Athletics Weekly

Shot Putters Targeted

News, reports and results from the UK and the rest of the world

Shot Putters Targeted

Postby Geoff » Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:33 pm

Two of Britain's best shot putters refused a test at Loughborough on the weekend of 9/10 January. Apparently their coach advised them not to take it! This was the result of a targeted test by UKADA following intelligence received. I'm not sure whether to name names but they are on another board.

I have heard doubts raised for some time about the coach concerned being involved in our sport and it was certainly a risk allowing him to mentor and coach out of a HiPAC. He has now been sacked from any role within UKA/England Athletics and the two athletes will receive a two year ban.

The press will run with this and it could be quite uncomfortable for our sport. I have not known this type of targeted testing based on intelligence done in this country before. Chambers was a little different.

Who said it couldn't happen here?
Geoff
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:33 am

Postby simonlangley » Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:50 pm

Were the 2 shot putters based at Loughborough Uni?
simonlangley
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: North London

Postby Geoff » Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:05 am

Yes as far as I know. One at least is a student and the other used to be.
Geoff
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:33 am

Postby Sportsman29 » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:14 am

Wow don't really expect this sort of story to come from our country. Thought the Dwain Chambers case was a one off really. Will no doubt be hearing some bad headlines about British athletics and Athletics in general i should think soon enough.

Strange also as Britain has no decent shot putters anyway...........
Sportsman29
 
Posts: 1401
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:56 pm

Postby Jeremy » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:30 am

I've been at Lee Valley the last 2 weekends (as a spectator and coach).

The last weekend quite a few people mentioned this story and had a few different opinions: from the coach being "grassed" to the conditions at Loughborough being completely insanitary.

My own view is that the "anti-doping" story will run and run. Yes there will be more failed tests. I feel that one of the first things they could do is change the words "anti-doping" to "Targeting Drugs Cheats". I have campaigned before for the use of lie-detector tests. Certainly for those who take funding, and certainly for those who have competed for UK in the past and now take tax-payers money from the Sport that gave them their success and fame in the first place.

Apparently UKA have had the Gold medals for our UK 4x400m boys since last May, and maybe it's the embarassment of this "anti-doping/drigs cheat" cropping up again that has meant postponing giving their medals because the drugs story is bigger than the "Gold" story.

Surely that's not right or fair for the athletes who were cheated and any other athletes and coaches who work so hard for their dreams.

Have a look at Ty Washington's "Killaroid" story. In fact have a look at his whole story. This magnificent man has handed back so many medals because his team mates have cheated, including his room mate of many years.

He also is being largely frozen out by the IAAF and the American equivalent of UKA. They just don't seem to care.

I really wonder what these "National/International/Bodies" have to hide. As for the UK, let's line up the Athletics Champions from the past, who now get paid by the tax payer, and are in charge of the running of our sport, to line up now, show some leadership and take the lie-detector test.

If there are skeleton's in the closet let's get them out now, not during our 2012 Olympics and not after. Let's get to the truth; where's the harm in that?

Let's provide a clear path for our successful 2012 Olympic medallists; there aren't going tp be that many in athletics, so let's not have their glory stolen by any potential cheats, both now, then and from the past.

Jeremy Tigar
Jeremy
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 10:09 pm

Postby Javelin Sam » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:43 am

i heard about this on friday. Quite shocked that they have been so stupid and also very disappointed in the coach. I had tapped into the coach for help with the shot putter i coach and now feel let down by their actions.
Javelin Sam
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Essex

Postby Javelin Sam » Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:51 am

i wonder if mr winch has received a call to fill the vacancy held by the now disgraced coach!?
Javelin Sam
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Essex

Postby MikeWinch » Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:32 pm

No he hasn't Sam. I have not been contacted AT ALL by any of them, except after my initiation of communication last month, largely due I suspect in my expressed opinions on the general state of play.

These athletes must be bonkers in this day and age. They have done nothing except create negative vibes around our sport and the event, and for what ?

Looking more broadly it will be interesting if this so called 'intelligence' based approach is actually in operation, as it begs the question as to who puts the info in their domain in the first place. I would hate to think that innocent (or though seemingly not in this case) people can be smeared and investigated on some nobody's say so.

What has the sport come to when this deemed the necessary way forward ? It seems to be in the final throws of its useful life, certainly as far as press are concerned.
MikeWinch
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:59 am
Location: In the real world !

Postby interested observer » Wed Jan 20, 2010 7:42 pm

having read the newspaper report i am slightly amused . do the athletes think they pee on the floor and it then gets mopped up for the sample.

checked uka site for something more definitive and nothing .

if the rumours are true then so glad some coaches and athletes despite pressure from above refused to allow GC anywhere near them . anyone associated with will now be tainted by connection and i cant say that his coaching ideas were exactly inspirational in any case
interested observer
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:10 pm
Location: midlands

Postby simonlangley » Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:56 pm

So who are these two shot putters?
simonlangley
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:15 pm
Location: North London

Postby interested observer » Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:09 pm

to make sure that i clear up one matter . i have not said all athletes coached by gc are taking drugs . i am saying it would appear from reports that the coach stopped the athletes taking the test which has the direct implication he knew they would have a positive result.
if this is the case i would not let anyone i was responsible for any where near him until it is proven he had no knowledge of what was going on.

it would be good if UKA would make a statement to at least confirm what at the moment is conjecture based on a newspaper report.

the fact that GC is a person i have no time for is based on personal experiance and is an opinion only but certainly one i am entitled to hold

its just possible that the mirror needed to sell more papers but i woulds have thought that someone would have come on a forum to establish the true facts
interested observer
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:10 pm
Location: midlands

Postby jambob » Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:58 pm

simonlangley wrote:So who are these two shot putters?


There is a thread on AD that names them.
jambob
 
Posts: 515
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 4:15 pm

Postby Geoff » Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:03 pm

Interested Observer it is more than just a newspaper report although I expect a lot more to be in the papers over the next few days. Quite a few people saw what happened and others were aware of what they were up to. The test was done because someone told them what they thought they were taking, probably an athlete and/or coach.

There's a lot of stuff being banded around which is difficult to corroborate and which is not very pleasant. Don't discount the possibility that UKA were aware of this before the test.

Many in the sport have been very wary about this coach and found it surprising he was getting so involved.

Can AW advise whether we can name names?
Geoff
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:33 am

Postby Jeremy » Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:55 am

MikeWinch wrote:No he hasn't Sam. I have not been contacted AT ALL by any of them, except after my initiation of communication last month, largely due I suspect in my expressed opinions on the general state of play.

These athletes must be bonkers in this day and age. They have done nothing except create negative vibes around our sport and the event, and for what ?

Looking more broadly it will be interesting if this so called 'intelligence' based approach is actually in operation, as it begs the question as to who puts the info in their domain in the first place. I would hate to think that innocent (or though seemingly not in this case) people can be smeared and investigated on some nobody's say so.

What has the sport come to when this deemed the necessary way forward ? It seems to be in the final throws of its useful life, certainly as far as press are concerned.


I agree with this Mike. It is frightening that and I quote (again) "I would hate to think that innocent (or though seemingly not in this case) people can be smeared and investigated on some nobody's say so. "

Unfortunately as it is clear that the people who run UKA don't have much passion for he sport and their skills seem to be based on those of Peter Mandleson and Alistair Campbell, no political shenanigans would surprise me. The new UKA hieracrchy introduced themselves with a massive own goal on Dwain Chambers; followed up by unbelievable procrastination with the 1997 400 relay boys. Meantime they've done absolutely bugger all to help get rid of the "Drugs Ban" on a fello Vet athlete, when the whole world new he wasn't cheating (including the UK Sport Doctors who loof at such things). I've written else where about my ideas on how to solve the "Drugs issue", so want go on any more here.

Any way i look forward to working with you with a couple of athletes who will probably overtake these "two unfortunate and misguided" individuals.

Catch up soon

Jeremy
Jeremy
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 10:09 pm

Postby Dutch » Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:40 am

jambob wrote:
simonlangley wrote:So who are these two shot putters?

There is a thread on AD that names them.

What is AD, and what's the URL?
Dutch
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:22 am

Postby Laps » Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:28 am

Dutch wrote:
jambob wrote:
simonlangley wrote:So who are these two shot putters?

There is a thread on AD that names them.

What is AD, and what's the URL?


http://athleticsdaily.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=uka&action=display&thread=4960
Laps
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:01 am

Postby fangio » Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:32 am

Jeremy

That's intersting I though UKA had to sign up to the UK Anti-Doping Agency, and it was the UK Anti-Doping Agency NOT UKA who both conducted the tests and had the confidential hot line.

I thought that UKA had to sign up to the newly created UKADA or they would not be able to compete in international competition as this was the indepednet agency for this country.

As such I beleived that "I would hate to think that innocent (or though seemingly not in this case) people can be smeared and investigated on some nobody's say so. " would correctly be applied to UKADA NOT UKA, and it woudl have had severe reprecussionson the sport had UKA not signed up to UKADA.

Oh well turns out iwas wrong adn the whole whistleblower policy is donw to UKA and they do the investigating and testing........ noi hang on a second I was right and it's just another example of UKA being blamed for something they had to do.

On the point of "I would hate to think that innocent (or though seemingly not in this case) people can be smeared and investigated on some nobody's say so. " I would hate to think that athletes knew something was going on and did not report it, I woudl hate to think that there was no confidential investigation capability that did nto smear people.

However the nature of human beings is that someone talks, in this instance the memerbship of AD includes the only perosn so far to mention (and possibly smear) the athetles by name, and was certianly the first site to mention (and possibly smear) the coach. The problem is not the investigations or whislte blowing, the problem is the willingness of people to smear, however from what has been said on various forums peopel have been talkign in a particular way about the coach concerned for years, it is most certainly not the system of investigation that has lead to accusations. The press and the governing bodies have not smeared anyone, I have yet to see anyone (other than the AD membership) mentioning names of athletes. Teh question then emerges, what happens if the athetles were innocent, do UKA or UKADA now have to release their names as beign innocent because some silly sod decided that prior to any investigation they would put thier names on a website and cause suspicion?

The only question is whether the benefits of people being able to report things are outweighed by the stupidity of those who name names prior to the release of a negative the outcome of any investigations. Perosnally I think far too many athletes say they had their suspicions, adn far too many peopel are smeared already, adn having an offical route they can go down to put up or shut up may help with that, and more importantly may catch some cheats.

Dutch

AD is Athletics Daily, and it is full of smears, unproven or in many case unevidenced allegations and a very one sided arguments, where you can be banned and abused if you disagree with the opinions of the forum owner/his cronies. I can evidence those points if you would like bu this is hardly the place for it, pm me if you would like to have the titles of threads that prove my points.
fangio
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:39 pm

Postby Oleg » Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:11 pm

This post has been edited by the site administrator
Please read our forum guidelines
http://www.athletics-weekly.com/forum/v ... .php?t=228
Oleg
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:48 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby benn » Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:42 pm

WRONG .You may find out to your cost now that naming supposed name's is wrong until an investigation is carried out :roll:
benn
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:26 pm

Postby Oleg » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:48 pm

Oleg wrote:This post has been edited by the site administrator
Please read our forum guidelines
http://www.athletics-weekly.com/forum/v ... .php?t=228


I didn't suggest or accuse anyone of taking drugs. I just said that I heard ***** and ****** were the people in question. Its not me making an accusation but saying that I hear they are under investigation. Amazing how you let so much cr@p sit around on here and you pounce on this like a disease!!

(edited again by admin)
Oleg
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:48 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby benn » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:50 pm

But you were the one who named an innocent man who wasnt even there at the time
benn
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:26 pm

Postby Oleg » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:55 pm

That may or may not be true - I just gave the names of the people I heard - if you would like to correct me, feel free.
Oleg
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:48 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby fatmanrunning » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:55 pm

and you've just put two names down again :?

just because someone else has had the poor judgement to mention them elsewhere doesn't mean it's right to put names on here.
fatmanrunning
 
Posts: 300
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 11:57 pm

Postby Oleg » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:59 pm

What happens elsewhere (I assume you mean AD which I avoid) is irrelevant. Somebody asked who was under investigation, I wrote who I heard it was, I didn't make any accusations so I didn't break the rules of the forum.
Oleg
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:48 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby admin » Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:28 pm

Oleg, you are a valued member of the site but you seem to have a deathwish on this matter! Please respect the rules of the forum.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 8:22 pm

Postby damienc » Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:31 pm

Oleg wrote:What happens elsewhere (I assume you mean AD which I avoid) is irrelevant. Somebody asked who was under investigation, I wrote who I heard it was, I didn't make any accusations so I didn't break the rules of the forum.


I agree. An open forum such as this should allow freedom of speech. Oleg didn't make an accusation and just mentioned two names that were being thrown about.
damienc
 
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 10:50 pm

Postby Oleg » Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:51 pm

Indeed, apparently not so open anymore, I see I've been edited again! Perhaps they put Frank Plunkett in charge of moderation?!
Oleg
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:48 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby Caroline » Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:01 pm

I would imagine that anything like this, particularly something that involves whistle-blowing (so I understand) has to have a full and thorough investigation. The fact that it hasn't hit the papers in glorious technicolour indicates that there is some sort of gagging order on this. However, the names are being spoken in athletic circles globally so I understand... I think it's just a question of watching this space. I'm sure that all will be revealed in the fullness of time.
Caroline
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:06 pm

Postby Geoff » Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:15 pm

We do have to be a little careful what we say about this although it opens up a pandorra's box of issues. A lot of people in the sport know who was involved and many saw what happened but my concern is the apparent uniqueness of this case with the alleged involvement of a coach who was at least partly employed by England Athletics. The celebrity nature of this is also different to previous cases.

I am somewhat saddened about the involvement of the athletes but disgusted if they were led down this path by their coach. It is a wake up call for us all who maybe believed this sort of thing couldn't happen in this country. It also raises questions about how much governing bodies can do to distance suspicious, but not found guilty, coaches from similar positions.

We will in time know the full story. I hope the athletes are truthful and cooperate with UKADA and UKA. Perhaps the coach will be equally honest.

This comes at a time when UKA have had a series of problems recruiting coaches and establishing a structure for throws in this country. What will this do for the credibility of heavy throws in the UK?
Geoff
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:33 am

Postby Javelin Sam » Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:20 pm

Javelin Sam
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Essex

Next

Return to Current events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 7 guests

 

Athletics Weekly Limited © 2010. Terms of use

Design by The Church of London