The rules should have seen him banned for life, particularly given how brazen he was. But the rules don't do that. So it's not really cricket to ban him for life.
Change the rules :yes:
It's a shame that he is a likeable character.
It's a shame that he is a likeable character. He was bang out of order and had all he needed to be a top sprinter without the aid of chemistry.
Can't agree he's cheated, had thousands of £'s of funding that someone else deserved, denied honest athletes and Olympians the opportunity to represent their country.I agree, we've all made really stupid mistakes, and while this is on a very high level, he's clean now and in the best form of his life, I, for one hope he runs in the olympics.
Can't agree he's cheated, had thousands of £'s of funding that someone else deserved, denied honest athletes and Olympians the opportunity to represent their country.
If you were found guilty of fraud in the bank you wouldn't be offred your job back again aftera slap on the wrist. likeable or not he knew what he was doing and he got caught. The silly thing is if the IOC just issued an lifelong exclusion against all athletes found guilty there wouldn't be any fuss.
see ya dwain.Apparantly UKA rushed him back for him to compete in another Championship..so when it suits its Ok. :shrug:
Mads Bee said:Chambers unlike most athletes admitted immediately he took drugs and has campaigned against drugs in sport ever since. He has done his "sentence" and should be free to compete as most other athletes are after a ban in all events. I reiterate, a lifetime ban should be imposed...however it is not..and I think this is all wrong.
.............and in the best form of his life
Chambers is going to have to find something else to do, that's life.
Chambers is going to have to find something else to do, that's life.
He's only banned from the Olympics - he's not banned from taking part in individual Grand Prix events. If he was, that would be a restraint of trade that he was claiming.
Man of the prestige events are invitation only and have avoided him because of the controversy. I think this is the end to be honest.
You may be right but there job is to sell tickets and get good broadcast figures and at the moment in the GB at least, Chambers is the biggest name in athletics.
following the Merritt case, that by-law could potentially be contested by the likes of sprinter Dwain Chambers
Merritt was banned for 21 months in 2009 for failing a drugs test for steroids, which he blamed on his use of an off-the-shelf penile-enhancement product. He completed the ban earlier this year and was free to run in the World Athletics Championships in Daegu, where he won a silver medal.
Shocking decision driven by the Yanks' Olympic body which is really surprising although given the history of drug cheating by USA athletes maybe we shouldn't be surpised.
Sends completly the wrong message, hope the BOA can hold their admirable line on this.
Good to see LaShawn doing his bit to fight one of the stereotypes people sometimes have about black men
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ol...n-test-case-gives-hope-to-banned-Britons.html
so is he likely to be selected?
Much as I dont agree with drug cheats, the Olympic ban should be worldwide. The case was brought against our BOA ( as we ban athletes from the Olympics who have served drug bans ) by the World Doping Agency, not Chambers. However, we should be consistant with other countries. The athletes have done their time for their crime and are subjected to more tests than others n they should be treated the same by all countries. Imho, the bans should be life from competing at all after found guilty of drugs but they arent n once the time has been served all athletes should be allowed to compete in all competitions n not be excluded by certain countries