
from en.wikipedia.org/.../USADA
USMS has had other swimmers competing that previously had been busted for drugs. Angel Martino and Vlad Pleshenko come to mind.
But they weren't CURRENTLY serving bans were they? That's the big part of this, Lance Armstrong is currently serving a lifetime ban, he had the opportunity to show his innocence or give mitigating factors or cooperate all in an attempt to reduce the lifetime ban, he declined to do any of those things.
This is simple, he is serving a lifetime ban from usada, he shouldn't be a member.
Interesting publicity USMS got as a result of the Lance situation: this morning at my gym a triathlete/cyclist starting asking me about local masters programs. He had heard about the Texas Zone meet incident last week and got to thinking he should join a masters club to improve his freestyle so he wanted to know about the area masters clubs. He knows that I compete in USMS but not until this past week did he think to pursue what USMS has to offer.
Any publicity is good publicity, right?!
And just think, I knew Rob Butcher before he was a household name!
Jeff
And just think, I knew Rob Butcher before he was a household name!Give it 15 minutes and the next kitty stuck in a tree story and Rob will as be forgotten as Oingo Boingo.:bighug:
