Then read the arguments as to why FP…
Nope, but you understand the concept that they could have had a 4th who wasn’t going to lead to their DQ and perhaps they could have done equally well…
2 Likes
But that decision would’ve had to have been taken long before, the US with faster individual runners couldn’t even make the final, so it’s almost certainly not as simple as just substituting in any old runner, they have to train etc.
The drugs in question were taken within the last couple of days before the event, (or a blood bag of course, but that’s just a different offence)
That sort of revisionism has England winning the Euro’s if they’d just picked some different penalty takers - of course it could’ve been true, but it’s not what they did.
Do they have to physically give them back or just stricken from records kind of thing?
UK took 8 male sprinters from which they could select (iirc), and, although they should train more, I think it is fair to say that sprinters train…
nope, it just recognises that if you don’t pick dopers and win a medal, you are less likely to have to give it back…
1 Like
give them back (although i don’t know how or if this is enforced)…
1 Like
Could make for an interesting plot for Taken 6 (or whatever)
1 Like
When you get given a medal surely it becomes your own personal property (cf trophies that have to be handed back to go to the subsequent winner) to do of as you will. You could sell them I suppose, many medals are. I doubt the IOC give medals out expecting that they retain legal title and can reclaim them if something like a failed drug test arises.
1 Like
I think they do have to give them back. Besides, surely the medal and that race are now sullied for the other 3 so would they want to keep the medal?
It does seem a bit bizarre that Ujah would test positive in competition. Does this stuff give the sort of short-term gains that would make it worth the risk of taking 2 days before the race? Shades of Ben Johnson in Seoul. He or someone on the team must have brought the gear with him into Japan too.
Don’t these guys know about the “glow time” on the stuff that they are taking? Surely you use it in training and hide behind the sofa when the OOC drugs testers come knocking on the door? More people seem to get banned for “missing” tests than for actual positives.
The old “If I was going to cheat do you think I would be that stupid?” defence.
2 Likes
Not in any of the established literature for it - it’s quite strange as I said above, it’s such an old drug that you would’ve thought an amateur could avoid in competition testing for it - there’s a chance there’s a more sensitive test rolled out at the olympics, but again the oddity on that is that it’s not an in competition drug, perhaps there is some recovery aspect and the microdose which would normally not be detectable or something.
Or it was a genuine screw up, and the guy’s just incompetent and was using some stupid supplement that contained it, that seems unlikely, but it is pretty weird on what’s known.
3 Likes
He certainly seems to think so:
Michael Johnson handed back Olympic gold medal with furious outburst: ‘Tainted by drugs’ | TV & Radio | Showbiz & TV | Express.co.uk
3 Likes
Guilty AF! or is it innocent? I can’t remember.
3 Likes
Maybe not:
“ The sprinter shocked the athletics world when he took the extraordinary step of giving back the award after a drug doping scandal hit the USA team.”
My emphasis
I can’t really remember the case, but the article implies that Pettigrew admitted to drug taking at a later date, so he didn’t actually get a ban that covered the Sydney Olympics.
1 Like
But they were awarded according to certain conditions…which exclude margarine gains… 
Well - still waiting on b test result. It’s not conclusive yet
I think B samples are only there to protect you from chain of custody screw ups aren’t they?
In other words, his A sample is absolute proof that the drugs were in his system ( or at least his test sample) . Could be wrong but I that’s the theory behind it.
Think so, tampering and contamination etc.