Back to Paula and I came in from a bike ride yesterday early evening and listened to BBC 5 live which was on. The psychology of the piece on Paula was most interesting.
Youngish female reporter doing the sports. Why is she doing the sports ? She likes sports and sporting matters - but she is a girl. She must like it enough that she accepts the stacked playing field that is "sports reporting is for men" so has to be very motivated. There were not many GB female sports stars that could make the news during the last 2 decades. Of this number that is smaller than a handful, Paula was probably the most high profile, and if you possessed a sense of fair play, undoubtedly her ultimate victory in setting those world records, over "nasty johnny foreigner who, by the way, to all of us who know stuff about sport - dope" would seem like the ultimate in carma. That she never won an Olympic gold just adds, does not take away from, her status as the star to love.
In this piece, the young reporter stated that the IAAF had investigated and the words she used were "the blood test results that some elements of the press had viewed as indicating doping" and found that this was not the case. Therefore there was no evidence of doping was the ultimate conclusion. She then went on to re-iterate Radcliffe's own statement of the day that she had never used doping products. Then there was a bit of background about Paula and Radcliffe said had her life made hell by all them nasty journalists who tried to expose her and then the bit that really got me, they had a clip of Paula stating that she had to take a stand for all the clean athletes out there and was very pleased to be vindicated by the experts at the IAAF.
The final bit was back to the young female journalist who rounded it off with her own personal assertion that this confirmed that Paula Radcliffe had never doped and had never had anything to do with blood doping.
Th final bit was sad, once again a journalist not recognising what their role is. Please report the facts, and, we can take the opinions of the participants, but right now every half wit who gets in front of a microphone thinks they can offer their own personal insight, which undoubtedly in their own opinion matches that of Solomon, to the uninformed and undoubtedly ignorant masses, one step up from the trough of Animal Farm.
I thought about the denial necessary in the construction of that piece. Undoubtedly the journalist would have been exposed to the provenance of the red flags on Puala's data and would know that this was no wild speculation by journalists whose actions she thought to cast in the role of the worst excesses of the British tabloids. So why didn't she state that the data was viewed by world leaders in the analysis of the blood passport and the data was from a time when dopers were not yet privy to this form of analysis and therefore not managing their test data to give simulated conformity ? She need not have gone that far, but at least giving the fact that some experts had viewed the data and come to alternative conclusions would have given balance, rather than falsely stating the source of the analysis was by dodgy journalists.
Perhaps it is because acceptance that Paula may have doped was going to be,for her, just like it is for an earlier generation, the thought of Alan Wells or others having gone full bore to beat them Ruskies or Americans, taking out two blocks at a time from the bottom of life's Jenga tower - too much to even contemplate. Everything she had built her dream career on would have been based on lies. That journalist was trapped and a victim of the omerta every bit as much as the young lad deciding whether to dope with the best or return back from the continent as a cyclist who couldn't make the grade.
But in the scheme of things, who are the real villains ? OK Lance is a scum bag. Paula stating she "had to do it for all the clean athletes out there" is just too preposterous for words. She is becoming a parody of herself - that quote is on a par with - Lance "I am the most tested athlete on the planet". The pathetic reporting just like the pathetic response of the kid saying, "ok, how much do I take and how often", cannot be condoned, but right now, the people who should be in the frame are the guys at the top. They get the big bucks for shouldering the responsibility. D i c k Pound summed up the situation at the IAAF nicely the other day. "It is a betrayal of what people in charge of the sport should be doing."
Hein and Pat were obvious. Liame D i c k will probably trump Blatter in the rather full annals of sporting corruption. But what of the ones that follow. Coe ran the ethics committee at the IAAF, for years, that should have provided the check and balance to Liame D i c k and wound back his excesses. Cookson was at the UCI for years - when did he ever ask Hein and Pat to explain about the cheque Lance sent in to help with the fight against doping ? Has he a single item on record of ever holding one of that pair to account, before those not in positions of responsibility in the sport took them down ? What Cookson does have on record is employing at the heart of the BC organisation Lance's soigneur and dope transporter's co driver - ex pro Simon Lilistone and keeping him employed and silent whist the story broke of the dope running for Lance. That story broke in late 2003 early 2004. Plenty of time for a person or principle to stand up, even if they are a bit slow witted. Why wouldn't you stand up. Why wouldn't you confront Liame D i c k ? If not then, just how much corruption has to go on before these guys get off their backsides and rock the corrupt craft they were sailing in ?
Coe has eventually relinquished his Nike role. It was outstanding arrogance by Coe to say there was no conflict of interest. That action now, just like his past failure to run the ethics committee so that it looked to manage the ethics at the IAAF, marks his competency. Sadly both he and Cookson are proving, by their own actions, that both are unlikely to have the character to be able to enact the changes needed.
Just as that young female reporter was duped into building her life structure based on a fictional story, reported without check or balance, so, unless there is major change, will another generation of young boys and girls, be duped. I wonder if the old men, unfit for their roles, at the top of sport ever contemplate that ?
"It is a betrayal of what people in charge of the sport should be doing." Well said Mr Pound.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram