Dwain Chambers

[sweetleftpeg 0]

Tbf, I think UK Athletics were quite willing to have him back before he came out with some of the shit he's come out with. His gob, arrogance, and lack of responsibilty for his actions hasn't helped him. If he'd come back, kept his head down, and helped preach the message that he was a stupid tit who'd made amistake then I'd be backing him right now. But no, he wanted to go on the beeb and give a 'look at me' speech about only winners take drugs. He has every right to compete for the UK, but that doesn't stop him being a cockend.

[Howay 12496]

They're completely out of his system now, he already had the physique he has before he took THG he was already a very good sprinter he just wanted that little bit extra to get amongst the elite (mainly Americans).

 

Have those two things been proven?

 

Can they even be proven?

Yes THG doesn't stay in the system that long he was Banned 4 years ago now he's been clean all that time he's had tests since coming back and during his ban (when he made a dismal attempt to play in NFL europa). He has always been the size he is now (size isn't everything in sprinting though Tyson Gay is alot smaller than Chambers but also a hell of alot better also Shawn Crawford and Jason Smoots are bigger than Chambers but I wouldn't say either are better especially not Smoots) and since track and field athletes are amongst the most often tested sportsmen and women around I doubt he'd been on THG very long as the testers are normally quick to catch up with the newest steroids.

Jaap Stam and Edgar Davids were both banned after testing positive for nandrolone and there wasn't much of an outcry when they returned after only 6 month bans this whole thing has been unfair on Chambers imo he admitted to using the drugs he wasn't like Marion Jones and lied about it, served the ban which was given too him if they didn't want him back they should have given him a longer ban.

I hope he wins in Valencia then goes on to make the British Olympic team, not that we will win anything in the sprinting events at the Olympics but he is our best shot.

Being harshley treated by hypocritical wankers who will probably laud it over Rio Ferdinand the drugs cheat when he plays for the Olympic team.

Spot on.

What strikes me about this is alot of people in the media that are talking about this subject probably didn't know or care much about sprinting. If they really want to vilify someone so much theres a lass who does long jump or triple jump who was born and raised in England but is competing for Italy now and from what I remember she is good.

Edited February 13, 2008 by Barton7

[Meenzer 15347]

If that's Fiona May, I think she's retired now. Married an Italian fella anyway, so it's fair enough - we've benefited from dodgy nationality calls in other sports with the likes of Greg Rusedski and that Vainikolo bloke in the rugby, say.

 

It's the Qataris snapping up a load of African middle- and long-distance runners that the authorities really need to address if that's the kind of thing they're bothered about. I believe they're doing the same in other sports too (e.g. the national football side which is 50% foreigners), but in athletics they're actually able to shove money at the good people.

Edited February 13, 2008 by Meenzer

[Howay 12496]

If that's Fiona May, I think she's retired now. Married an Italian fella anyway, so it's fair enough - we've benefited from dodgy nationality calls in other sports with the likes of Greg Rusedski and that Vainikolo bloke in the rugby, say.

Ah that must be her just remember her being at a Gateshead competition and her getting some stick.

Very true although I'm not a fan when it happens which is why I really hope Almunia doesn't ever get called up to the England squad, it's also why I'm not too keen on Hargreves playing for England too.

It's the Qataris snapping up a load of African middle- and long-distance runners that the authorities really need to address if that's the kind of thing they're bothered about. I believe they're doing the same in other sports too (e.g. the national football side which is 50% foreigners), but in athletics they're actually able to shove money at the good people.

Yeah this is a problem I remember when they snapped up the best steeple chaser his Kenyan team mate (who was the second best) was irate about it, I think he soon changed from Quatari to American though so he's a complete mercenary.

Edited February 13, 2008 by Barton7

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3788]

They're completely out of his system now, he already had the physique he has before he took THG he was already a very good sprinter he just wanted that little bit extra to get amongst the elite (mainly Americans).

 

Have those two things been proven?

 

Can they even be proven?

Yes THG doesn't stay in the system that long he was Banned 4 years ago now he's been clean all that time he's had tests since coming back and during his ban (when he made a dismal attempt to play in NFL europa). He has always been the size he is now (size isn't everything in sprinting though Tyson Gay is alot smaller than Chambers but also a hell of alot better also Shawn Crawford and Jason Smoots are bigger than Chambers but I wouldn't say either are better especially not Smoots) and since track and field athletes are amongst the most often tested sportsmen and women around I doubt he'd been on THG very long as the testers are normally quick to catch up with the newest steroids.

Jaap Stam and Edgar Davids were both banned after testing positive for nandrolone and there wasn't much of an outcry when they returned after only 6 month bans this whole thing has been unfair on Chambers imo he admitted to using the drugs he wasn't like Marion Jones and lied about it, served the ban which was given too him if they didn't want him back they should have given him a longer ban.

I hope he wins in Valencia then goes on to make the British Olympic team, not that we will win anything in the sprinting events at the Olympics but he is our best shot.

Being harshley treated by hypocritical wankers who will probably laud it over Rio Ferdinand the drugs cheat when he plays for the Olympic team.

Spot on.

What strikes me about this is alot of people in the media that are talking about this subject probably didn't know or care much about sprinting. If they really want to vilify someone so much theres a lass who does long jump or triple jump who was born and raised in England but is competing for Italy now and from what I remember she is good.

 

Not true one of the reasons UK athletics didn't want to pick him was the lack of drug tests during that period.

[ewerk 30167]

Chambers fails to have ban lifted

 

British sprinter Dwain Chambers will not be able to run at the Olympics after he lost his attempt to overturn his lifetime ban.

 

The 30-year-old took his case to secure an injunction against the British Olympic Association by-law to the High Court, but the ruling went against him.

 

Under BOA rules, the sprinter was banned from future Games after testing positive for the steroid THG in 2003.

 

Chambers had argued that the ban was an unfair restraint of trade.

 

He still has the right of appeal against the decision, but the clock is against him with any hearing having to take place before the end of the Court's proceedings on Friday.

 

British selectors have to name their final squad for next month's Games in Beijing by Sunday at the very latest.

 

More to follow.

[Happy Face 29]

Seems a little unfair when everyone else at the olympics are eight miles high anyway.

[Meenzer 15347]

I can see both sides of the coin really, but he looked really sharp yesterday and if he's genuinely clean and getting involved in anti-drugs promotion and the like, then I don't see what else he can do to convince people. The powers-that-be were pretty quick to overturn Ohuruogu's Olympic ban when they realised she had a shot at a medal, so I'm sure they'll do the same if Chambers keeps his form going into the outdoor season, whatever they might say now.

Well, so much for that. Chambers shouldn't have run his mouth off as much as he did, no doubt, but it's a shame when a sport refuses to allow for redemption of any kind. Especially when there's a whiff of double standards in the air. Still, I'm sure the Union Flag will flutter proudly as Craig Pickering goes out in the quarter-finals.

[Fop 1]

I can see both sides of the coin really, but he looked really sharp yesterday and if he's genuinely clean and getting involved in anti-drugs promotion and the like, then I don't see what else he can do to convince people. The powers-that-be were pretty quick to overturn Ohuruogu's Olympic ban when they realised she had a shot at a medal, so I'm sure they'll do the same if Chambers keeps his form going into the outdoor season, whatever they might say now.

Well, so much for that. Chambers shouldn't have run his mouth off as much as he did, no doubt, but it's a shame when a sport refuses to allow for redemption of any kind. Especially when there's a whiff of double standards in the air. Still, I'm sure the Union Flag will flutter proudly as Craig Pickering goes out in the quarter-finals.

 

Aye I'm far from sure he should be allowed to run, but with the amount of hypocrisy and rhetoric flying about, I'd pretty much come around to hoping he would just to see a few heads explode.

[Guest alex]

The UK is the only country which still upholds the life time Olympic ban iirc. So in some ways it's unfair (arguably) but it's also quite noble.

[catmag 336]

I'm glad he's not going, he's got no-one to blame but himself. The decision about him competing in the Olympics wasn't made today in the High Court, it was made by Chambers himself over the months that he knowingly took banned substances. Whether he's clean now or not, I don't care. He's been arrogant enough to take on the system and any victory for him from now on will be tainted by his own actions in the past.

[ewerk 30167]

I'm glad he's not going, he's got no-one to blame but himself. The decision about him competing in the Olympics wasn't made today in the High Court, it was made by Chambers himself over the months that he knowingly took banned substances. Whether he's clean now or not, I don't care. He's been arrogant enough to take on the system and any victory for him from now on will be tainted by his own actions in the past.

 

So anyone who commits a crime or does wrong shouldn't get a second chance? He has served his time and shown remorse for what he has done, he should have been allowed to go imo.

[catmag 336]

I'm glad he's not going, he's got no-one to blame but himself. The decision about him competing in the Olympics wasn't made today in the High Court, it was made by Chambers himself over the months that he knowingly took banned substances. Whether he's clean now or not, I don't care. He's been arrogant enough to take on the system and any victory for him from now on will be tainted by his own actions in the past.

 

So anyone who commits a crime or does wrong shouldn't get a second chance? He has served his time and shown remorse for what he has done, he should have been allowed to go imo.

 

No, I'm not saying that. Anyone who commits a crime and admits it should not then have the arrogance to claim that it's against their rights to send them to prison (for instance) He knew the risks and shouldn't think that the rules should be changed for him.

 

As for competing in the future in other events - he'll be allowed to do so because he's 'served his time' That doesn't mean I have to like it, personally.

[ewerk 30167]

I'm glad he's not going, he's got no-one to blame but himself. The decision about him competing in the Olympics wasn't made today in the High Court, it was made by Chambers himself over the months that he knowingly took banned substances. Whether he's clean now or not, I don't care. He's been arrogant enough to take on the system and any victory for him from now on will be tainted by his own actions in the past.

 

So anyone who commits a crime or does wrong shouldn't get a second chance? He has served his time and shown remorse for what he has done, he should have been allowed to go imo.

 

No, I'm not saying that. Anyone who commits a crime and admits it should not then have the arrogance to claim that it's against their rights to send them to prison (for instance) He knew the risks and shouldn't think that the rules should be changed for him.

 

As for competing in the future in other events - he'll be allowed to do so because he's 'served his time' That doesn't mean I have to like it, personally.

 

He has served his ban (been to prison), it's more like sending him to prison and then refusing to let him out.

Edited July 18, 2008 by ewerk

[catmag 336]

I'm glad he's not going, he's got no-one to blame but himself. The decision about him competing in the Olympics wasn't made today in the High Court, it was made by Chambers himself over the months that he knowingly took banned substances. Whether he's clean now or not, I don't care. He's been arrogant enough to take on the system and any victory for him from now on will be tainted by his own actions in the past.

 

So anyone who commits a crime or does wrong shouldn't get a second chance? He has served his time and shown remorse for what he has done, he should have been allowed to go imo.

 

No, I'm not saying that. Anyone who commits a crime and admits it should not then have the arrogance to claim that it's against their rights to send them to prison (for instance) He knew the risks and shouldn't think that the rules should be changed for him.

 

As for competing in the future in other events - he'll be allowed to do so because he's 'served his time' That doesn't mean I have to like it, personally.

 

He has served his ban (been to prison), it's more like sending him to prison and then refusing to let him out.

 

How? He's free to compete in other events! He KNEW it carried a lifetime Olympic ban - it's not like he was ignorant of the rules.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3788]

I'm glad he's not going, he's got no-one to blame but himself. The decision about him competing in the Olympics wasn't made today in the High Court, it was made by Chambers himself over the months that he knowingly took banned substances. Whether he's clean now or not, I don't care. He's been arrogant enough to take on the system and any victory for him from now on will be tainted by his own actions in the past.

 

So anyone who commits a crime or does wrong shouldn't get a second chance? He has served his time and shown remorse for what he has done, he should have been allowed to go imo.

 

No, I'm not saying that. Anyone who commits a crime and admits it should not then have the arrogance to claim that it's against their rights to send them to prison (for instance) He knew the risks and shouldn't think that the rules should be changed for him.

 

As for competing in the future in other events - he'll be allowed to do so because he's 'served his time' That doesn't mean I have to like it, personally.

 

He has served his ban (been to prison), it's more like sending him to prison and then refusing to let him out.

 

How? He's free to compete in other events! He KNEW it carried a lifetime Olympic ban - it's not like he was ignorant of the rules.

 

I agree with the Cat lady on this one. It is nothing like being in prison as he is free to come and go as he pleases. He can pursue any career he wishes he knew when he took the drugs what the consequences would be. I am glad that the judge decided against him in this pathetic waste of public money.

Edited July 18, 2008 by Kevin Carr's Gloves

[Fop 1]

I'm glad he's not going, he's got no-one to blame but himself. The decision about him competing in the Olympics wasn't made today in the High Court, it was made by Chambers himself over the months that he knowingly took banned substances. Whether he's clean now or not, I don't care. He's been arrogant enough to take on the system and any victory for him from now on will be tainted by his own actions in the past.

 

So anyone who commits a crime or does wrong shouldn't get a second chance? He has served his time and shown remorse for what he has done, he should have been allowed to go imo.

 

No, I'm not saying that. Anyone who commits a crime and admits it should not then have the arrogance to claim that it's against their rights to send them to prison (for instance) He knew the risks and shouldn't think that the rules should be changed for him.

 

As for competing in the future in other events - he'll be allowed to do so because he's 'served his time' That doesn't mean I have to like it, personally.

 

He has served his ban (been to prison), it's more like sending him to prison and then refusing to let him out.

 

How? He's free to compete in other events! He KNEW it carried a lifetime Olympic ban - it's not like he was ignorant of the rules.

 

I agree with the Cat lady on this one. It is nothing like being in prison as he is free to come and go as he pleases. He can pursue any career he wishes he knew when he took the drugs what the consequences would be. I am glad that the judge decided against him in this pathetic waste of public money.

 

It's just a shame it doesn't work the other way really, I am pretty surprised they upheld it considering how hard it is to get draconianly punished for a lot of things.

 

Still the level of some of the vitriol aimed at him was completely OTT, he cheated in a sporting event, he didn't murder someone.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3788]

I'm glad he's not going, he's got no-one to blame but himself. The decision about him competing in the Olympics wasn't made today in the High Court, it was made by Chambers himself over the months that he knowingly took banned substances. Whether he's clean now or not, I don't care. He's been arrogant enough to take on the system and any victory for him from now on will be tainted by his own actions in the past.

 

So anyone who commits a crime or does wrong shouldn't get a second chance? He has served his time and shown remorse for what he has done, he should have been allowed to go imo.

 

No, I'm not saying that. Anyone who commits a crime and admits it should not then have the arrogance to claim that it's against their rights to send them to prison (for instance) He knew the risks and shouldn't think that the rules should be changed for him.

 

As for competing in the future in other events - he'll be allowed to do so because he's 'served his time' That doesn't mean I have to like it, personally.

 

He has served his ban (been to prison), it's more like sending him to prison and then refusing to let him out.

 

How? He's free to compete in other events! He KNEW it carried a lifetime Olympic ban - it's not like he was ignorant of the rules.

 

I agree with the Cat lady on this one. It is nothing like being in prison as he is free to come and go as he pleases. He can pursue any career he wishes he knew when he took the drugs what the consequences would be. I am glad that the judge decided against him in this pathetic waste of public money.

 

It's just a shame it doesn't work the other way really, I am pretty surprised they upheld it considering how hard it is to get draconianly punished for a lot of things.

 

Still the level of some of the vitriol aimed at him was completely OTT, he cheated in a sporting event, he didn't murder someone.

 

They upheld the ban because there was no good reason not to. His 2 reasons for overturning the ban were that it was unfair as if he ran for any other country he would be able to compete (except Denmark and China). Well theres a shock different countries having different rules. Secondly that it was a restraint of trade. Well boohoo I cheated and because of the rules my trade is being restrained. Maybe a bankrupt should be able to run a company again because it restrains his trade otherwise.

[Fop 1]

I'm glad he's not going, he's got no-one to blame but himself. The decision about him competing in the Olympics wasn't made today in the High Court, it was made by Chambers himself over the months that he knowingly took banned substances. Whether he's clean now or not, I don't care. He's been arrogant enough to take on the system and any victory for him from now on will be tainted by his own actions in the past.

 

So anyone who commits a crime or does wrong shouldn't get a second chance? He has served his time and shown remorse for what he has done, he should have been allowed to go imo.

 

No, I'm not saying that. Anyone who commits a crime and admits it should not then have the arrogance to claim that it's against their rights to send them to prison (for instance) He knew the risks and shouldn't think that the rules should be changed for him.

 

As for competing in the future in other events - he'll be allowed to do so because he's 'served his time' That doesn't mean I have to like it, personally.

 

He has served his ban (been to prison), it's more like sending him to prison and then refusing to let him out.

 

How? He's free to compete in other events! He KNEW it carried a lifetime Olympic ban - it's not like he was ignorant of the rules.

 

I agree with the Cat lady on this one. It is nothing like being in prison as he is free to come and go as he pleases. He can pursue any career he wishes he knew when he took the drugs what the consequences would be. I am glad that the judge decided against him in this pathetic waste of public money.

 

It's just a shame it doesn't work the other way really, I am pretty surprised they upheld it considering how hard it is to get draconianly punished for a lot of things.

 

Still the level of some of the vitriol aimed at him was completely OTT, he cheated in a sporting event, he didn't murder someone.

 

They upheld the ban because there was no good reason not to. His 2 reasons for overturning the ban were that it was unfair as if he ran for any other country he would be able to compete (except Denmark and China). Well theres a shock different countries having different rules. Secondly that it was a restraint of trade. Well boohoo I cheated and because of the rules my trade is being restrained. Maybe a bankrupt should be able to run a company again because it restrains his trade otherwise.

 

If you think they can't I have a bridge to sell you.

 

Like I said I'm surprised, especially with the EU's usual stand on sport, but still the stuff said about him is OTT, as I mentioned cheating in sport is nothing like murder, from some of the stuff said you'd think it was worse.

[tinofbeans 91]

my 2 cents is a lot of this is down to the coaching staff, they are the ones that "impose" this stuff on the athletes. the athletes themselves do have to make a decision, but most would say yes to a virtually untraceable agent that allows them to run faster simply because of their competetiveness and ultimately gullibility.

 

remember a whole load of american athletes have been doing this for years... florence griffiths joyner or flo jo, in the 80's for example was a prime example of taking pretty much everything and blowing records away. that she died in her late 30's of illnesses relating to her drug taking kind of tells you what she was going through.... the other thing with these steroid abusers is the obvious side effects there is something about the steroids that makes your eyes look different (slighltly yellow and more prone to being bloodshot) amongst the other more obvious things.... like increase muscle mass etc etc...

Edited July 19, 2008 by canofbeans

[Fop 1]

my 2 cents is a lot of this is down to the coaching staff, they are the ones that "impose" this stuff on the athletes. the athletes themselves do have to make a decision, but most would say yes to a virtually untraceable agent that allows them to run faster simply because of their competetiveness and ultimately gullibility.

 

remember a whole load of american athletes have been doing this for years... florence griffiths joyner or flo jo, in the 80's for example was a prime example of taking pretty much everything and blowing records away. that she died in her late 30's of illnesses relating to her drug taking kind of tells you what she was going through.... the other thing with these steroid abusers is the obvious side effects there is something about the steroids that makes your eyes look different (slighltly yellow and more prone to being bloodshot) amongst the other more obvious things.... like increase muscle mass etc etc...

 

The last time there was a "clean" athletics event was probably in the early 50's, maybe even pre-war.

[Guest alex]

I still think a lot of athletes and even a lot of gold medalists run clean though.

[Fop 1]

I still think a lot of athletes and even a lot of gold medalists run clean though.

Yup and a lot don't get caught when they do too, like that Greek pair (initially anyway).

 

I just don't think it will ever go away, it'll always be the race between technology to cheat and technology to catch it, although what they'll do when it reaches the genetic stage I dunno.

[ewerk 30167]

Maybe a bankrupt should be able to run a company again because it restrains his trade otherwise.

 

They are allowed to run companies again after a certain period of time, some of the most successful business men out there have previously been declared bankrupt so your analogy doesn't stand up.

 

A lifetime ban for being caught once is unduly harsh imo, it doesn't allow for the fact that he may genuinely regret his actions and unfairly bans him from showing his talent on the biggest stage. He has done wrong, he has served his ban but to continue punishing him is completely unfair. Should ex-cons never be allowed a job? Should anyone who has done wrong never be forgiven?

Edited July 19, 2008 by ewerk

[Guest alex]

Maybe a bankrupt should be able to run a company again because it restrains his trade otherwise.

 

They are allowed to run companies again after a certain period of time, some of the most successful business men out there have previously been declared bankrupt so your analogy doesn't stand up.

 

A lifetime ban for being caught once is unduly harsh imo, it doesn't allow for the fact that he may genuinely regret his actions and unfairly bans him from showing his talent on the biggest stage. He has done wrong, he has served his ban but to continue punishing him is completely unfair. Should ex-cons never be allowed a job? Should anyone who has done wrong never be forgiven?

Dwain Chambers isn't really the same as those cases though. He's allowed to compete and subsequently earn money but he can't compete in the Olympics for Britain due to the rules. He hasn't served his ban in terms of the Brtish Olympic team, it's a lifetime one. Shame more countries didn't follow our lead imo. And it's not the same as ex-criminals not being allowed to work ever again - although they are obviously sometimes restricted in terms of the jobs they can. I'm not trying to pull your post apart btw, I just don't really think his treatment is all that harsh, which is what I'm really getting at.

Edited July 19, 2008 by alex