Navka skips doping test in Europeans, N/K's Turino trip in jeopardy
- Thread starter rjulie510
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
where Are All The Believers That A Rule Is A Rule Is A Rule And No Exception Should Exist?
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
Waiting to hear if anything comes of this! A rule is a rule, but everything I've heard so far is third-hand based on a single article! Details, please! Though atm, with just what's been said, I would say it looks like she dodged a doping test, and if Kyoko Ina could get a suspension for not being able to do anything at night when they came pounding on her door, Tatiana Navka shouldn't get a free pass, either.
Here is another article:
http://www.sovsport.ru/gazeta/default.asp?id=211688,
it's an Interview with Zhulin (Translation here: http://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34094) and note that this one was taken right after the Free skate, so it was done before the whole doping story arose. According to this, Navka went to hospital for stitches immediatley after the FS, since she was in hospital when the interview was taken. That means that the article stating she got sitches the other day is either wrong, or the doctors advised Navka to wait until the next day (maybe to have a specialist checked her up? There are surgeons specialising in hands solely), but then, it's not like it was Navkas decision to wait for that.
http://www.sovsport.ru/gazeta/default.asp?id=211688,
it's an Interview with Zhulin (Translation here: http://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34094) and note that this one was taken right after the Free skate, so it was done before the whole doping story arose. According to this, Navka went to hospital for stitches immediatley after the FS, since she was in hospital when the interview was taken. That means that the article stating she got sitches the other day is either wrong, or the doctors advised Navka to wait until the next day (maybe to have a specialist checked her up? There are surgeons specialising in hands solely), but then, it's not like it was Navkas decision to wait for that.
ISU has no plans to sanction N/K
New article from The Globe and Mail with comment of ISU officials:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060128/DOPING28/TPSports/TopStories
New article from The Globe and Mail with comment of ISU officials:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060128/DOPING28/TPSports/TopStories
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Thanks Shanti. There is always a way for the ISU to foregoe a RULE in certain cases and for others NOT.
hwell:
hwell:So it appears that N&K will get thru this episode unscathed. It is interesting (actually I consider it absurd) that only one of a pair have to submit a sample. My own opinion: as unfair as it may seem, they should be held to the letter of the rules, just as others have. But, I'm glad they'll go to Turin. It would've been a rather hollow victory for any one else had they not competed.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
I think the Senior Ladies will be hollow without Mao. JMOmhu714 said:
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2003
Joesitz said:
I am one of those, and went "on record" on this thread earlier stating that I wasn't clear on the facts, from one article in one puplication, where I didn't feel clear on the facts.
This article more recently posted http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060128/DOPING28/TPSports/TopStories
Does reference an ISU rule that give the on-site official a certain amount of leeway. I'm still not clear that the "leeway" was properly used in this situation - I'll be interested in more info from those better informed about all the rules, and also how the ISU rules and the World Anti-Doping agency rules tie together. I'm not certain whether the ISU saying "it was OK" will be the end of this matter. Does anyone with more knowledge of the rules than me have an opinion?
All that being said, I think it was STUPID for Navka to leave the arena without peeing in the cup. This opinion assumes it's true that she was able to participate in the medals ceremony, stop in the lounge for a snack, etc. before leaving for the hospital. Why take a chance? If we haven't heard the last of this, and Navka ends up with a suspension, it's her own fault. Lord knows she's been on the podium enough times, and hence I assume has peed in enough cups to know better.
DG
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
I think it's pretty clear from the Globe and Mail story that she was given permission by an ISU official to go to the hospital without taking the drug test. That she had a conversation in Russian with the same ISU official was in the original L'Equipe story. It also would explain why she was concerned about having signed the original paperwork, since she was no longer going to take the test.
Whether the ISU official was right doesn't change his apparent authority to Navka, and from the G&M story, it's also clear she acted in good faith in a procedural matter. (This is not the same as a personal or team physician prescribing or okaying medicine that's in violation of the drug regulations, where the patient is acting in good faith.)
Whether the ISU official was right doesn't change his apparent authority to Navka, and from the G&M story, it's also clear she acted in good faith in a procedural matter. (This is not the same as a personal or team physician prescribing or okaying medicine that's in violation of the drug regulations, where the patient is acting in good faith.)
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
mhu714 said:Guess we're both up early on a Saturday, eh Joe?ITA with you re: Asada. It's absolutely ridiculous to ban someone from one competition while allowing her to compete in all others. If you're good enough to compete you should.
iseev Rules with Speedy as spokesman.