I took the rule number form a post elsewhere, but it is the IOC who have stipulated the responsibility (not a right a responsibility) to select on grounds of example too. Quick search shows this on page 3 para 1http://www.olympic.org/Documents/Reference_documents_Factsheets/Roles_and_responsabilities.pdf
Not a whopper by me at all, but somethign that you seem keen to overlook. The IOC says NOC's HAVE TO select on the basis of the example not just performance.
In the current version of the charter it is section 4 on NOC's Subsection 2, article 2.1 that's page 60 of the July 2011 Charter linked to below.http://www.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdf
Full Text says
"2. NOCs’ tasks:
The NOCs perform the following tasks:
2.1 They constitute, organise and lead their respective delegations at the Olympic
Games and at the regional, continental or world multi-sports competitions
patronised by the IOC. They decide upon the entry of athletes proposed by
their respective national federations. Such selection shall be based not only on
the sports performance of an athlete but also on his ability to serve as an example
to the sporting youth of his country. The NOCs must ensure that the entries
proposed by the national federations comply in all respects with the provisions of
the Olympic Charter."
Got it? So if the BOA decide that having a drug ban means you are not a good example and choose not to make such people eligibel for selelction they are acting in line with their RESPONSIBILITY to the Olympic Charter.
Your reliabilty is in tatters by not checking your references.Can you advise were you got the mis info on rule 31 as I have seen no ref by anyone else.
I see the point about ability to serve as an example and I can see how an offence many years ago can influence how this ability is perceived.This is a very strong point and I thank you for bringing it forth.I would counter by suggesting that if it is only drug offences that warrant application of this then it highly selective to the point of being a further sanction.I am not aware of one case of criminal or antisocial or immoral behavior having caused non selection.I think we have a very serious offender in boxing.
I append the eligibility Code for reference.
40 Eligibility Code*
To be eligible for participation in the Olympic Games, a competitor, coach, trainer or other
team official must comply with the Olympic Charter, including the conditions of eligibility
established by the IOC, as well as with the rules of the IF concerned as approved by the
IOC, and the competitor, coach, trainer or other team official must be entered by his NOC.
The above-noted persons must:
– respect the spirit of fair play and non violence, and behave accordingly; and
– respect and comply in all aspects with the World Anti-Doping Code.
Bye-law to Rule 40
1. Each IF establishes its sport’s own eligibility criteria in accordance with the Olympic
Charter. Such criteria must be submitted to the IOC Executive Board for approval.
2. The application of the eligibility criteria lies with the IFs, their affiliated national federations
and the NOCs in the fields of their respective responsibilities.
3. Except as permitted by the IOC Executive Board, no competitor, coach, trainer or
official who participates in the Olympic Games may allow his person, name, picture or
sports performances to be used for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.
4. The entry or participation of a competitor in the Olympic Games shall not be conditional
on any financial consideration.
It is still noted that you refuse to deal with Beloff and also not retract your allegation of his bias due to the influence of money.