Impressive - Martin Fagan

drquirky

ultrapercy wrote: »

The lack of understanding regarding depression is astounding. No matter how many information campaigns that happen people still refuse to see the difference between a clinical illness and how they feel on a rainy day or when they narrowly fail to bring their 5k pb under 23 mins. Anyone who followed Fagans career could see signs of a problem early on. This is not to excuse what he did, it was very wrong but it does give it context. Thats the nature of the illness it interupts the decision making process. People who are depressed often take their own lives and sometimes even the lives of others but you all know this already just some of you are not strong enough to accept it. Its out there, its becoming increasingly more common, and it could happen to you,if it does, hopefully people will be more understanding than to accuse you of faking but you reap what you sow.

Great post. I've dealt w/ anxiety issues most of my adult life and it's pretty amazing the way people think a mental health issue is something you can just cast aside...

A little empathy does wonders and costs nothing...

average_runner

ultrapercy wrote: »

The lack of understanding regarding depression is astounding. No matter how many information campaigns that happen people still refuse to see the difference between a clinical illness and how they feel on a rainy day or when they narrowly fail to bring their 5k pb under 23 mins. Anyone who followed Fagans career could see signs of a problem early on. This is not to excuse what he did, it was very wrong but it does give it context. Thats the nature of the illness it interupts the decision making process. People who are depressed often take their own lives and sometimes even the lives of others but you all know this already just some of you are not strong enough to accept it. Its out there, its becoming increasingly more common, and it could happen to you,if it does, hopefully people will be more understanding than to accuse you of faking but you reap what you sow.

I dont think its a lack of understanding here, i think its people that are ignorant and rather have a dig at a person than understand the full big pic.

I wish Martin all the best in his fight against depression and other high profile athletes needs to keep their mouth shut unless they know for sure and if so, provide the proof.

robinph

It is perfectly possible to feel sorry for the person Martin Fagan and the situation that he finds himself in and hope that he can get his life back together and achieve something useful in the sport now, yet still feel that the athlete Martin Fagan should have received a lifetime ban and should not be winning prizes in competitive races.

ultrapercy

robinph wrote: »

It is perfectly possible to feel sorry for the person Martin Fagan and the situation that he finds himself in and hope that he can get his life back together and achieve something useful in the sport now, yet still feel that the athlete Martin Fagan should have received a lifetime ban and should not be winning prizes in competitive races.

I agree with you 100% and dont take exception to your opinions or your posts, a large part of me agrees with your argument.Its the post that deny his depression that Im concerned with. He committed a grave wrongdoing probably the worst thing that can be done in sport but accusing him of faking is as great a wrongdoing imo. The man claimed to have driven around Arizona considering crashing into a tree. If he made that up and went public with it, in front of family and friends. I dont think he made that up.

pistol_75

FWIW I thought he got a very good reception at the presentation after the race last night. Certainly nobody voicing anything in a negative way.

Personally I think it's good to see him back competing again regardless of whatever level he gets back to.

Clearlier

average_runner wrote: »

I dont think its a lack of understanding here, i think its people that are ignorant and rather have a dig at a person than understand the full big pic.

I wish Martin all the best in his fight against depression and other high profile athletes needs to keep their mouth shut unless they know for sure and if so, provide the proof.

I haven't picked up that people are having a dig at Martin in this thread (there's probably one but it's not a significant theme).

Sadly it's verging on the naive to just accept what an athlete who has been caught doping says. That's not a particularly nice position but there have been too many explanations offered for doping that were subsequently show to be untrue and offered primarily on the basis of their believability. Ian O'Riordan hasn't helped with that. Even subsequent to having been fed the questions he should have asked by Paul Kimmage he still fails to ask any real questions (or at least there's no evidence of it in his articles).

I'm not sure exactly what you're saying about other high profile athletes but if it's that they shouldn't say anything about people they suspect of doping then I disagree. I thought, for example, that Paula Radcliffe's protest against Olga Yegerova was the right thing to do.

Of course there are different types of cheats out there. Yegerova so far as I can tell was pretty blatant and unapologetic. Armstrong was incredibly calculating, aggressive, unpleasant and totally unapologetic. Linford Christie was hypocritical. Marion Jones was calculating. Maybe Martin is one of the good guys. I certainly want to believe his story. It's the failure by anyone to ask the difficult questions that leave me uncertain. I'd be much happier if he had been grilled and I felt like I got the full picture but right now it feels like I have one view only.

ultrapercy

I meant that in a general way but also in response to other threads about the same subject. Your right regarding the plight of "elite" athletes and this may make those close to potential scholarship athletes in particular more aware of the pitfalls.

rovers_runner

Martin Fagan had depression, that's entirely believable.
He also claims he only cheated in his sport due to this condition, but there are unanswered questions as to the link between how far back he started using PEDs and when his personal issues started(see missed drug tests in 2007).

As others have said, people with depression don't automatically shed their interpretation of whats right and wrong.

People take PEDs to gain a competitive advantage and gain financially.
It wouldn't be a normal symptom of people with depression to take such actions to benefit their own standing?

buck65

I thought the O Riordan article was fine, really he is himself a runner and would be somewhat sympathetic to Fagan's plight. No way is he an investigativer type journalist but one who writes only about athletics in a positive way from what I can see (I would dub him elitist or snobbish at times).

His book was full of errors and repition and just grammar bad.

Anyway back to the story. Fagan, like all dopers claim no-one helped them so as not to implicate anyone and whatever about depression you wouldn't be taking EPO to make yourself feel normal as he said in the article.

I find it hard to believe that this was a one off thing, history has taught me that dopers by their nature are cheats, so many of my heroes have been proven frauds, Martin you're full of **** but welcome back to the party, you're in good company I'd say.

walshb

His 'depression' and his intentional taking of PEDs shouldn't really be all that linked.

johnruns

average_runner wrote: »

I dont think its a lack of understanding here, i think its people that are ignorant and rather have a dig at a person than understand the full big pic.
.

So basically what you are saying is if you welcome back Martin Fagan you understand depression and if you don't welcome him back you are ignorant?? I don't think thats true at all,most people not welcoming him back just don't believe him and why should they its just another excuse in a long list of excuses from drug cheats and O Riordans piece of fiction in the Irish Times wont change that.

Thud

ultrapercy wrote: »

The lack of understanding regarding depression is astounding. No matter how many information campaigns that happen people still refuse to see the difference between a clinical illness and how they feel on a rainy day or when they narrowly fail to bring their 5k pb under 23 mins. .

case in point

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rprq69TWE8E

T runner

rovers_runner wrote: »

.....
People take PEDs to gain a competitive advantage and gain financially.
It wouldn't be a normal symptom of people with depression to take such actions to benefit their own standing?

Just to give my understanding (layman's be warned) about how depression might affect a competitive athlete.

Depression is a disease of perception. A person with depression will tend to (illogically) see the perceived negative's in any situation not the actualities or the positives. This can happen in a chain reaction of thoughts which can greatly and quickly alter mood.

e.g

In good from
Ah theres johnny from such and such a club
oh that wasn't quite the warmest of welcomes
I wonder why he doesn't like me
Maybe I was too quiet around their running group before
Fuc*k, theres 4 more of them
I cant go over there, they hate my guts
Why am I such a chicken sh*t
Im a worthless asshole.

This causes sustained anxiousness, and outright bouts of heavy depression when self worth is low. Running helps many people with depression by being a positive in their lives, and also, I think, the release of endorphins can offset the chemicals involved in that chain reaction of thought, much like anti-depressants do.

For someone like Martin Fagan however, (and Marco Pantani) self worth is ALL tied up in how well he is performing. Running well= positive, running badly or injured = mind gone to the wolves.

For those saying that someone makes a rational choice to take a PED and thus depression is not an excuse, see the chain of thought above. It is not rational.

IF Martin Fagan had depression, the pattern fits.

Perhaps, one can see why his eagerness to be back competing is also consistant for someone with depression.

walshb

T runner wrote: »

IF Martin Fagan had depression, the pattern fits.
.

That's just it with cheating, and any acts that go against rules/regulations There will always be red herrings. Some excuses are real and genuine.

rom

Say if he ends up at some stage deciding to go down that path again is depression a valid reason if it was valid the first time.

running coach pacer

rom wrote: »

Say if he ends up at some stage deciding to go down that path again is depression a valid reason if it was valid the first time.

No - Depression is not a valid reason to cheat and comprise your integrity or the sport you take part in. No valid reason exists for cheating .

However Depression does help us understand why Martin Fagan made bad choices (staying in America when his career was on a downhill due to injury , staying Stateside when he could not earn enough to get by and ultimately making a choice that will tarnish his name as long as he runs). He was not able to get out of rut he was in and that is very consistent behavior from people that suffer from depression.

But it does separate for me the question of a life term ban is not applicable in his case as comparable to say Lance Armstrong and Ben Johnson - his drug taking most agree was out of short term desperation .

He has done his time and has held his hand up to the errors. Time to give the man a break.

NiallG4

running coach pacer wrote: »

No - Depression is not a valid reason to cheat and comprise your integrity or the sport you take part in. No valid reason exists for cheating .

However Depression does help us understand why Martin Fagan made bad choices (staying in America when his career was on a downhill due to injury , staying Stateside when he could not earn enough to get by and ultimately making a choice that will tarnish his name as long as he runs). He was not able to get out of rut he was in and that is very consistent behavior from people that suffer from depression.

But it does separate for me the question of a life term ban is not applicable in his case as comparable to say Lance Armstrong and Ben Johnson - his drug taking most agree was out of short term desperation .

He has done his time and has held his hand up to the errors. Time to give the man a break.

Sorry. Can't agree. It is "exactly" the same as Lance Armstrong and Ben Johnson. I keep hearing he is a lovely chap and he may well be but there can be no excuses. Depression, threats, financial, duress etc cannot be used as reasons to cheat. I have every sympathy for all of the above situations and my family has been affected by depression but it gives nobody the right to cheat. I know this sounds harsh but it has to be the way otherwise it is the loophole for anybody cheating. Don't separate Martin from Lance or Ben. They are all drug cheats and "all drug cheats" should be banned for life. I really really feel sorry for the guy and it must be awful walking into presentation halls knowing everyone is watching and talking about you but there has to be one punishment for all with no exception or leeway.

theboyblunder

NiallG4 wrote: »

Sorry. Can't agree. It is "exactly" the same as Lance Armstrong and Ben Johnson. I keep hearing he is a lovely chap and he may well be but there can be no excuses. Depression, threats, financial, duress etc cannot be used as reasons to cheat. I have every sympathy for all of the above situations and my family has been affected by depression but it gives nobody the right to cheat. I know this sounds harsh but it has to be the way otherwise it is the loophole for anybody cheating. Don't separate Martin from Lance or Ben. They are all drug cheats and "all drug cheats" should be banned for life. I really really feel sorry for the guy and it must be awful walking into presentation halls knowing everyone is watching and talking about you but there has to be one punishment for all with no exception or leeway.

To all those who think he should be punished for life. To all those who think he should be branded 'cheat' for life.....Can you explain to us where this comes from? Why should we have a different rule for PEDs than, say, armed robbery, where the punishment is generally not for life?

Rememeber this is the guys livelihood. He is probably not trained to do much else (although I dont know that for sure to be fair).

Have you ever been forgiven for something? Have you ever cheated or done anything dishonest in your life? Because if you have, and lets face it, we all have, then we are all 'cheats'. Everyone on here. You are all 'cheats'.

I think we should stop branding this guy. If he wants to marry your daughter, or sell you a car - then by all means, take the previous dishonesty thing into account. Privately. But we should remember that have all been dishonest at least once! I never cheat in races, and ive never done anything majorly dishonest but that doesnt make me a saint.

If I call that guy a cheat after he has served his time, im technically correct, but i'm a massive hypocrite.

T runner

NiallG4 wrote: »

Sorry. Can't agree. It is "exactly" the same as Lance Armstrong and Ben Johnson. I keep hearing he is a lovely chap and he may well be but there can be no excuses. Depression, threats, financial, duress etc cannot be used as reasons to cheat. I have every sympathy for all of the above situations and my family has been affected by depression but it gives nobody the right to cheat. I know this sounds harsh but it has to be the way otherwise it is the loophole for anybody cheating. Don't separate Martin from Lance or Ben. They are all drug cheats and "all drug cheats" should be banned for life. I really really feel sorry for the guy and it must be awful walking into presentation halls knowing everyone is watching and talking about you but there has to be one punishment for all with no exception or leeway.

Where's the loophole? He got two years. He would have got one year if he had been upfront about his source, he wasn't as he unsubstantially claimed he bought it off the internet. That's why he got 2 not 1. Again where is this loophole?
Lance Armstrong not only took EPO to win 7 tours, but he helped organized and manage the use of the drug within the team, forcing other riders to use it and threatening them and their family members at different junctures.
His misdemeanor is not "exactly the same" as Fagan's therefore the punishment is different. Different times for different crimes.

My own view would be a lifetime ban for any athlete that does not completely spill the beans. Two years otherwise. This immediately changes the dynamic and risk of drug taking for the user, and for the person/coach/organization supplying it, if any.

An athlete will always deep down, want to compete. The likely outcome is bean spilling, and bean spilling attacks the culture of drug taking which is getting to the heart of the issue.

NiallG4

T runner wrote: »

Where's the loophole? He got two years. He would have got one year if he had been upfront about his source, he wasn't as he unsubstantially claimed he bought it off the internet. That's why he got 2 not 1. Again where is this loophole?
Lance Armstrong not only took EPO to win 7 tours, but he helped organized and manage the use of the drug within the team, forcing other riders to use it and threatening them and their family members at different junctures.
His misdemeanor is not "exactly the same" as Fagan's therefore the punishment is different. Different times for different crimes.

My own view would be a lifetime ban for any athlete that does not completely spill the beans. Two years otherwise. This immediately changes the dynamic and risk of drug taking for the user, and for the person/coach/organization supplying it, if any.

In athlete will always deep down, want to compete. The likely outcome is bean spilling, and bean spilling attacks the culture of drug taking which is getting to the heart of the issue.

I really have sympathy for the guy but if we want a clean sport there has to be zero tolerance. When I say loophole, I mean there can me no excuse. I am no judge but I love watching both athletics and cycling and hate the fact that every great performance by athletes, I am always thinking is he "at it" I hope I see a day where I don't have to question every performance in my head. Maybe I was harsh in using the word drug cheat but unfortunately that's the label he has to get used to in the media. When the word Ben Johnson, Lance Armstrong are used the DC word will attach. Lance could feel aggrieved in that there are lots more cyclists who he knows are cheating and they get no ban and continue cycling today. If he starts naming them and the suppliers and returns to compete, do we all say he served the time so lets move on. I repeat, I really feel for the guy but even if it was one of my own family, I would still be calling for a life ban. That's just my opinion. Nothing personal at all. I cant agree with your 2 year ban. Sorry.

MrCreosote

NiallG4 wrote: »

I really have sympathy for the guy but if we want a clean sport there has to be zero tolerance. When I say loophole, I mean there can me no excuse. I am no judge but I love watching both athletics and cycling and hate the fact that every great performance by athletes, I am always thinking is he "at it" I hope I see a day where I don't have to question every performance in my head. Maybe I was harsh in using the word drug cheat but unfortunately that's the label he has to get used to in the media. When the word Ben Johnson, Lance Armstrong are used the DC word will attach. Lance could feel aggrieved in that there are lots more cyclists who he knows are cheating and they get no ban and continue cycling today. If he starts naming them and the suppliers and returns to compete, do we all say he served the time so lets move on. I repeat, I really feel for the guy but even if it was one of my own family, I would still be calling for a life ban. That's just my opinion. Nothing personal at all. I cant agree with your 2 year ban. Sorry.

If you think a life ban is going to stop doping, you're dreaming.
Truth and reconciliation are the only way forward.

NiallG4

MrCreosote wrote: »

If you think a life ban is going to stop doping, you're dreaming.
Truth and reconciliation are the only way forward.

Should send you to Stormont. You may have a point. The 2008 Olympic 1500M "first across the line" Rashid Ramzi is apparently about to make a comeback to the sport after his 2 year ban. Whats your view on this? Mine is the guy cheated Kiprop out of his moment of glory and should be banned for life. Ramzi lived his dream of standing on the podium in the Olympic stadium albeit hearing a different countries national anthem. Maybe I am being harsh here but would we believe him if he claimed it was a one off and was suffering depression. To save myself any more grief, attack the post not the poster. These are my opinions, nothing more.

MrCreosote

NiallG4 wrote: »

Should send you to Stormont. You may have a point. The 2008 Olympic 1500M "first across the line" Rashid Ramzi is apparently about to make a comeback to the sport after his 2 year ban. Whats your view on this? Mine is the guy cheated Kiprop out of his moment of glory and should be banned for life. Ramzi lived his dream of standing on the podium in the Olympic stadium albeit hearing a different countries national anthem. Maybe I am being harsh here but would we believe him if he claimed it was a one off and was suffering depression. To save myself any more grief, attack the post not the poster. These are my opinions, nothing more.

My view doesn't matter- he served his time (exactly the same as Martin Fagan), and now he is free to compete. Those are the rules. If I have a problem with the length of bans, it's at the governing bodies I would look.

Anyway his positive test meant I got to see Nick Willis being presented with his silver medal in 2011, so every cloud...:pac:

Timmaay

Thud wrote: »

case in point

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rprq69TWE8E

God what an awful interview on all fronts, you couldn't script it if you tried.

robinph

What is the best way of expressing our discontent regarding the types of bans handed out by the governing bodies so that they notice and do things properly?

Other than arguing amongst ourselves on various forms of social media there are not really many avenues that fans can use. Much easier to shout and scream on twitter or the like than to put forward a motion for being discussed at the next AGM of whatever body.

brutes1

Some relevant articles here

IAAF 4 year ban proposed http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/athletics/23621134
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/07/us-athletics-world-doping-idUSBRE97610U20130807
Lifetime bans illegal
http://espn.go.com/olympics/story/_/id/7869911/britain-lifetime-olympic-doping-ban-ruled-illegal-report-says
WADA 4 year ban http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/news/20131115/wada-doping-penalty-doubled-four-years-olympics.ap/

robinph

Well "illegal" is over stating it, there isn't any act of a national parliament to make the use of drugs in sport illegal.

What the BOA wasn't doing was following the codes set by the next governing body above them. It was correct in a reading of the rules that the BOA has to comply with the rules set by the next body up, what should have happened though is that WADA should have taken the opportunity to make their punishments more severe and met the BOA somewhere in the middle. Unfortunately no other national body was following the same stance as the BOA.

dna_leri

theboyblunder wrote: »

To all those who think he should be punished for life. To all those who think he should be branded 'cheat' for life.....Can you explain to us where this comes from? Why should we have a different rule for PEDs than, say, armed robbery, where the punishment is generally not for life?

.

We should not compare the "punishment" with criminal cases where perpetrators liberty is taken away but instead with other careers:
If you cheat in the Leaving Cert you can be disbarred from State Examinations for life.
As a Chartered Accountant you can be barred for life from membership of the association for life for unethical behaviour.
As a company director you can banned from being a director for life if you do not meet your legal responsibilities.
You can be refused a taxi license, security guard license for indiscretions related to your profession.
Likewise in many other walks of life, you can lose you job and never get employed in your industry again for one serious mistake.
In most sports, the governing body does not have the option to ban you from being a member for life if you are caught taking drugs.

We can argue the rights and wrongs of each of the professions but in the examples above sport is out of step.

robinph

dna_leri wrote: »

If you cheat in the Leaving Cert you can be disbarred from State Examinations for life.

Without going off on too much of a tangent, but could that include not being able to then take a driving test?

dna_leri

robinph wrote: »

Without going off on too much of a tangent, but could that include not being able to then take a driving test?

NO

The State Examinations Commission is responsible for the development, assessment, accreditation and certification of the second-level examinations of the Irish state: the Junior Certificate and the Leaving Certificate. The State Examinations Commission is a non-departmental public body under the aegis of the Department of Education and Skills.

the Commission may, according to the opinion of the Commission as to the gravity of the offence, debar the candidate from entering for any of the examinations run by the State Examinations Commission for such period as the Commission may determine.