Official London Olympics Doping thread

[buckle]

OTT
Yup that would be Dennis Lillee and Rod Marsh. Which actually makes for an almost on topic comparison, because for the uninitiated they were two of the toughest competitors every to play cricket for Australia, and they despised the poms with a passion.

Those ridiculous odds for a two horse race were placed because England were in to all intents and purposes an impossible situation. The match however became known as Bothams Game, because at the moment the bet was made Ian Botham (who hated Aussies just as much) came out and hit 149 to give a lead of 130, then Bob Willis picked up 8/43 for England to win by 18 runs . Incredible turn around

The inference was the Aussies threw the game for the winnings , but when you take into account the larger than life personalities involved it is far more likely to be one of those strange events that do sometimes happen just by chance.

Back to topic

500-1 odds but overcome by "marginal gains".

 

[Stueyy]

In 1966 they won the tournament in Brazil. What a team!

In Brazil? You sure?

 

[buckle]

In Brazil? You sure?

It was a joke, friend - not a very good one - but a joke all the same.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Secondly, with regard to your "akistan" influenced hockey teams: have you actually watched the games? The GB men and women teams are hardly full of imports bought in to win a medal. Hockey is actually very popular in GB. As witnessed by the gold medal in Seoul '88

Ok, thanks for the hint. I accept "defeat" here , b/c i really tought most players have a akistan backround.

Just to clarify, the auto political correct routine scans any combination of letters P.A.K.I. within a word and makes them *, thus "****stan".

Intriguing

Exactly. When i write the whole country name they xxx it. What´s wrong with you in the USA? And i tought germany is overly political correct.

I'm just amazed at rowing being considered a non technical sport.

It needs power and endurance for sure, but applying those correctly is highly technical.

I agree rowing is technical but I'd be careful with statements like that. Running well is extremely technical, just like rowing well is. Doing either badly however is fairly easy.

And chess is very technical. You need great hand/eye coordination to move the king from A to B.... Come on guys, it gets ridiculous.
Relative to true technical sports they are easy to learn. In the end the power/endurance is the deciding factor. Not the talent of motion/technique.
For example, i just saw the men finals in table tennis. Amazing how they put such tremendous spin on the ball and still manage to put the ball in play accurately. Poetry in motion.

running well is overrated

everyone can run

No, no, you need a close to perfect leg lift for a straight forward move.

Re long jump/triple jump the level is really lower nowadays but the main reason for the bad results is the type of track which slows the jumpers but dries incredibly quick. The track runners use is different.

BS. Lewis and Powell jumped + 8.90 in Tokyo. It was also a so called fast track back then. And all of a sudden they only make it fast for runners nowadays? You really don´t think that, right?

Which story?

This one:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=976548#post976548

 

[Galic Ho]

You criticise me for talking about the Australian papers (saying they are Murdoch/Fairfax run) and then put a link to the Daily Mail. Nice.

I said read the comments. Then click on most supported. Most liked comments think Pendleton had some bizarre ruling made against her and that Meares somehow made the dirtiest act possible.

I highlighted comments that the British Public make. Fairfax and New Corp Media in Australia do not have a large comment section on their online articles. The moronic articles are the result of journalists, not commentators using the comment ability. That's the difference. Professional journalist versus Joe Blow in the street on his iPhone/android handset having his two cents worth. Australian online papers certainly do not have a benign like/dislike feature to scew the article. The most liked comments on that article show how the average Brit thinks. Sad to say but I was surprised the public is that darn thick in the head.

You can make a case for this not being truly representative of the British public, but it stands for the portion who read and who commented as a whole. Very large percentage were whinging and sprouting conspiracy garbage. Albeit, who gives a damn what the rules state. As I said, Pendeleton veered off course...psychological tell was she knew she wouldn't win. I can make a case for her doing it deliberately...but that's doubtful. Just a minor track incident she should have known to NOT allow to occur in an Olympic final. By that time Pendleton should have realised the commissair would penalise her. He'd already done it.

It is a sad day when Phil Liggetts commentary is the sound reasonable voice from within Britain. That in itself points to the sheer idiocy and rampant tom foolery people engage in when national sporting patriotism is on the line. Aka, enter the whinging Pom mentality. If they only knew the truth, they'd be rather silent. Or on here, in the Clinic in the Track cycling thread where all the Sky fanboys have made their thread of unity.

Short story, I don't point out the obvious part that I mentioned above because they are obvious. Head to your local university and talk to a communication student. That's where journalism students go. Most are fleeting imbeciles. Most of the sports journos know sweet F all about sports. I know this from experience. No surprise to me then that the finished product working at an Aussie paper is mostly just a paid for hack. Big difference between that one individual and a large portion of the reading public.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

think.. hope.. maybe... Lemaitre is clean(ish). Great run to just finish out of Top 2, coming all the way from last place after aprox. 100 meters

 

[Galic Ho]

How about listing sports we actually play? like cricket, we're pretty good at it and you won't find a cleaner sport.

I guess you can then name for us all the three international captains and the nations they played for who admitted to match fixing? Two are from rival nations who hate one another...should narrow it down for you. This is all within the last twenty years. But wait there are more.

Do you think it was a coincidence that ****stans recent match fixing scandal at test level was against the English team on English soil? No, that was pure chance, nothing to see there or investigate. Had NOTHING to do with the English in any way did it?

Want to name the cricketers who have tested positive for steroids like nandrolone? Hint, one was the fastest bowler in the world...he might even be ****stani. Or how about you name the young English cricketer who died a few months back...go on give us the details. Nothing nefarious going on there either right?

Cricket has a large amount of money behind it. The recent emerging geographic region behind a lot of the new money in cricket, the Asian subcontinent, is rife with corruption and dogdy managers and governing bodies. It's naive to assume cricket is anything other than dirty and dodgy in some of it's locales and specific corners of the glode where it is a trade lauded over.

 

[Damien]

I said read the comments. Then click on most supported. Most liked comments think Pendleton had some bizarre ruling made against her and that Meares somehow made the dirtiest act possible.

You really cannot use Daily Mail comments as a barometer of the British Public. The comments are nuts! Look at any article and they are nuts. People who think Obama is a socialist from Kenya hell-bent on destroying the United States, that the BNP are going to save the country, and multi-cultural families don't exist. Read the Daily Mail prior to the Olympics and you would have been convinced everyone in Britain hated it and it would be a diaster. It clearly has not manifested as such.

The Daily Mail comments section is not representative of Britain. It just isn't.

 

[Damien]

Do you think it was a coincidence that ****stans recent match fixing scandal at test level was against the English team on English soil? No, that was pure chance, nothing to see there or investigate. Had NOTHING to do with the English in any way did it?

You can't just make assertions like that without evidence. Those crickets were caught by the English and it's not as if Cricket is played all over the place, there are matches here all the time so why is it surprising that spot-fixing in Cricket would occur in one of the countries where matches are played the most? It's like being surprised a Basketball scandal happens in America.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

I said read the comments. Then click on most supported. Most liked comments think Pendleton had some bizarre ruling made against her and that Meares somehow made the dirtiest act possible.

I highlighted comments that the British Public make. Fairfax and New Corp Media in Australia do not have a large comment section on their online articles. The moronic articles are the result of journalists, not commentators using the comment ability. That's the difference. Professional journalist versus Joe Blow in the street on his iPhone/android handset having his two cents worth. Australian online papers certainly do not have a benign like/dislike feature to scew the article. The most liked comments on that article show how the average Brit thinks. Sad to say but I was surprised the public is that darn thick in the head.

You can make a case for this not being truly representative of the British public, but it stands for the portion who read and who commented as a whole. Very large percentage were whinging and sprouting conspiracy garbage. Albeit, who gives a damn what the rules state. As I said, Pendeleton veered off course...psychological tell was she knew she wouldn't win. I can make a case for her doing it deliberately...but that's doubtful. Just a minor track incident she should have known to NOT allow to occur in an Olympic final. By that time Pendleton should have realised the commissair would penalise her. He'd already done it.

It is a sad day when Phil Liggetts commentary is the sound reasonable voice from within Britain. That in itself points to the sheer idiocy and rampant tom foolery people engage in when national sporting patriotism is on the line. Aka, enter the whinging Pom mentality. If they only knew the truth, they'd be rather silent. Or on here, in the Clinic in the Track cycling thread where all the Sky fanboys have made their thread of unity.

Short story, I don't point out the obvious part that I mentioned above because they are obvious. Head to your local university and talk to a communication student. That's where journalism students go. Most are fleeting imbeciles. Most of the sports journos know sweet F all about sports. I know this from experience. No surprise to me then that the finished product working at an Aussie paper is mostly just a paid for hack. Big difference between that one individual and a large portion of the reading public.

Even wrt the comments the people that read the DailyMail are not representative of the 'British public'. Chances are most of the people that write the comments there are Daily Mail readers or people that subscribe to that point of view. If you can't understand that then there is no point me arguing further on that issue.

I have noticed you keep bringing up the whinging Poms. Having lived in Australia I can confirm that the whinging is far worse. Bad winners, Worse losers. You seem to think only Brits suffer from national sporting patriotism. In which case you are the one that is blind to the reality of things.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

think.. hope.. maybe... Lemaitre is clean(ish). Great run to just finish out of Top 2, coming all the way from last place after aprox. 100 meters

Why do you think he might be clean compared to any other runner?

 

[the big ring]

You really cannot use Daily Mail comments as a barometer of the British Public. The comments are nuts! Look at any article and they are nuts. People who think Obama is a socialist from Kenya hell-bent on destroying the United States, that the BNP are going to save the country, and multi-cultural families don't exist. Read the Daily Mail prior to the Olympics and you would have been convinced everyone in Britain hated it and it would be a diaster. It clearly has not manifested as such.

The Daily Mail comments section is not representative of Britain. It just isn't.

Look at any Australian newspaper - ANY - when discussing cycling or cyclists and you will find exactly the same style of comment from the unwashed, lowest common denominator, knuckle draggng, red neck neanderthal. Death threats via vehicular manslaughter and the like are common place, it's revolting.

I think Garlic Ho's claim is misguided.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

beside i said hope, maybe, clean(ish)...

Anyway, the good old rule "talent shows early" is applicable for him. Now, i truly would doubt him if he comes out in the final and runs a 19.47 there. That would be a Bolt like explosion after age 20.

 

[hotrats]

beside i said hope, maybe, clean(ish)...

Anyway, the good old rule "talent shows early" is applicable for him. Now, i truly would doubt him if he comes out in the final and runs a 19.47 there. That would be a Bolt like explosion after age 20.

Bolt winning the Junior Worlds 200m at the age of 15 and before he was 18 becoming the first junior to run sub 20s doesn't count as showing talent early?

 

[Damien]

Look at any Australian newspaper - ANY - when discussing cycling or cyclists and you will find exactly the same style of comment from the unwashed, lowest common denominator, knuckle draggng, red neck neanderthal. Death threats via vehicular manslaughter and the like are common place, it's revolting.

I think Garlic Ho's claim is misguided.

People on the internet are nuts. That's my theory. It's a correct one too.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Bolt winning the Junior Worlds 200m at the age of 15 and before he was 18 becoming the first junior to run sub 20s doesn't count as showing talent early?

I am not doubting that Bolt is/was a great talent (as Lemaitre is). But it is unprecedented in the history of athletics that a guy beyond age 20 is bettering his PB at world class level by another 0.6 seconds in two years. Lemaitre would need to run a 19.47 to accomplish the same performance explosion. Would that cry out for doping? Yes of course, it would.

 

[Galic Ho]

Even wrt the comments the people that read the DailyMail are not representative of the 'British public'. Chances are most of the people that write the comments there are Daily Mail readers or people that subscribe to that point of view. If you can't understand that then there is no point me arguing further on that issue.

I have noticed you keep bringing up the whinging Poms. Having lived in Australia I can confirm that the whinging is far worse. Bad winners, Worse losers. You seem to think only Brits suffer from national sporting patriotism. In which case you are the one that is blind to the reality of things.

Here. That's laughable and your pattented deflection at work once again. No Brit would ever say that to an Aussie face to face in Australia. Any Brit worth their salt already knows this. Stereotyping based on what....your word? I had a source I was poking fun at. Note, unlike me, you don't have an example to reference that represents a sizeable portion of the UK public. Just your word. Hang round in better circles and upgrade your standards. You'll find your experiences better. Sounds like you found the biggest Bogan centre in Australia...too bad for you.

You're deflecting once again. Oh, Galic Ho said something within a carefully defined context, my panties are in a twist, I'll deflect and say something about Australia. Yeah nice try genius...doesn't refute what I said about those commenting. Note you totally avoided the dynamic I defined....journalists versus the public. Wonder why that is? Oh, that's right, you're upholding the British end. Nobody cares. I posted a link with specific observations and you not once, but twice, were confused about the context. Step it up please....

As I said, read the damn article. The Daily Mail offers a plethora of differing views on multiple differing subjects every single day. It focuses on gossip. Happens all the time. BUT, there is a pattern within what people state in the comments sections. One can read an article and accurately predict the nature of comments and what will/will not be liked/disliked. If you are that thick you cannot do this...well its sad. Deny all you want, but when one article has a DOMINANT theme then yes, it is an indicator that a PARTICULAR PORTION of people in a given sample bracket believe the words expressed. I said one could quite easily limit those views to only a percentage of the population...but that requires one to run the stats. It's about the numbers. they are there. They are there in abundance.

Oh but to appear credible the Brits trash the Mail. Sorry. Doesn't count. brits read and they most certainly use the comment section to voice their frustrations. Deal with it. They are Brits and they do represent GB. Maybe not 50% but still a very sizable percentage. As I said, you are being impeccable stupid and acting like a princess. Deal with it. The Brits were whinging over Anna Meares on that particular site. Need I remind you that perhaps the Mail is the place to go to do that? Why....because they allow it! Sure be offended Brits are saying this...but don't deflect with a weak minded excuse that they aren't British. The Aussies rubbing it in to the Brits in the article are equally pathetic.

No the reason you don't like the Mail, is because you don't like the narrative and tone. I don't like the narrative and tone of many Aussies, doesn't give me the ability to deny their views exist. I simply state anyone with a smidgen of intelligence doesn't believe them. Next time, I suggest you do the same. Easy way to dismiss them is to state you disagree rather than run off in a tangent and try and dismiss them being British at all. They are. Deal with it. Do note, I was laughing at the idiocy of those commenting. Sounds like you agree with me...so what's the issue. Why protest so much?

 

[Damien]

Here. That's laughable and your pattented deflection at work once again. No Brit would ever say that to an Aussie face to face in Australia. Any Brit worth their salt already knows this. Stereotyping based on what....your word? I had a source I was poking fun at. Note, unlike me, you don't have an example to reference that represents a sizeable portion of the UK public. Just your word. Hang round in better circles and upgrade your standards. You'll find your experiences better. Sounds like you found the biggest Bogan centre in Australia...too bad for you.

You're deflecting once again. Oh, Galic Ho said something within a carefully defined context, my panties are in a twist, I'll deflect and say something about Australia. Yeah nice try genius...doesn't refute what I said about those commenting. Note you totally avoided the dynamic I defined....journalists versus the public. Wonder why that is? Oh, that's right, you're upholding the British end. Nobody cares. I posted a link with specific observations and you not once, but twice, were confused about the context. Step it up please....

As I said, read the damn article. The Daily Mail offers a plethora of differing views on multiple differing subjects every single day. It focuses on gossip. Happens all the time. BUT, there is a pattern within what people state in the comments sections. One can read an article and accurately predict the nature of comments and what will/will not be liked/disliked. If you are that thick you cannot do this...well its sad. Deny all you want, but when one article has a DOMINANT theme then yes, it is an indicator that a PARTICULAR PORTION of people in a given sample bracket believe the words expressed. I said one could quite easily limit those views to only a percentage of the population...but that requires one to run the stats. It's about the numbers. they are there. They are there in abundance.

Oh but to appear credible the Brits trash the Mail. Sorry. Doesn't count. brits read and they most certainly use the comment section to voice their frustrations. Deal with it. They are Brits and they do represent GB. Maybe not 50% but still a very sizable percentage. As I said, you are being impeccable stupid and acting like a princess. Deal with it. The Brits were whinging over Anna Meares on that particular site. Need I remind you that perhaps the Mail is the place to go to do that? Why....because they allow it! Sure be offended Brits are saying this...but don't deflect with a weak minded excuse that they aren't British. The Aussies rubbing it in to the Brits in the article are equally pathetic.

No the reason you don't like the Mail, is because you don't like the narrative and tone. I don't like the narrative and tone of many Aussies, doesn't give me the ability to deny their views exist. I simply state anyone with a smidgen of intelligence doesn't believe them. Next time, I suggest you do the same. Easy way to dismiss them is to state you disagree rather than run off in a tangent and try and dismiss them being British at all. They are. Deal with it. Do note, I was laughing at the idiocy of those commenting. Sounds like you agree with me...so what's the issue. Why protest so much?

Seriously. The Daily Mail comments section is wacked out. Even the people commenting probably don't behave like that in real life, it's the power of the internet. People say and act in ways they wouldn't in real life. The percentage of the population that comment on the Daily Mail website isn't representative. It's not even all British, many Americans and expats comment on it. It has a international audience.

I live here but you're trying to make a statement about a 'sizable percentage' of the British people based on a comments section of a website. It's isn't justified.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Hacker: Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers:

* The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country;
* The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country;
* The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country;
* The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country;
* The Financial Times is read by people who own the country;
* The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country;
* And The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.

Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?

Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits.

 

[Damien]

Hacker: Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers:

* The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country;
* The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country;
* The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country;
* The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country;
* The Financial Times is read by people who own the country;
* The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country;
* And The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.

Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?

Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits.

Pretty much still true today!

 

[Catwhoorg]

Yes (Prime) Minister - Still one of the finest pieces of political commentary/comedy ever made.

 

[Galic Ho]

Look at any Australian newspaper - ANY - when discussing cycling or cyclists and you will find exactly the same style of comment from the unwashed, lowest common denominator, knuckle draggng, red neck neanderthal. Death threats via vehicular manslaughter and the like are common place, it's revolting.

I think Galic Ho's claim is misguided.

No it's not. Those people are still Australian and represent the journalistic view of a portion of the Australian public.

They weren't present as an audilbe voice box for some, then their articles would disappear. Plus as I mentioned, it was the comments from the public that were revealing. That was the point. Not misguided at all. Journalists are not the public utilising a feature that allows them to comment on an article and like/dislike. That's a feature of the new digital age. Everyone can have a voice. BTW, it always means something. It's not random...not when the patterns are recognisable and discernable.

Death threats against cyclists. Wake up dude. That's reality down under. Sheesh, don't you listen to what people say? It's not made it up, it is reality. There are LARGE numbers of people in Australia who THINK it is their right to trash bicycle riders. That's not some unsightly minority view held by a few. It's entrenched in many. Hence the massive media frenzy when Szubanski opened her fat trap last year. Two equally hot headed parties were at one anothers throats about 'their' supposed rights and views being superior. It's not just neanderthals. Those views have long been ingrained in many city born motorists. I know idiots like that personally...I'm related to one. Always backs down when challenged. Always. Cowards and bullies, nothing more.

BTW, some of the uptight lardy dah cyclists in the city don't help anyone. Lots think they are some physical marvel. Same psychological deal with tall poppy syndrome. It's not made up...there are buffoons and braggants who trash our Olympians non stop. Don't win a medal...you suck. You choked. Oh an Olympian is upset for not winning...crybaby, loser, bad sport. No, they were simply fed for a long time the BELIEF they were no.1. Then they fall short and are upset, because given their psychological predisposition, it is a failure NOT WINNING. Totally understandable when a kid can't shrug that off, put on a fake smile and back slap everyone else. People fail to think and hop into people's shoes all the time. It's not easy behaving yourself when emotionally distraught with a camera beaming images of your gob crying profusely into the tv's of millions worldwide.

That's why I'm not bagging out any of the medal winners at the Olympics. As I said, good on them. Good on Wiggins. I don't have to think they are crystal clear clean doping wise, but I won't knock them for winning. Let alone falling short. People tend to forget to differentiate between the manner and the means presented in both performance pre and posts events.

 

[Galic Ho]

Seriously. The Daily Mail comments section is wacked out. Even the people commenting probably don't behave like that in real life, it's the power of the internet. People say and act in ways they wouldn't in real life. The percentage of the population that comment on the Daily Mail website isn't representative. It's not even all British, many Americans and expats comment on it. It has a international audience.

I live here but you're trying to make a statement about a 'sizable percentage' of the British people based on a comments section of a website. It's isn't justified.

Oh princess, read the damn article. It was an exception you git. The people making the claims one of which I used as an example WERE BRITISH FFS!!! Why would a yank or an Aussie or some Europhile go on about Queen Vicky?

They wouldn't. Get your panties in a bunch why don't you...

The comments were representative of a portion of the British public. Otherwise they wouldn't be there. Nice logic fail. Just like the Aussie journalists are represnetative...I simply stated they were idiots. Simply state next time you don't agree with them FFS. It's not that hard.

How about you guys copy the Greeks. Go round up all the undesirables and get rid of them. Oh and if the missive above about who really reads the papers is true...housewives carry great sway. They cook, they clean and do other duties. All the staples on a balanced life for your average Brit. They matter...ask the politicians. **** off the wives, you are in a mess.

 

[killswitch]

BS. Lewis and Powell jumped + 8.90 in Tokyo. It was also a so called fast track back then. And all of a sudden they only make it fast for runners nowadays? You really don´t think that, right?

What do C."lean" Lewis and Powell have to do with the London track? My post cited the commentary of a former triple jump olympic champion who is in London right now.

LOL at "an athlete is struggling so he is clean".

 

[Damien]

Oh princess, read the damn article. It was an exception you git. The people making the claims one of which I used as an example WERE BRITISH FFS!!! Why would a yank or an Aussie or some Europhile go on about Queen Vicky?

They wouldn't. Get your panties in a bunch why don't you...

I am perfectly calm. I am simply stating that the people that comment on The Daily Mail website are not a accurate representation of anything other than the type of people that comment on such websites. It's a self-selecting demographic and their views are probably made worse than they are because of the cloak of the internet. For example would you really call me a 'git' for expressing such an opinion if we were having this discussion in a pub? The internet is full of this kind of thing. You can't use it as a barometer.

The comments were representative of a portion of the British public. Otherwise they wouldn't be there. Nice logic fail. Just like the Aussie journalists are represnetative...I simply stated they were idiots. Simply state next time you don't agree with them FFS. It's not that hard.

I don't agree with them. However I think your over-stating their relevance. Even Daily Mail readers aren't like those commentators. The people on there are always angry.

How about you guys copy the Greeks. Go round up all the undesirables and get rid of them. Oh and if the missive above about who really reads the papers is true...housewives carry great sway. They cook, they clean and do other duties. All the staples on a balanced life for your average Brit. They matter...ask the politicians. **** off the wives, you are in a mess.

The missive about who reads the papers is a comedy bit from one of our classic comedy shows. It's funny because the stereotypes ring kind of true but that's what they are, stereotypes, it has no place in a real discussion about Britain.