Ban on Carolina Kostner Over
- Thread starter cruzceleste
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
Fun fact. Some argue that that saying has been twisted over time. And that the original referred to literal blood, ie solders dying on the battlefield vs "water of the womb" so the idea being kinda the opposite of how it is used now. Great example of differing standards.
Now you went and made me look it up.
Blood: 1060 kg per cubic meter
Water: 1000
Ice: 920
Skulls of bureucrats: 2900
Research is good for the soul
Very interesting! Sort of a brothers-in-arms forge stronger ties than family meaning. Thanks for that.
But can he get satisfaction?
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2012
Wow, I wonder if the 'real world" cares as much as we do about this? I still can't figure out what is the "right" thing to do about Ms. Kostner's role in this "doping scandal". Does morality have a role in this sport? One could be a mass murderer but they could be the "best" figure skater or a medallist - does that mean they should be stripped of their medal if their actions were not directly related to their sport? And if Kostner's actions are seen as "party to a crime" and part of the olympics and skating is thus part to what extent should her penalty be in comparison to the main perpetrator? In the alternative, she is like 27 or 28 so how realistic is it that she would even skate in 2018? (Not to mention while she has some great skating skills and some wonderful skates she hardly is a the role model for consistent excellency.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2012
Mmmm. So it's Italy's Olympic committee that are pushing for a ban. But the Italian Skating Federation are backing her.
Do any of our Italian members know if there are any reasons why CONI would be out to get Caro?
Don't tell me that they are still holding it against her that she bombed at the Turin Olympics!
Oh Mathman, what have you started with that innocent rolling stone reference...?
Now you went and made me look it up.
Blood: 1060 kg per cubic meter
Water: 1000
Ice: 920
Skulls of bureucrats: 2900
Can I just add, brilliant piece of research. Especially the final statistic...
With regards the impact of a ban, may I just point out that even if Carolina is banned (which I really hope she isn't!), it does not mean that in the future, she will never be able to coach, etc.
Just look at Karel Fayfr. 20-odd years ago, he was given a 3 year ban for doing something much more serious than not reporting doping (This is not the place to elaborate). Yet, that did not spark the end of his career. Rather, he is now coaching quite a few elite level skaters.
Thank you for reminding us of this. We were all kinda getting carried away with it...
CaroLiza_fan
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
:yeahthat:
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2010
Mmmm. So it's Italy's Olympic committee that are pushing for a ban. But the Italian Skating Federation are backing her.
Do any of our Italian members know if there are any reasons why CONI would be out to get Caro?
Don't tell me that they are still holding it against her that she bombed at the Turin Olympics!
My guess is as good as yours, but I'll give it a try.
So, when Schwazer was controled positive (right before 2012 Olympics, so the case was much talked about), he confessed (that's a novelty in itself, usually athletes deny the obvious), but he tried to pass it as “one moment of weakness” and said he did it by himself. Instead, what emerged from the inquiry was that both CONI and FIDAL (Italian Athletics Federation) were well-aware of his cooperation with Dr. Ferrari, and willing to close an eye on it all, hoping for a medal in London. During the 2011-2012 season, all athletes likely to medal in London were told that doping tests (in Italy) would have been “lenient”. In fact, Schwazer was caught by WADA, not by Italian officers who were eager to cover him before and dropped him immediately afterwards.
To cut a long story short, in my opinion CONI wants to be harsh on Carolina to show that they are strict: none of their officials resigned or even apologized for these facts, but Kostner is a household name and so they're going to make her pay for it. As for what you said about Turin, well, right after Kostner's disastrous outcome in Vancouver the Head of CONI (now retired) declared he was “disappointed that she wasn't a true champion”. After 2010 Kostner got her act together majorly, as we all know, so maybe they're holding a grudge for THAT.
Maybe there's a deal: they hushed this thing until Sochi, but now Kostner has to retire/be banned. As for the retroactive ban and the stripping of medals, I hope it's only a threat, but I don't know.
Now, Kostner's main fault is having lied to WADA officers and maybe having been reticent with inquirers, which is not good for a member of Penitentiary Police. A reasonable punishment, IMO, would be to fire her from Fiamme Azzurre (Penitentiary Police Sport Team) and to fine her, maybe even a ban (not a retroactive one). She made a costly mistake and she probably knew/figured something, but she didn't procure the doping for him, and it wasn't up to her to report him/find proof, no more that it was up to Italian officers. Furthermore, 2004 Italian OGM in Racewalking Ivano Brugnetti voiced his own suspicions about Schwazer and Ferrari (before London, of course) and he was told by FIDAL to “shut up and mind his own business”.
Why do inquirers stress out discrepancies between Kostner's and Schwazer's version, (implying that they believe to Schwazer)? Recently, Schwazer said that he wants to compete in Rio (!), and his ban would be expired by then. As it was already explained (by alebi IIRC) Italian Athletics is in such a desperate state that they will support anyone can provide medals, especially at the Olympics.
Mind that, when caught, Schwazer said that he hated his sport, that he took doping to face the pressure to win and so on: very well then, RETIRE and do something else with your life. I think he was pressured into coming back.
I want to add that Hyperbaric Oxygen chamber use is forbidden in Italy but allowed in other countries (Schwazer used it in Oberstdorf at Kostner's place), and it was recommended/prescribed to him by his then-coach (who faces no charges).
Sorry for this very long post.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2011
I couldn't find a source for bureaucrat skull bone; however, most sources I did find listed the density in the 1500-1900 kg/m[SUP]3[/SUP] range. Though I also found that a mutation in chromosome 11 on the LRP5 gene can result in bone densities up to 8(!) times higher than usual.Now you went and made me look it up.
Blood: 1060 kg per cubic meter
Water: 1000
Ice: 920
Skulls of bureucrats: 2900
As for the previous posts about blood being thicker than water, shouldn't we use viscosity? Blood is 3.3 centiPoise (or mPa*s) on average while water is 0.89 cP (numbers from Wolfram Alpha). That demonstrates the increased thickness of blood better than density measurements, I think.
Last edited:
Thank you so much for this post. You brought up a lot of points that the majority of people probably aren't aware of. I think Carolina is more scapegoated an used as an example than many people think.
I do want to point out though that the Fiamme Azzure so far have been on her side and support her.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2012
Please, do not apologise! That was an extremely interesting read, and explains an awful lot (maybe even everything!) about this situation.
Thank you
CaroLiza_fan
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2014
bartlebooth has perfectly told what I also wrote some pages ago (then the thread died of chitchats). This is not a simple "Schwazer case". What emerged from his confession is that there is (or there was) a system, in Italy, that involved elite athletes (from many disciplines) and federations' bosses. I told about a list with many athletes (in activity) who have skipped even 7 doping controls (you know you can't skip more than 2) with the placet of federations and the CONI has done nothing and has still to say something about them. CONI, till now, has only taken a decision for retired athletes (it's not only Kostner, even if she's the most famous in the group), thing that makes many people (who are following this case from the beginning) suspicious. (It's even more strange that they waited 2 years before taking a decision about Carolina when it was clear she has lied from the beginning). As if suddenly CONI wanted to show that they're doing things properly.
CONI has been pressed in the last months to do something about doping. Malagò (the chief) has appeared in a TV program some days ago trying to keep up appearances and they did a (big?) convention yesterday (which, honestly, didn't bring anything new to the system).
CONI is in a difficult situation because, if the case goes on, many federations are risking a lot. There's a sentence from yesterday Malagò's speech (http://www.coni.it/it/news/primo-pi...ò-organi-autonomi,-pronti-a-nuovi-sforzi.html) where he's saying that the WADA rule imposes a 4 years ban for this case but also that the rule will change from 1st January. Now I wonder why CONI suddenly decided for a case who was pending from 2 years when just one more month could make the difference. Where they really pressed by something/someone?
Now about Carolina. I'm still sure she was in the dark on many things (you are already busy with your career that you can't waste your time doing researches on what your BF is eating and who he's meeting... I mean, it's also your BF and you're a skater not Sherlock Holmes). But exactly because you are an athlete you know which are your duties and lying to a doping officer isn't allowed, not for the sake of your BF and not for the sake of anyone in your family. This carelessness is costing so much now and, from what she said in the last article (http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/201...amavo-schwazer-non-doping-non-sapevo/1245053/), this is the thing she regret the most.
CONI has been pressed in the last months to do something about doping. Malagò (the chief) has appeared in a TV program some days ago trying to keep up appearances and they did a (big?) convention yesterday (which, honestly, didn't bring anything new to the system).
CONI is in a difficult situation because, if the case goes on, many federations are risking a lot. There's a sentence from yesterday Malagò's speech (http://www.coni.it/it/news/primo-pi...ò-organi-autonomi,-pronti-a-nuovi-sforzi.html) where he's saying that the WADA rule imposes a 4 years ban for this case but also that the rule will change from 1st January. Now I wonder why CONI suddenly decided for a case who was pending from 2 years when just one more month could make the difference. Where they really pressed by something/someone?
Now about Carolina. I'm still sure she was in the dark on many things (you are already busy with your career that you can't waste your time doing researches on what your BF is eating and who he's meeting... I mean, it's also your BF and you're a skater not Sherlock Holmes). But exactly because you are an athlete you know which are your duties and lying to a doping officer isn't allowed, not for the sake of your BF and not for the sake of anyone in your family. This carelessness is costing so much now and, from what she said in the last article (http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/201...amavo-schwazer-non-doping-non-sapevo/1245053/), this is the thing she regret the most.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
Thank you both alebi,bartlebooth. That's it. And maybe because Carolina is ladin or from South Tirol, so she is an easier target than others. She always spoke out against doping. And to be judged just from doping authority is really unfair. Swarzer had given the availability in Italy and she didn't understand why they came to Obersdorf in first place. She told him to get the test done the same day and Swarzer did it. So she thought now all is ok again. So there was not a hiding intention, but Wada didn't mention it at all. So what did she wrong?
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2014
At that time she couldn't know (and honestly no one knew) that Schwazer was already supervised by doping officers. They were already following his travels, that's why the officers went to Obersdorf when Alex gave his availability for controls in Racine.
If someone wants to know more about, there is an athletics' site (sorry only in Italian) who's following this case from the beginning, with many interesting articles and opinions. Just to give you the idea of how rotten things are... http://www.atleticalive.it/10487/co...rla-borrione-avvisammo-coni-nessuno-si-mosso/ and http://www.atleticalive.it/9123/ass...i-avrebbero-evitato-i-3-controlli-antidoping/
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2012
Ah! Sorry, alebi. I had not looked at this tread for a couple of days, and when I came back it was all conspiracy theories about the USFS trying to get Gracie a medal, and I was like "Arrrgh!!!! I can't be bothered with this rubbish!"
I just found your posts on page 6, and they do explain the whole situation very well.
So, in summary, CONI were turning a blind eye to doping for years, and now that they have been found out, they are trying to save their own backs by making scapegoats of the people around the dopers, whether these people actually knew about the doping or not.
Just as a point of interest, and because it is probably highly significant in them wanting this case dealt with now, what is the new rule that will come in on 1st January?
Thank you to both you and bartlebooth again
CaroLiza_fan
Similar threads
- Locked
