interesting duathlon results from the weekend

ecoli

Saw this after someone mentioned it to me and left a bitter taste in my mouth:

http://www.westmeathexaminer.ie/sport/roundup/articles/2012/10/21/4012856-katie-nugent-duathlon

http://www.precisiontiming.net/result/racetimer?v=%252Fen%252Frace%252Fshow%252F1059%253Flayout%253Dprecision_timing

I can understand supporting the charity but toeing the line of ANY race until the end of next year should not be on.

brutes1

Wow.
How long is the ban for , end 2013 ?

pconn062

I'd say the winner was delighted to get by him on the bike after Martin opened a two minute lead after the first run. Doesn't seem right to me that he was there at all (in a competitive sense).

robinph

I'm not actually sure how I'd feel on this and have a few conflicting opinions.

He screwed up and should pay the penalty and should not be allowed to appear as if he got away with anything.
He's still a known figure so his participation in an event is going to be a draw for people, either just wanting to beat him or raising the profile a bit so that people come and watch.
If he beat me by one place I'd be very annoyed that he was allowed to take part and claim a prize that should have been mine, but if he came forth I think I'd be OK.
Should be some kind of "Drugs are bad mmm'kay" talk/ publicity thing attached.
If entering any event it should be as "unattached".

ThePiedPiper

I've been thinking about this lately with the Armstrong bans, etc. Just as Armstrong continues turning up and doing well in triathlons, maybe Fagan is allowed to continue racing in events that multi-sport. Of course, I believe that a ban in running for drugs should carry over to any sport where running is part of it, and cycling bans should cover tri as well.. I'm just not sure that they actually do.

YFlyer

Anybody know what are the details of his ban?

Clearlier

RunForestRun wrote: »

I've been thinking about this lately with the Armstrong bans, etc. Just as Armstrong continues turning up and doing well in triathlons, maybe Fagan is allowed to continue racing in events that multi-sport. Of course, I believe that a ban in running for drugs should carry over to any sport where running is part of it, and cycling bans should cover tri as well.. I'm just not sure that they actually do.

I may get a couple of details wrong here but as I understand it any organisation that signs up to WADA will observe a ban imposed by any other organisation within WADA.

Armstrong took part in triathlons until he decided to stop challenging USADA at which point he had to withdraw/was kicked out of the events that he had entered. Someone on the tri forum was suggesting that one of the tri organisations was considering withdrawing from WADA so that they could invite Armstrong (hopefully just a bit of loose speculation).

I'm guessing that the duathlon was sanctioned by a body which is a member of WADA or the organisers were unaware of the restrictions. I do not believe that Martin should have been taking part.

YFlyer

Clearlier wrote: »

I may get a couple of details wrong here but as I understand it any organisation that signs up to WADA will observe a ban imposed by any other organisation within WADA.

Armstrong took part in triathlons until he decided to stop challenging USADA at which point he had to withdraw/was kicked out of the events that he had entered. Someone on the tri forum was suggesting that one of the tri organisations was considering withdrawing from WADA so that they could invite Armstrong (hopefully just a bit of loose speculation).

I'm guessing that the duathlon was sanctioned by a body which is a member of WADA or the organisers were unaware of the restrictions. I do not believe that Martin should have been taking part.

Kono Ironman banned Armstrong.

ThePiedPiper

Thanks for the clarification there Clearlier. I've always been uncomfortable with the likes of Chambers, and any such athlete serving a drugs ban in a sport, taking part in another sport during their ban.

Clum

WTC, who run the Ironman events, don't allow athletes under investigation for doping allegations to participate in their events. Here's the WTC statement in relation to Lance.

"WTC has been notified that USADA has initiated its Anti-Doping Review Board Process against Lance Armstrong to determine if there is sufficient evidence of doping during his cycling career to bring forward charges of a non-analytical nature. Our rules, as stated in the WTC Professional Athlete Agreement and Waiver, dictate an athlete is ineligible to compete during an open investigation. Armstrong is therefore suspended from competing in WTC-owned and licensed races pending further review."

I've no idea if ITU events inherit WADA-related bans from other organistations, so can't confirm if any AAI imposed suspension from a WADA finding would filter through to Triathlon Ireland but, even if it did, I don't think the duathlon in question here is a TI approved event.

Whether it is or it isn't I don't think he (Fagan that is) should be racing during his ban. There are a lot of non AAI approved road races and non TI approved mutlisport events in this country and if he was to finish ahead of me in one of these events during his two year suspension I'd feel cheated.

ecoli

robinph wrote: »

I'm not actually sure how I'd feel on this and have a few conflicting opinions.

He screwed up and should pay the penalty and should not be allowed to appear as if he got away with anything.
He's still a known figure so his participation in an event is going to be a draw for people, either just wanting to beat him or raising the profile a bit so that people come and watch.
If he beat me by one place I'd be very annoyed that he was allowed to take part and claim a prize that should have been mine, but if he came forth I think I'd be OK.
Should be some kind of "Drugs are bad mmm'kay" talk/ publicity thing attached.
If entering any event it should be as "unattached".

These were my feelings to. Looking at the time he wasnt all out on the run and its good to get known faces supporting local charity events like this but at the end of the day he was still competing.

I dont think its in breach of his ban but it was more the ethical standpoint which I was against regardless whether he got 1st or 100th.

robinph

I think comparisons with Lance are not quite right as Lance is still in denial and is just adding to the problem.

People who admit what they did, and acknowledge the reasons for doing it and can help try and make sure that others don't get caught in the same thing is good. And by caught I obviously mean being caught up in the taking of PED's not getting caught taking them.
I would be happy to have him pace me round a race and provide a rabbit for others to chase as he's obviously very talented and I'm sure could provide useful training information to others, but it needs to be done with the subscript of "I screwed up, do not do what I did, here is how to avoid what happened to me".

Winning any kind of prizes for positions is not on though.

ecoli

Pisco Sour wrote: »

Bit OTT putting Martin Fagan and Lies Pharmstrong into the same sentance. One clearly had depression, made a rash ill-thought out decision which has destroyed his reputation probably forever, and never actually raced with EPO in his system, the other was the centre of the biggest doping conspiracy in the history of sport and possibly the greatest fraud sport has ever seen.

I believe Fagan should be banned from athletics, and 2 years is not enough for drug cheats, but how big was this duathlon race? Did he win prize money? If it was a genuine charity event where all proceeds go to the charity and he didn't take home a cent from it then who cares really!

I completely agree with you regarding the comparisons to Lance is a bit like comparing a pick pocket to a bank robber.

In terms of him participating in this to some extent I agree and was a reason I was slightly apprehensive about posting it as it was in aid of charity and looked to be a fairly local race however regardless of money the feel of competing is still there so in a sense he is not truly carrying out his ban, as I said its more a moral standpoint than anything

ThePiedPiper

To be fair, I really wasn't comparing Fagan and Armstrong, I was really just trying to get a handle on what way the bans work with regards competing in different disciplines from the one in which you received your ban. Agreed, the situations and personalities are totally different, Fagan's behaviour has been fairly commendable throughout.

RayCun

If I was in Mullingar Harriers I don't think I'd be happy about him entering as a member of my club.

dna_leri

Clum wrote: »

There are a lot of non AAI approved road races and non TI approved mutlisport events in this country and if he was to finish ahead of me in one of these events during his two year suspension I'd feel cheated.

I think that's the core of it. If the event is not sanctioned by the national body which subscribes to WADA then normal rules do not apply and no one can stop him running, except himself or the organisers. Assuming this race was not approved, then he was complying with the letter of the ban but not the spirit. He should have had better judgement, but maybe that's his failing.

If you don't want to be beaten by him, stick to AAI/TI approved events.

ecoli

RayCun wrote: »

If I was in Mullingar Harriers I don't think I'd be happy about him entering as a member of my club.

The only thing about that is that he helps out with training etc and trains with the club IIRC from interviews etc over the last few months so as such he is an active member however competing under the name was a bit out of order given he has a ban from athletics so shouldnt be affiliiated.

RayCun

Yeah, I'm not sure how I'd feel about him being involved in the club now, or competing for the club after the ban - I couldn't guess without being involved myself, and knowing him. But during the ban it seems clear enough, he shouldn't be competing and shouldn't be representing the club.

TRR

RayCun wrote: »

Yeah, I'm not sure how I'd feel about him being involved in the club now, or competing for the club after the ban - I couldn't guess without being involved myself, and knowing him. But during the ban it seems clear enough, he shouldn't be competing and shouldn't be representing the club.

true shouldn't be competing under the clubs name and is not really in the best spirit of things even if it was just for charity and not sanctioned. To be honest I think it was silly on his part as he has opened himself to criticism.

thirstywork2

RayCun wrote: »

If I was in Mullingar Harriers I don't think I'd be happy about him entering as a member of my club.

everyone deserves a second chance and he is coaching a beginners group of over 50 people down in Mullingar.

RayCun

thirstywork2 wrote: »

everyone deserves a second chance and he is coaching a beginners group of over 50 people down in Mullingar.

He will have his second chance to compete when his ban is up

ecoli

thirstywork2 wrote: »

everyone deserves a second chance and he is coaching a beginners group of over 50 people down in Mullingar.

I think this is a point that does need to be highlighted he is giving back to the sport where so many before him have avoided it. This is one of the commendable aspects which for me anyway has separated him from many others in the past

however is still dont think that competing at any level should be done while he is serving a ban

Hard Worker

I thought the ban covered membership of a club or any involvement in the sport. I thought that included coaching.
In other words, a two year ban from athletics means that Mullingar Harriers shouldn't have him as a member for the duration of the two years of the ban.

ChickenTikka

Folks are we not overreacting here a little. It was a charity event - if you google it: "In May 2012, after a courageous struggle with leukaemia, Katie Nugent died aged just six".

Did Fagan get prize money for winning? Did he accept it? etc alot of negative comments when maybe the guy was doing it entirely out of charitable motivations.

And if we feel "cheated" by him beating us in a race, is it because we'd beat him had he not taken EPO. Unlikely. So how are we "cheated".

I fully agree that he shouldn't be allowed compete in official competition but for him I doubt that jogging around a local road race in his county is competing. Let him take part - disallow him from taking prizes or featuring on a team and that solves the problem.

I'm sure his club appreciate the many years of harsh training that he put himself through since a young age and are big enough to forgive him one massive mistake and let him continue to represent the club in a minor capacity until he serves his time.

RayCun

ChickenTikka wrote: »

Let him take part

Why?

He took EPO, he was caught, and he got a two-year ban. Why should he not serve the ban?
I tend to believe him when he says that he took the drugs because he was depressed and wanted a way out, and that he's sorry he did it. But he should demonstrate that he's sorry by staying away from racing until his ban is up, not just entering this race, and only doing that run.

Clum

ChickenTikka wrote: »

And if we feel "cheated" by him beating us in a race, is it because we'd beat him had he not taken EPO. Unlikely. So how are we "cheated".

I know for fact Martin would beat me in a run, doped or not, but I also know I'd beat him on the bike. This gives me a good chance of beating him in a multi sport event.

What I don't know is how long the effects of PEDs last. It's possible he's still benefiting (hence the lengthy ban) and his bike time is even quicker than it should be.

Whether that's true or not, he's being punished for a reason and that punishment goes further than being banned from championship races. I'm delighted he's giving something back through training and I genuinely feel sorry for him because he wants to do nothing more than to continue racing but he committed a crime, was caught and given a sentence to serve.

I wish the charity all the best in their fund raising but if Martin was there to help the charity he could have taken on a celebrity starter's role or something.

Tombo2001

I think if he wants to give something back he could coach, which I'd guess he is doing.

This race.......probably he shouldnt be doing it......he's not proving anything to anyone by doing well in it.....or perhaps running it and then not claiming a prize/ place......i think if he ran it and didnt claim a prize that would be best.

But overall I dont think its a big deal. Probably the people who organized it were absolutely a-ok and encouraged him to do it.

I'm glad that he looks a lot better than he did 12 months ago or whenever it was. That would be more relevant for me....as....not doing much at all about the situation, it was pretty clear he was not in a good place......(and in that sense there is absolutely no comparison with Lance 'messiah complex' Armstrong).

myflipflops

How is there a debate about this? A banned athlete should not be competing anywhere.

The 'but it's for charity' argument is rubbish -if he wanted to help the charity, a donation would have been a better idea.

I like Martin and I have enormous sympathy and a hell of a lot of empathy with his story but he should be facing a life ban. I know If we want to clean up the sport then the punishment for cheating needs to be so much bigger.

While I have no real doubt that he has a lot to give back in terms of coaching, I have big issues if he is coaching kids in Mullingar. There needs to be a firm line drawn with dopers.

woodchopper

thirstywork2 wrote: »

everyone deserves a second chance and he is coaching a beginners group of over 50 people down in Mullingar.

Its your opinion so fair enough. I presume you also held the same support for Cathal Lombard when he was running around during his ban.

firemouth

seriously lads,all this over a charity race???get a grip!

robinph

firemouth wrote: »

seriously lads,all this over a charity race???get a grip!

Just because it's for charity or someone wears a plastic yellow wrist band that is meant to cure cancer does not make it OK to cheat in sport.

Yes, I know the comparison isn't entirely fair between the two, but doesn't change the fact that they cheated.

ultrapercy

robinph wrote: »

Just because it's for charity or someone wears a plastic yellow wrist band that is meant to cure cancer does not make it OK to cheat in sport.

Yes, I know the comparison isn't entirely fair between the two, but doesn't change the fact that they cheated.

If Fagan did not contravene(possibly a word Ive just made up?) the terms of his ban there is no issue other than an image/public relations issue. I think it was unwise of him to compete in any event during the term of his ban as it unnessaraily draws negative attention on him and his sport. It surprises me that its not in breach of his ban, a friend of mine hit a referee in a junior soccer match and recieved a 10 year ban, it prohibited him from all footbal activities like coaching and even training with a club. Overall tho its small potatoes realy, think his heart is in the right place but he should seek some wiser council.

robinph

I think when Linford Christie got his ban he was still allowed to coach, but wasn't allowed access to the athletes in certain areas at championships. Unless you get a ban as a coach for giving the athletes PED's then I don't think the athletes are banned from coaching.

Any public activity should be done carefully to avoid giving the wrong impressions though. What happened here is maybe not banned, but it is certainly outside the spirit of the ban.

Pisco Sour

robinph wrote: »

I think when Linford Christie got his ban he was still allowed to coach, but wasn't allowed access to the athletes in certain areas at championships. Unless you get a ban as a coach for giving the athletes PED's then I don't think the athletes are banned from coaching.

Any public activity should be done carefully to avoid giving the wrong impressions though. What happened here is maybe not banned, but it is certainly outside the spirit of the ban.

Funny you should mention Linford. Not long ago one of the older lads in my club was telling me that Christie came down to Australia for the pretigious Stawell Gift handicapped footrace one year in the mid to late 90s. He was warming up when he saw some anti-doping drug testers. He calmly inquired as to why they were here for this race, to which the reply was it was standard procedure. 20 minutes later Christie disappeared from the venue in the first taxi he could find. True story.

firemouth

robinph wrote: »

Just because it's for charity or someone wears a plastic yellow wrist band that is meant to cure cancer does not make it OK to cheat in sport.

Yes, I know the comparison isn't entirely fair between the two, but doesn't change the fact that they cheated.

Couldnt agree more,your 100% right but as far as I know he hasnt broken any rules by supporting the charity.

robinph

Agreed.
The charity bit is irrelevant though, that it's not an official AAI or whatever other registered event is was makes it possible for him to have taken part.

Throwing the word charity around just confuses the issue.

Armstrong has still cheated however many yellow things he sells.
Fagan has still cheated however many charity races he comes second in.

Fagan has admitted what he did wrong though and accepted his ban. Although he's not broken the ban, it is still a bit of a moral grey area.

shels4ever

robinph wrote: »

Agreed.
The charity bit is irrelevant though, that it's not an official AAI or whatever other registered event is was makes it possible for him to have taken part.

Throwing the word charity around just confuses the issue.

Armstrong has still cheated however many yellow things he sells.
Fagan has still cheated however many charity races he comes second in.

Fagan has admitted what he did wrong though and accepted his ban. Although he's not broken the ban, it is still a bit of a moral grey area.

yep but it was for charity


*couldn't resist.

YFlyer

.