Like Shelby Horihan, Brianna McNeill has been issued a doping ban. However, there is one important difference.
Eugene, Oregon — Not for Shelby Houlihan and her Head scratch case Saturday’s doping story, athletics, involving pork burritos, may have been Brianna McNeill.
Like Hurihan, the champion who defends the Olympics in the 100-meter hurdles, McNeil has been hit by a ban that puts her future at risk. Like Houlihan, McNeil’s case passed through an international drug testing service and was brought to the Supreme Court of Sport.
Unlike Houlihan, McNeil stood at the starting line of Saturday’s Olympic trial, despite being convicted of violating doping rules.
This is one of several areas where the case details are different. But what they all have in common is true for so many dopings. They are complex, confusing, and sometimes ridiculous. Blow up the way of Furihan Earlier this week, they described the entire system as fraudulent, unfair, or, at worst, corrupted.
“The perceived turmoil is understandable and unfortunately undermines confidence in the system,” said Travis Tigert, CEO of the United States Anti-Doping Agency. Everyone is confident in it. “
But being confident in the system often means that you need to dig deeper into the details of the case, rather than quickly scrolling through social media to get an idea of who’s right or wrong. To do.
Unlike Houlihan, McNeal has not been accused of actually using performance-enhancing drugs. Instead, she has been accused of “tampering within the results management process,” a so-called whereabouts violation. If Houlihan’s case has a gray area (there is a compelling argument that people can test positive after eating a particular type of meat), it is even more difficult to identify the case of whereabouts.
“Briana McNeill is not an anti-doping person, so she has appealed to (decision) and firmly believes she has not violated anti-doping rules,” her lawyer Howard Jacobs said she would run. Said in this month’s statement accompanying. At trial.
The full details of her case have not been released.
How would you describe a doping breach in an athlete who has not been accused of doping? All Olympic applicants are responsible for keeping a detailed log of where and when they are, so that they can be tested at any time without notice. In general, athletes are allowed two free passes. The third athlete causes an anti-doping breach, not where the testers say they are when they appear.
McNeil is looking at her second breach related to whereabouts rules, and the five-year ban she is suing shows a worsening situation. However, she appealed the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, a high court, and CAS appeared in an Olympic trial to prevent irreparable damage to her chances of racing in Tokyo if the court were overthrown. I ordered you to allow me to do it. Ban.
When the USA Track & Field booked a place for her in an Olympic trial with the prospect that she could appeal her own CAS decision to the Swiss Supreme Court of Justice, she said it was giving to Furihan. It’s the same kind of protection you’ve come up with. In fact, she appealed and the Swiss judge refused to grant her immediate relief as usual.
All of that helped keep her away from trial. However, over a 24-hour period, Tygart’s office, USATF, US Olympic and Paralympic Committee, and World Athletics phones hung up asking athletes and their agents to explain why the rules seemed. .. Fine-tuned for Furihan.
USATF argued that this was not the case. They, in fact, had not received official notice of the ban on Houlihan when they made their first decision, and they intended to keep her options, but would never ignore anti-doping rules. explained.
But over and over again, anti-doping rules have been bent, molded and chosen to lead to specific results.
It happened in the long run and stupid Russian doping scandal.
Christian Coleman will be a favorite at this year’s Olympic 100 meters. It was not prohibited due to a violation of whereabouts information. Coleman was first amnesty for a rule specialty that could easily be prosecuted. A few months later, when international testing authorities came to look for him, he had no such luck and he wasn’t where he said he was.
“We are constantly improving every program to make it easier and more effective for clean athletes,” says Tigert. “But for athletes around the world who take whereabouts responsibility seriously, it works very well and is essential for successful unannounced testing, and ultimately protects all athletes. “
Those who line up with McNeil on the hurdle may ask you to be different. One of the remaining questions for Saturday’s qualifying was what would happen to the 4th place finisher if McNeil won one of the three Olympic spots in the trial and was later declared ineligible. did.
Understand the difference between US Olympic truck doping bans
Source link Understand the difference between US Olympic truck doping bans