Doping in XC skiing

[Aragon]

Re:

I live in Norway. Naïvety as displayed by ToreBear is dime a dozen here, so his posts don't surprise me one bit.

A dysfunctional anti-doping agency that couldn't even catch a cold and a borderline maniacal sense of patriotism will do that to people. Some Norwegians genuinely believe the lack of Norwegian positives is because our athletes don't dope, and that they're just naturally 10-15% better than everyone else. It's sad.

Our athletes aren't better, but our anti-doping agency is definitely sh*t.

This is a few years old take on the issue, but one proponent of the idea that the Norwegians have naturally anti-doping mindset is none other than the doping historian Erkki Vettenniemi who wrote the following essay some three years ago:

http://idrottsforum.org/forumbloggen/what-science-says-about-doping-in-norway/

I am not quite certain if this is a satirical take on how unreliable polls are or is this guy serious because:

1) He is a heavy proponent of the theory that Norwegian Gjermund Eggen was one of the first blood dopers in the 1966 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships when he started being 16th at 30km but won three golds later in the games (not then a banned method but portrays their ethical stance in a weird light).
http://idrottsforum.org/forumbloggen/triple-victory-for-norwegian-sport-medicine/

2) In his other books, he ridicules the notion that polls could tell the real opinion of athletes because they have vested interest to lie and downplay the prevalence of doping use/availability etc.
3) He himself isn't reluctant at all in accepting practically every doping-related rumour as fact.

 

[python]

in a couple of hours we will (should) find out of the cas decision on johaug...

a former cas member thinks that the sundby case may play against poor therese chances. in brief, her sole defense of relying exclusively on the doc just weeks AFTER sundby failed in cas using the same logic, may according to this lawyer, accentuate her negligence.

https://www.nrk.no/sport/derfor-kan-sundby-dommen-knuse-johaugs-ol-drom-1.13650711

and another one...it can be interesting to those like diskgear who wondered for a while why the fis does not publish the names of its ad panel members. the weird twist here though is the norwegian antidoping tsar whining about....the fis secrecy :lol: where was this anti-secrecy agent when fis - also in total secret - decided to acquit sundby :Question:

so if the judgment went in favour of his compatriot, the antidoper huncho WASN'T concerned. when his compatriot got in trouble, he blasts fis secrecy.

a bigger hypocrisy from the one who supposed to uphold impartiality due to the very nature of his job is difficult to imagine

http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/antidoping-norge-sjef-angriper-fis-hemmelighold-rundt-johaug-anke/a/23951438/

 

[BullsFan22]

Re:

in a couple of hours we will (should) find out of the cas decision on johaug...

a former cas member thinks that the sundby case may play against poor therese chances. in brief, her sole defense of relying exclusively on the doc just weeks AFTER sundby failed in cas using the same logic, may according to this lawyer, accentuate her negligence.

https://www.nrk.no/sport/derfor-kan-sundby-dommen-knuse-johaugs-ol-drom-1.13650711

and another one...it can be interesting to those like diskgear who wondered for a while why the fis does not publish the names of its ad panel members. the weird twist here though is the norwegian antidoping tsar whining about....the fis secrecy :lol: where was this anti-secrecy agent when fis - also in total secret - decided to acquit sundby :Question:

so if the judgment went in favour of his compatriot, the antidoper huncho WASN'T concerned. when his compatriot got in trouble, he blasts fis secrecy.

a bigger hypocrisy from the one who supposed to uphold impartiality due to the very nature of his job is difficult to imagine

http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/antidoping-norge-sjef-angriper-fis-hemmelighold-rundt-johaug-anke/a/23951438/

My guess is that her suspension will be shortened and she'll be able to race when the season starts in November.

 

[bambino]

18 months it is and out goes poor Therese from the Olympics. I think they are still generous for Therese, but on the other hand - in terms of competitions - 18 and 24 months does not play much difference.

Waiting for Tore Bear to come and tell us the whole integrity of the world's best antidoping assosiation has been violently compromised.

 

[python]

nothing official on the cas site yet

it would be interesting to read the original reasoning and where/how wada might have been involved in its own rule interpretation. i am particularly curious, since wada did NOT join the official fis appeal...

whatever. i cheer not the punishment but the lack of her obnoxious screaming we will be relieved from at the olympics.

 

[meat puppet]

Agree that they were very generous to Johaug. Here's the CAS statement: http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Media_Release_5015.pdf

Apparently the sentence is given for negligence for which the appropriate ineligibility range is 12-24 months as opposed to having intentionally used the steroid which would yield 24-28 months.

 

[bambino]

Re:

nothing official on the cas site yet

it would be interesting to read the original reasoning and where/how wada might have been involved in its own rule interpretation. i am particularly curious, since wada did NOT join the official fis appeal...

whatever. i cheer not the punishment but the lack of her obnoxious screaming we will be relieved from at the olympics.

Some CAS comments in Aftenposten at least, though in Norwegian. Translator works OK.

https://www.aftenposten.no/100Sport/vintersport/langrenn/Her-er-dommen-Therese-Johaug-mister-OL-240392b.html

 

[olhell]

Re:

nothing official on the cas site yet

it would be interesting to read the original reasoning and where/how wada might have been involved in its own rule interpretation. i am particularly curious, since wada did NOT join the official fis appeal...

whatever. i cheer not the punishment but the lack of her obnoxious screaming we will be relieved from at the olympics.

At least the Media Release is made available:
http://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/news-detail/article/cas-decision-in-the-case-of-therese-johaug.html

Lets hope the full decision is made public soon...

 

[Robert5091]

http://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-i...s-decision-in-the-case-of-therese-johaug.html

Ms Johaug failed to conduct a basic check of the packaging

Since she went out in the local press just weeks before hand and said she checks everything 3 times then she's lucky not to get a longer sentence.

 

[No_Balls]

Re: Re:

Not funny when the fork strikes your ass Toreboy? But lashing out against other dopers is ok huh? As long as they are not Norwegians right?

This is priceless. Straight from the fishes head:

Idrettspresident Tom Tvet sier i en kommentar at han syns dommen er streng.

<p>IDRETTSPRESIDENT: Tom Tvedt på pressemøte på Scandic Fornebu i fjor. </p>
IDRETTSPRESIDENT: Tom Tvedt på pressemøte på Scandic Fornebu i fjor.
FOTO: PATRICK DA SILVA SÆTHER, VG
– Det har vært en lang og krevende prosess. Endelig er det satt sluttstrek for den juridiske behandlingen av saken. Resultatet ble en streng dom og et annet utfall enn det Therese selv hadde håpet på, men vi kan ikke annet enn å ta dommen til etterretning, sier idrettspresident Tvedt.

– Det kan være vanskelig å forstå at Thereses bruk av en leppekrem uten prestasjonsfremmende effekt skal få så alvorlige konsekvenser. Men WADAs regelverk er strengt når det gjelder idrettsutøvernes eget ansvar. Nå vil vi bruke tid på å gjennomgå denne saken, både avgjørelsen og prosessen, for å vurdere hvilken lærdom vi kan trekke av dette, avslutter Tvedt.

http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/johaug-tatt-i-doping/bjoergen-etter-johaug-dommen-jeg-har-det-vondt/a/24123433/

Ministry of sports in Norway going Kremlin-style. No wait, that was Norway, that was totally in Norway. Looks like we are no better then everybody else we have been pointing finger against.

 

[python]

Re: Re:

nothing official on the cas site yet

it would be interesting to read the original reasoning and where/how wada might have been involved in its own rule interpretation. i am particularly curious, since wada did NOT join the official fis appeal...

whatever. i cheer not the punishment but the lack of her obnoxious screaming we will be relieved from at the olympics.

At least the Media Release is made available:
http://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/news-detail/article/cas-decision-in-the-case-of-therese-johaug.html

Lets hope the full decision is made public soon...

nothing official on the cas site yet

it would be interesting to read the original reasoning and where/how wada might have been involved in its own rule interpretation. i am particularly curious, since wada did NOT join the official fis appeal...

whatever. i cheer not the punishment but the lack of her obnoxious screaming we will be relieved from at the olympics.

Some CAS comments in Aftenposten at least, though in Norwegian. Translator works OK.

https://www.aftenposten.no/100Sport/vintersport/langrenn/Her-er-dommen-Therese-Johaug-mister-OL-240392b.html

thanks guys !
reading the summary, i suspect the full ruling may never be made public since iirc, normally, the cas news summary would refer to the later ruling if and when it was coming...

i am reading between the lines the decision was unanimous (3 of 3) and the duration might have been a mid point of what the fis officially requested (16 to 20).

 

[Discgear]

I have a question to ToreBear. If CAS would have had exonerated Johaug or had significantly lowered the ban, as I understood was your hope. What impact would that have had on future antidoping work?

I can easily picture Russian, Chines and eastern European meds taking the fall when athletes get caught. Or?

 

[olhell]

Re: Re:

thanks guys !
reading the summary, i suspect the full ruling may never be made public since iirc, normally, the cas news summary would refer to the later ruling if and when it was coming...

i am reading between the lines the decision was unanimous (3 of 3) and the duration might have been a mid point of what the fis officially requested (16 to 20).

Full ruling is published. Start reading guys!
http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Award_5015_internet.pdf

 

[python]

^^
yep, just was logging in to post the rulling link I saw in the vg article...reading it now. it does look though as there were no diverging arbitrators. as if there was one, an opinion as to why would typically be provided at the end of a ruling.

 

[yaco]

I am more interested in that Jodagh was represented by Morgan and Jacobs who are famous for getting reduced sentences for athletes with AAF - Morgan and Jacobs only take on cases where the athlete admits guilt - So this is one of their few failings.

 

[Blaaswix]

Norwegian media was in full on leave-Britney-alone levels of hysteria earlier today, too many articles to link to, but among them, Norway should boycott the olympic games, all anti-doping work has been seriously undermined by this ruling against an *entirely innocent athlete*, that the judgement is extremely harsh (it's not, in comparison with similar cases) and so on. Surely the possibility, and actually likelihood, that she would miss the olympics must have been anticipated? These reactions really are very undignified. But not very surprising.

 

[Põhja Konn]

Good. I actually expected that she would be forced to miss the olympics as the FIS and CAS couldn't afford to be so soft in this case. The arrogant and self-righteous attitude shown by Johaug's camp effectively guaranteed that she couldn't get off lightly. Still I did worry that she is somehow able to wriggle out of this, which, thankfully, didn't happen.

Obviously I agree with those who think she actually got off lightly despite missing the olympics. With the attitude shown by Johaug herself and people around her, full four year suspension would have been thoroughly deserved.

 

[bambino]

Re:

^^
yep, just was logging in to post the rulling link I saw in the vg article...reading it now. it does look though as there were no diverging arbitrators. as if there was one, an opinion as to why would typically be provided at the end of a ruling.

So the CAS panel was definitely not unanimous on virtually anything. It was majority decision. Not a hard guess who would've let Therese go with warning...

Couple of things I find funny, but also extremely rich of Johaug's layers:

- they claim Johaug has done precisely as regulated in her sports contract by consulting with team doctor on any medication, thus there is no fault. Obviously they did not mention a prevailing clause in the same contract where she is obliged to follow WADA codes rigorously

- they claim she could and had a right to delegate her responsibilities of doping conduct to another person (Doctor of course). They have another case where that has been granted. That case was for RACING HORSE! I found the CAS panel response extremely amusing saying something like "Ms Johaug is expected by the panel to handle her medical usage better than the athelete in particular case"

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

^^
yep, just was logging in to post the rulling link I saw in the vg article...reading it now. it does look though as there were no diverging arbitrators. as if there was one, an opinion as to why would typically be provided at the end of a ruling.

So the CAS panel was definitely not unanimous on virtually anything. It was majority decision. Not a hard guess who would've let Therese go with warning...

Couple of things I find funny, but also extremely rich of Johaug's layers:

- they claim Johaug has done precisely as regulated in her sports contract by consulting with team doctor on any medication, thus there is no fault. Obviously they did not mention a prevailing clause in the same contract where she is obliged to follow WADA codes rigorously

- they claim she could and had a right to delegate her responsibilities of doping conduct to another person (Doctor of course). They have another case where that has been granted. That case was for RACING HORSE! I found the CAS panel response extremely amusing saying something like "Ms Johaug is expected by the panel to handle her medical usage better than the athelete in particular case"

There you have the flaw with CAS - A guilty verdict should only occur if the arbitrators are in unanimous agreement - Majority verdicts should not be acceptable at this level.

 

[bambino]

Re: Re:

^^
yep, just was logging in to post the rulling link I saw in the vg article...reading it now. it does look though as there were no diverging arbitrators. as if there was one, an opinion as to why would typically be provided at the end of a ruling.

So the CAS panel was definitely not unanimous on virtually anything. It was majority decision. Not a hard guess who would've let Therese go with warning...

Couple of things I find funny, but also extremely rich of Johaug's layers:

- they claim Johaug has done precisely as regulated in her sports contract by consulting with team doctor on any medication, thus there is no fault. Obviously they did not mention a prevailing clause in the same contract where she is obliged to follow WADA codes rigorously

- they claim she could and had a right to delegate her responsibilities of doping conduct to another person (Doctor of course). They have another case where that has been granted. That case was for RACING HORSE! I found the CAS panel response extremely amusing saying something like "Ms Johaug is expected by the panel to handle her medical usage better than the athelete in particular case"

There you have the flaw with CAS - A guilty verdict should only occur if the arbitrators are in unanimous agreement - Majority verdicts should not be acceptable at this level.

In that case they should also change the rule that the parties can select one of the panel members. Otherwise you will never get decisions out.

 

[Oude Geuze]

On the bright side, the olympics will be marginally more exciting Mother Bjørgen to demolish everyone, show the lightweights how its done! I'm expecting 4 gold medals from her. The level of competition amongst the womens xc skiing is just laughable... The men's race however, Ustiugov is my main man, awsome to watch him race, I just hope Northug gets one, 50k would be awsome.

 

[Discgear]

Just three years ago, it was a call for a eight year ban in doping violations. The span would be 5-8 years. The call was made by the newly elected president of the European Athletic Association, Norwegian Svein Arne Hansen, in August 2015.
http://www.vg.no/sport/friidrett/friidrett/vil-ha-aatte-aar-utestengelse-for-doping/a/23513631/

Of course we have heard nothing like this being called out after the verdicts against Johnsrud Sundby and Johaug.
Current president of the Norwegian Confederation of Sports, Tom Tvedt, yesterday said about the Johaug verdict: It’s hard to understand that the use of a lip balm without performance enhancing effects will be so severely punished. http://www.rbnett.no/ntb/sport/2017...en-–-Kan-være-vanskelig-å-forstå-15189532.ece

Tvedt’s comments are perfectly in line with Norwegian media, especially state radio and television, top leaders like Løfshus and Røste, lawyers and athletes like Bjørgen. The double standars, meritoriously illustrated by ToreBear, are through the roof. Norwegian sports community is embarrassing itself on full display to the world, bearing more resemblance with a religious sect than a modern and civilized part of northern Europe. It's completely nauseating.

 

[GJB123]

Re: Re:

^^
yep, just was logging in to post the rulling link I saw in the vg article...reading it now. it does look though as there were no diverging arbitrators. as if there was one, an opinion as to why would typically be provided at the end of a ruling.

So the CAS panel was definitely not unanimous on virtually anything. It was majority decision. Not a hard guess who would've let Therese go with warning...

Couple of things I find funny, but also extremely rich of Johaug's layers:

- they claim Johaug has done precisely as regulated in her sports contract by consulting with team doctor on any medication, thus there is no fault. Obviously they did not mention a prevailing clause in the same contract where she is obliged to follow WADA codes rigorously

- they claim she could and had a right to delegate her responsibilities of doping conduct to another person (Doctor of course). They have another case where that has been granted. That case was for RACING HORSE! I found the CAS panel response extremely amusing saying something like "Ms Johaug is expected by the panel to handle her medical usage better than the athelete in particular case"

There you have the flaw with CAS - A guilty verdict should only occur if the arbitrators are in unanimous agreement - Majority verdicts should not be acceptable at this level.

Rubbish! The CAS-panel is not a jury, they are judges and in any system I know it is perfectly normal that cases decided by judges can go on majority decisions.

 

[Aragon]

Re: Re:

The case might not be necessarily totally over, as according to the Norwegian daily Dagbladet, Johaug's lawyers are at least considering the possibility of appealing to the Swiss Supreme Court, a few have tried and - as far as I know - without success.

https://www.dagbladet.no/sport/gir-ikke-opp-ol-johaug-vurderer-a-anke-dommen-slik-kan-det-utrolige-likevel-skje/68614687

A Finnish sports law specialist Olli Rauste commented that the CAS-decision will not be overruled unless there is clearly something to the magnitude of bribery or biased composition of the CAS-panel or something similar.

http://www.is.fi/maastohiihto/art-2000005337041.html

 

[python]

..wanted to quickly register a thought about lil therese that isn't directly related to her doping.

i now watched several of her public appearances related to the case (as well as 2-3 dozens of her races over a decade). in almost every case she demonstrated an extreme emotional bipolar reaction - either wild, uncontrolled screaming or a crushed, always-flooded-in-tears sobbing...turns out - at least that's what the cas ruling mentioned - she:
a) played a clip of her teared press conferences to the arbitrators
b) flooded the hearings room floor with her tears again during a personal testimoy

a couch psychoanalyst in me thinks the this girl could be mentally unstable ? or is she just boundlessly absorbed in self pity ? or is it an involuntary reaction to incite a public reaction to herself, sort of like a spoiled child cry ?