OT: track..update on Sha'Carri Richardson

[Adesmar123]

In fact, the state of Connecticut empaneled a group of board-certified physicians who have named dozens of conditions for which cannabis may be prescribed. Today in Connecticut, fully 58,000 people are being prescribed cannabis for a range of illnesses and conditions, including multiple sclerosis, nausea due to chemotherapy for cancer, and many others, and have been for eight years.

So can anyone say with a straight face that cannabis is a dangerous drug when tens of thousands of people are using it under doctors' directions? Nonsense!

Interesting response, when questioned attack the person. Ad hominem attacks are all the rage in current society.

 

[Husky25]

I don't see many arguing whether pot is dangerous or not. It's against the rules set up by a governing body. Ricky Moore and Kirk King were suspended in 1996 for accepting a plane ticket home for the holidays. It was a dumb rule then and will be pretty much 100% legal for this upcoming season, but a rule was broken and they paid the consequences, in missed games.

Not much difference here.

 

[Plebe]

Should we eliminate from competition anyone who drank a beer between workouts, or after a big win? Of course not. There comes a time when ridiculous is ridiculous, everyone knows it, and changes should be made to the rule.

Beer is not on the prohibited list. So to answer your question, no.
Pot is. Big difference.

 

[HuskyNan]

It's a stupid rule. Never should have been enacted. It's cruel. It's dumb. The rule should be eliminated, and that athlete permitted to compete.

If Richardson were the, say, 200th best sprinter in the country, would you be as outraged?

I‘m not addressing @Fairfield Fan but musing, why are rules applied to top performers deemed stupid but the average schmoe can get bounced for the same reason without any fanfare whatsoever? We’re hearing about Richardson but she’s a star in her sport. Who else failed the test and why haven’t we heard anything about them to stir up the outrage machine on Twitter? Is the anti-pot rule bad or is it only bad when it affects a star?

 

[LwrcasefaN]

As far as her current circumstance, there really is no argument. She broke a rule, dumb or not, and she admitted to it. Move on. The worst thing about a rule or law...is to agree on it and then conveniently not agree on it. The best time to change a rule or law...is when it isn't being used.

 

[Plebe]

I‘m not addressing @Fairfield Fan but musing, why are rules applied to top performers deemed stupid but the average schmoe can get bounced for the same reason without any fanfare whatsoever? We’re hearing about Richardson but she’s a star in her sport. Who else failed the test and why haven’t we heard anything about them to stir up the outrage machine on Twitter? Is the anti-pot rule bad or is it only bad when it affects a star?

On that note, I found this article informative and interesting, including the following excerpt:

[...] Richardson is far from alone in running afoul of WADA’s marijuana rules. Americans who served cannabis-related suspensions in the past three years include weightlifters and triathletes, MMA fighters and skateboarders, freestyle skiers and pole vaulters. Richardson isn’t even the only American sprinter whose 2021 season was interrupted by a positive marijuana test. Kahmari Montgomery, who specializes in the 400 meters, accepted a one-month suspension early last month.​

Sha'Carri Richardson's Olympic drug ban: Why is marijuana a prohibited substance?

Marijuana remains on WADA's "prohibited list," even as U.S. states decriminalize it and major American sports leagues no longer punish users.

sports.yahoo.com

 

[Fairfield Fan]

If Richardson were the, say, 200th best sprinter in the country, would you be as outraged?

I‘m not addressing @Fairfield Fan but musing, why are rules applied to top performers deemed stupid but the average schmoe can get bounced for the same reason without any fanfare whatsoever? We’re hearing about Richardson but she’s a star in her sport. Who else failed the test and why haven’t we heard anything about them to stir up the outrage machine on Twitter? Is the anti-pot rule bad or is it only bad when it affects a star?

The answer is that the rule is absurd for all athletes. It's just become the focus because its application resulted in perhaps the fastest sprinter in the world not being permitted to compete at the pinnacle of the sport.

And it doesn't matter that it's against the rule, while drinking beer isn't. Cannabis use should be permitted, just like that other intoxicant, alcohol. It doesn't enhance performance. Indeed, alcohol is clearly damaging to the body, yet it is permitted by the IOC, while cannabis, which doesn't cause cancer, and can't result in an overdose, is prohibited.

It's a travesty. It will be eliminated. But not soon enough.

 

[Fairfield Fan]

Many red herrings here.

Legality of usage in broader society is irrelevant. Just to give one example, there are all sorts of over-the-counter drugs that contain stimulants on the WADA "prohibited list".

"Performance-enhancing" is also irrelevant. Cannabinoids are categorized by WADA as a "substance of abuse" (along with cocaine, heroin, ecstasy, etc.) and are only "prohibited in-competition" (as opposed to, say, anabolic steroids, which are "prohibited at all times")

Richardson is suspended not because of the absurdity of the rule, which is also irrelevant. She's suspended because (as she herself admits) she lacked the discipline and self-control to refrain from consuming a substance that she knew was banned in competition. Elite athletes in drug-tested sports have the responsibility to be meticulous, obsessive even, about everything they put in their bodies.

If there's one thing that I find encouraging for the rest of her career, it's that she's owning her mistake and not trying to shift the blame onto the rule for being stupid.

the absurdity of the rule is the entire point. Cannabis is not a stimulate. Indeed, it's a depressant. So it doesn't enhance performance, and WADA never said it did. In that 2011 article, WADA's chief seemed to suggest that this was all about protecting the athlete. But how can they not prohibit alcohol or tobacco, both of which clearly endanger the life and health of the athlete, but prohibit cannabis, which does not?

This is the beginning of the end of WADA's embarrassing ban on cannabis. It's indefensible, and it will come off the list. Just not before this injustice is meted out to yet another person of color.

 

[mustafa]

All she had to do is follow the rules, not too hard to do.

Everyone always has excuses.

Another athlete, who was able to or willing to actually follow the rules, now has an opportunity.

 

[Dokey]

All she had to do is follow the rules, not too hard to do.

Everyone always has excuses.

Another athlete, who was able to or willing to actually follow the rules, now has an opportunity.

It isn’t who follows the rules—especially one that is from another era— but who is the fastest or the best. You just hand out asterisks.

 

[Dokey]

It isn’t who follows the rules—especially one that is from another era— but who is the fastest or the best. Otherwise you just hand out asterisks.

 

[Spaceman213J]

She broke the rules and she admits it.

Whether you agree with it or not makes no difference. Currently, it is a banned substance.

It is probably going to change in the near future, but she knew she was violating a current rule.

Now... we are talking about a group that let the KGB handle the test of their own athletes in Sochi, when the world knew the Russian athletes were doping and the group that is letting men compete in women's sports. This isn't a group known for their sound reasoning.

 

[AmeriConn]

Why haven’t Snoop and Willi Nelson weighed in?

 

[Bald Husky]

I agree that the rule is out of touch with todays reality, and it is a shame that she was suspended. Still, throughout her career the substance has been banned, she new that, so why would she be so stupid to engage with the stuff now, especially with the Olympics on the horizon.

 

[Magruber]

I agree that the rule is out of touch with todays reality, and it is a shame that she was suspended. Still, throughout her career the substance has been banned, she new that, so why would she be so stupid to engage with the stuff now, especially with the Olympics on the horizon.

I agree with most of your post but will add:

1. It's NOT a shame that she's suspended. It was 100% the right thing to do.

2. Yes, she is stupid for doing what she did.

3. Actions have consequences.

 

[Beemer]

Give me a break....if you're an athlete and you know there is an ingredient in whatever you're taking/drinking/smoking on the prohibited list then you.do.not.use.it. and you especially do not use it right before a competition where there is drug testing. I mean this is basic common sense.

It doesn't matter if the rule is wrong, out of date or whatever. You don't break them. If you do you will face consequences. Again, basic common sense. If change is needed then get it changed.

Maybe Richardson thought the rules wouldn't apply to her since she is a top sprinter. Oops. Now she has forfeited (and rightly so) her opportunity to run in the Olympics. I give her full props for admitting what she did was wrong and not seeking to overturn the suspension, that is refreshing to see in an elite athlete.

 

[darkstar1]

Beer is not on the prohibited list. So to answer your question, no.
Pot is. Big difference.

I think, or at least hope, that the point is that the time has come to drop the rule, not that Richardson should be allowed to run. I agree the rule should go, but she broke the rule knowing the consequences, which are much less severe now than years ago. End of story for me.

 

[Plebe]

I think, or at least hope, that the point is that the time has come to drop the rule, not that Richardson should be allowed to run.

An online petition that has received over a half-million signatures is calling for the latter, not the former. So, at least for many folks, overturning her suspension is indeed the point.

Petition to reinstate America’s fastest woman nears goal

The petition has nearly 568,000 signatures.

thehill.com

 

[Husky25]

An online petition that has received over a half-million signatures is calling for the latter, not the former. So, at least for many folks, overturning her suspension is indeed the point.

Petition to reinstate America’s fastest woman nears goal

The petition has nearly 568,000 signatures.

thehill.com

What happens if they get to 600,000 signatures that would not have had they not reached the previous "goal" of 500,000?

 

[LwrcasefaN]

I agree with most of your post but will add:

1. It's NOT a shame that she's suspended. It was 100% the right thing to do.

2. Yes, she is stupid for doing what she did.

3. Actions have consequences.

Under the circumstances (grieving her deceased Mom))...I wouldn't classify her as stupid. Everyone handles grief in their own way. And yes...there are consequences.

 

[Blakeon18]

It's interesting. The ban...as it stands...includes the 100 meter dash. But the ban is lifted...assuming she passes drug tests....before the 4 by 100 relay. As I understand it, her exclusion from the relay possibiliites is a USOC decision.
Somewhere in this thread a poster says that the IOC does not allow you to include relay possibilities who are currently banned.
If that is so...does that mean that the USOC could add her name....bouncing someone else....after her 30 day ban is over?
Then the IOC would be OK with her running in the relays? Is it basically up to the USOC whether she is added to that list or not....after 30 days pass?

Their statement did seem clear....essentially...it wouldn't be fair to USA competitors who followed the rules to allow one who didn't to run.

 

[Cornell Lt]

Gone are the days when someone would put themselves in this position and everyone would say "tough luck" you knew the rules and screwed up and now you suffer the consequences. Now you have a percentage who want to pardon her actions and blame the rule instead of the athlete.

 

[Magruber]

Gone are the days when someone would put themselves in this position and everyone would say "tough luck" you knew the rules and screwed up and now you suffer the consequences. Now you have a percentage who want to pardon her actions and blame the rule instead of the athlete.

1000% right.

Everyone has excuses and justifications.
Just crazy.

These days we always look to have reasoning, justifications and excuses for criminal actions. In the corner of criminals. Societal outrage in favor of the criminal.
Where is the support of the innocent victim and the rules and law? Gone that's where?

Commit crimes and break rules and laws AND modern society will come loaded with a full boat of excuses for you.

 

[Jmul760170]

Beer is not on the prohibited list. So to answer your question, no.
Pot is. Big difference.

I remember Ben Johnson during interviews, it was noted he was drinking beers so he could provide the required urine sample.