At the U.S. Trials there was one official in every lane looking at the turns, so now that we're in Athens, how does Kitajima get away with that dolphin kick on his turn? It seemed clear to me from the above water shot, then was confirmed with the underwater. Other breaststrokers care to weigh in?
Parents
Former Member
Originally posted by Gareth Eckley
In all fairness to Wayne, I think he would want to go back and change his " only US, Canada and Australia" are against drug cheats if he could. Britain has a pretty good record, and the US track & field fiasco is a black mark, there.
I feel that US and Australian swimming is "clean". Reasons are performances have steadily improved, swimmers have taken years to reduce their times.
A few points:
1) You cannot make statements about "countries" vis-a-vis drugs unless all sports are state controlled. It only makes sense to judge the respective sports federation and other bodies. For example, in the US the various swimming authorities, both formal and informal, have been actively vocal against drugs in their sport. US Track and Field is a disagrace and varioius authorities, including the USOC must be held partly responsible. Also how can the USOC have Donald Fehr involved in their organization for so many yearS? My point is that making blanket statements about countries is fraught with error.
2) Is US swimming clean? Not even sure what that means. If you mean that there is widespread opposition to drug use and willingness to embrace legitimate testing absolutely. We're also fortunate to have prominent swimming community members speaking out against drug use. It is likely that any drug use by US swimmers is due to "rogue" swimmers or coaches.
Having said all of this I do believe that the vast majority of international swimmin federations are not only against drug use but more importantly are in favor of more stringent testing. Most of the disagreements appear to be howver the question of how fast to push the search for new drugs. At this point the best deterrent is a policy, yet to be adopted on a widespread basis, that samples will be kept for X years and will be tested retroactively for new drugs. Also like the idea of coming up with new drug tests that look further back and suprise testing or retro testing to catch those cheaters who attempt to "wash out" the drugs prior to big competition.
Originally posted by Gareth Eckley
In all fairness to Wayne, I think he would want to go back and change his " only US, Canada and Australia" are against drug cheats if he could. Britain has a pretty good record, and the US track & field fiasco is a black mark, there.
I feel that US and Australian swimming is "clean". Reasons are performances have steadily improved, swimmers have taken years to reduce their times.
A few points:
1) You cannot make statements about "countries" vis-a-vis drugs unless all sports are state controlled. It only makes sense to judge the respective sports federation and other bodies. For example, in the US the various swimming authorities, both formal and informal, have been actively vocal against drugs in their sport. US Track and Field is a disagrace and varioius authorities, including the USOC must be held partly responsible. Also how can the USOC have Donald Fehr involved in their organization for so many yearS? My point is that making blanket statements about countries is fraught with error.
2) Is US swimming clean? Not even sure what that means. If you mean that there is widespread opposition to drug use and willingness to embrace legitimate testing absolutely. We're also fortunate to have prominent swimming community members speaking out against drug use. It is likely that any drug use by US swimmers is due to "rogue" swimmers or coaches.
Having said all of this I do believe that the vast majority of international swimmin federations are not only against drug use but more importantly are in favor of more stringent testing. Most of the disagreements appear to be howver the question of how fast to push the search for new drugs. At this point the best deterrent is a policy, yet to be adopted on a widespread basis, that samples will be kept for X years and will be tested retroactively for new drugs. Also like the idea of coming up with new drug tests that look further back and suprise testing or retro testing to catch those cheaters who attempt to "wash out" the drugs prior to big competition.
