U.S. relay team could lose Sydney gold to doping

[J65]

From The Morning Call -- July 19, 2004









U.S. relay team could lose Sydney gold to doping
Jerome Young case could impact Michael Johnson's 1,600 squad.

From Call wire services

Track and field's governing body recommended Sunday that the U.S. 1,600-meter relay team, led by Michael Johnson, be stripped of its gold medal from the Sydney Olympics as part of the Jerome Young doping case.

The International Olympic Committee is expected to endorse the recommendation by the International Association of Athletics Federations, probably before next month's Athens Olympics.

''The IOC told us that 'We follow your decision,''' IAAF president Lamine Diack said.

USA Track & Field said it ''regrets'' the decision and will ''continue to work through all appropriate channels on behalf of the affected athletes.''

The recommendation came 21/2 weeks after the Swiss-based Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled that Young, the 400 world champion who ran in the relay's opening and semifinal rounds, should be stripped of his gold because of a positive doping test for the steroid nandrolone on June 26, 1999.

Young, who has denied taking a prohibited substance, was exonerated by a USATF doping appeals board on July 10, 2000.

The gold was the fifth and final for Johnson, who ran the anchor leg in the relay final. Other members of the team were twin brothers Alvin and Calvin Harrison, Antonio Pettigrew and Angelo Taylor....

www.mcall.com/sports/all-olympicsjul19,0,3352724.story?coll=all-sports-hed

[ChrisC]

I'm real curious to see how the whole 'steroid crackdown' plays out. Right now the public attitude seems to be that it's a good thing and that we should remove all the "cheaters" from the US team and also increase testing. This is all well and good but it will have an adverse effect on the performance of the US at the olympics.

When the US starts losing events to countries with less stringent testing policies (e.g. China) it will be interesting to see the public attitude. Sure average joe doesn't want any athletes to use steroids, but when US athletes start losing at events we typically dominate I think attitudes will change. For example, suppose a chinese athlete wins the 100m, I imagine the US Olympic Committee will be rethinking their steroid crackdown shortly after the non US athlete crosses the finish line in first place.

I'm not sure if this will happen at the 2004 Games, based on previous medal totals the US is still most likely to win the most golds. Wait a few years until we start getting overtaken in the medal totals - I bet officials will be rethinking the current 'witch-hunt'

[J65]

"For example, suppose a chinese athlete wins the 100m, I imagine the US Olympic Committee will be rethinking their steroid crackdown shortly after the non US athlete crosses the finish line in first place.".

It's not the USOC, IIRC, but the IOC who dictates that. But like tax laws, someone always finds a loophole.

If I were King each athlete would have to submit what they are taking and then take a test and if something shows up that wasn't on the list(i.e. being dishonest) then they are disqualified.

Also there would be an outcry from poorer countries who say richer countries are winning through drugs and not natural athletic ability.

It's a sticky situation today, where sports, technology, and politics converge into a three way train wreck, IMO.

[ChrisC]

John:

A solution that I've heard before is:

Create two athletic categories - natural and no-holds-barred.

in the natural class - no steroids, super strict drug testing, etc.

in the no-holds-barred class - anything goes, completely untested.


I know this is unrealistic but it presents an interesting solution, i think sadly that attendance would be far higher at the no-holds-barred events...

[J65]

Interesting concept there Chris.

Heard the almost same thing about the home run records. One "natural", the other having an asterik.

The debates will surely rage on.