PDA

View Full Version : Should Dwain Chambers be selected to run for GB



golach
14-Jul-08, 15:08
Should this man be allowed to represent the UK at Beijing, he was caught using illegal steroids which were performance enhancing drugs. And now wants to race at the Olympics

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7503792.stm

Anne x
14-Jul-08, 15:17
I voted No other OH and I had this very conversation last night while watching the Athletics on the Beeb and judging the the crowds response to him at that meeting
I dont think there are a lot who have great sympathy for him or want him to compete for his Country

teenybash
14-Jul-08, 15:51
I voted no.
To let him compete flies in the face of what the Olympics are all about.

NickInTheNorth
14-Jul-08, 15:59
I voted that he should be allowed, purely because that is what the rules allow.

To my mind however the rules need changed.

they should either not test for illegal practises, and the fastest man / woman wins (my prefered option simply because the best cheats are not discovered and thus win anyway)

or as another option any offence should result in a whole life ban (but that will never happen)

justine
14-Jul-08, 16:28
unfortunately there is no easy solution to this.He was found to be using illegal drugs, and there fore given a 2 year ban and a lifetime ban from the olympics..He now has the right to run for gb in anything other than the olympics.Should he be selected for the games then it will be unfair to all others that have been given the dreaded lifetime ban.To deny him would be a sensible answer but then has he proved himself worthy of the exception to the rule.
I have not voted on this as it is a 50/50 no win situation.If he is allowed to run i hope that he wins as we need all the help we can get...

Highland Laddie
14-Jul-08, 17:01
He took drugs,was caught,got banned, so it should stand, hang up his shoes, if not, what sort of message are we sending to the young !!!!!

DeHaviLand
14-Jul-08, 17:56
He's served his ban. We allow murderers out of prison in the hope they can be rehabilitated. Chambers has proven he is rehabilitated.

Gizmo
14-Jul-08, 18:05
He's served his ban. We allow murderers out of prison in the hope they can be rehabilitated. Chambers has proven he is rehabilitated.

That's a ridiculous analagy, if someone who worked in a nursing home murdered one of the patients would you think it perfectly right that once that person has served their sentence they should be able to return to the same job?

Dwain Chambers may have served his ban but he tarnished british sport and should not be allowed to compete at a national level ever again.

Kevin Milkins
14-Jul-08, 18:28
Cant be bothered to read the thread as I had already made up my mind that he should not race.
The other clean living and hard working athletes dont want him either.
Bin him.
Get a job as a politician, he would fit in well there.

golach
14-Jul-08, 19:08
He's served his ban. We allow murderers out of prison in the hope they can be rehabilitated. Chambers has proven he is rehabilitated.
No he has not served his complete ban, The British Olympic Association has a ruling that all drug users who are caught are banned from all Olympic Games sin die.

percy toboggan
14-Jul-08, 19:42
The man is a disgrace.
If he represents Britain then all the 'clean'athletes should walk away from this expensive run and jumpfest which matters not one jot in the scheme of things anyway.
Chambers deserves nothing...absolutely nowt.

binbob
14-Jul-08, 21:49
well............thinking of all the footballers,celebrities etc...they do dreadful things...but no bans for them in their chosen sphere.i mean ..amy whinehouse...absolute disgrace to the human race.yet ..i bet u listen to her let ur kids buy/listen etc.i would rather dwayne chambers competed...i am quite sure that there are many going to the olympics who are not so honest and clean.

the papers are full of folk doing wrong ..so ..that is life.no one is perfect or even close..

MadPict
14-Jul-08, 22:19
Absolutely not - he was a drug cheat.

What message does it send to all the hard working and dedicated clean atheletes - cheat and you can win...

DeHaviLand
14-Jul-08, 23:12
Absolutely not - he was a drug cheat.

What message does it send to all the hard working and dedicated clean atheletes - cheat and you can win...

Precisely, he WAS a drug cheat. Now he's clean, is rehabilitated, and is a world class athlete. And the message he's giving is that you dont need drugs to win.

golach
14-Jul-08, 23:15
Precisely, he WAS a drug cheat. Now he's clean, is rehabilitated, and is a world class athlete. And the message he's giving is that you dont need drugs to win.
How can he be trusted ever again? The whole relay team could lose their medals if he tested positive once more.

scorrie
14-Jul-08, 23:20
I say let him run. Drug cheats should either be banned for life, or allowed to compete again after they have served whatever penalty was doled out.

I would prefer a life ban for those caught cheating but that is not the way it is. If an athlete is allowed to compete, they should not be barred from any particular event. At one time you could argue that the Olympic Games were a special case but that no longer applies. Ever since professional athletes and sportsmen and women were allowed into the Olympics it crushed the ideals upon which they were founded. The Olympic Committee are as greasy as anyone and the awarding of the Games is more to do with business and politics than any other factor these days. Millionaire Tennis stars and Basketball players have made a mockery of the notion of competition for the sake of Sport. Baron de Coubertin would be disgusted by how far away from Sport the event has drifted.

scorrie
14-Jul-08, 23:36
How can he be trusted ever again? The whole relay team could lose their medals if he tested positive once more.

If you are to take that view, then NO person convicted of ANY offence could ever be trusted again either. Are you going to start a campaign to have ALL former offenders locked up again, on the grounds that they can never be trusted again?

If we are unwilling to give people a CHANCE to show they have learned a lesson, they can never prove that they have it in them to do so.

Moderator
14-Jul-08, 23:37
A number of posts have been removed from this thread as not appropriate.

golach
14-Jul-08, 23:40
If you are to take that view, then NO person convicted of ANY offence could ever be trusted again either. Are you going to start a campaign to have ALL former offenders locked up again, on the grounds that they can never be trusted again?

If we are unwilling to give people a CHANCE to show they have learned a lesson, they can never prove that they have it in them to do so.
He was never convicted of any crime, he was punished by his sporting peers, for taking performance enhancing steroids, and was dealt with by the Sporting judges, and part of that deal is that he never be allowed to take part in any Olympic events again....ever

Cattach
15-Jul-08, 06:31
He's served his ban. We allow murderers out of prison in the hope they can be rehabilitated. Chambers has proven he is rehabilitated.

Has he?!!!!! With the way drugs can now be hidden we just do not know.

brokencross
15-Jul-08, 07:49
Don't know the medical ins 'n 'outs, but when taking the drugs he must have increased his body mass/bulk which contributed to his improved performance. So is that body mass/bulk advantage still there even though he has stopped taking drugs and therefore still unfair??

I voted NO, I think the British Olympic bye law was in force at time of his drug taking so he knew the rules and risks. He broke the rules and should be forced to abide by them.

On Saturday I was hoping he would injure himself and have to withdraw and hence drop the legal action as it is only damaging athletics.

Cattach
15-Jul-08, 09:31
Don't know the medical ins 'n 'outs, but when taking the drugs he must have increased his body mass/bulk which contributed to his improved performance. So is that body mass/bulk advantage still there even though he has stopped taking drugs and therefore still unfair??

I voted NO, I think the British Olympic bye law was in force at time of his drug taking so he knew the rules and risks. He broke the rules and should be forced to abide by them.

On Saturday I was hoping he would injure himself and have to withdraw and hence drop the legal action as it is only damaging athletics.

I think you ma\ke excellent points and he cetainly knew the consequences and the rules he was breaking. He should not be in the UK team.

DeHaviLand
15-Jul-08, 11:01
Has he?!!!!! With the way drugs can now be hidden we just do not know.

Yes, he has. And if we follow through with your argument, we shouldn't be sending anyone to China. Just in case!:roll:

hotrod4
15-Jul-08, 11:15
He cheated, he got caught-period.
What sort of message does that send out to our kids?
Its Ok to cheat you will get another chance later anyway, I am surprised that we have athletes at all after some schools banned competitive sport to spare "peoples feelings" and then we see those that do get to participate cheat!

Melancholy Man
15-Jul-08, 12:56
If you don't want "preformance enhancing drugs" in the Olympics, fair enough, but don't suggest it's inimicable to the Olympics themselves. In Antiquity, competitors were happy to dope themselves up with juju and... erm... herbal remedies (http://www.socal.com/artman/publish/article_1307.shtml). They were out to win, as Plato would have said between bouts of pankration, which he was reigning champion in, and which allowed anything except the eyes, throat and goolies.

There's an account of a wrestling contest in which, knowing he was about to be defeated, a competitor deliberately induced an alternative fall which broke his neck. He was dead, but now he was immortal whilst his competitor was alive but defeated.

Oh, an Baron Pierre de Coubertain was, of course, not thefather (http://www.bbc.co.uk/shropshire/features/2004/08/william_penny_brookes.shtml) of the modern Olympics. That said, his ideal went out when they stopped awarding medals for art and music in 1952.

scorrie
15-Jul-08, 15:32
Has he?!!!!! With the way drugs can now be hidden we just do not know.

By that same token, ALL athletes could be doing EXACTLY the same thing.

scorrie
15-Jul-08, 15:43
He was never convicted of any crime, he was punished by his sporting peers, for taking performance enhancing steroids, and was dealt with by the Sporting judges, and part of that deal is that he never be allowed to take part in any Olympic events again....ever

For goodness sake, the principle is the same!! He has competed in and WON the trial for the Olympics. He should either have been banned from all events or allowed to compete in all events. It is a farcical system that lets him into the qualifier and not the event itself.

TBH
15-Jul-08, 16:02
I voted no.
To let him compete flies in the face of what the Olympics are all about.Everything nowadays flies in the face of what the olympics were originally about. Professionalism has taken over.

brokencross
18-Jul-08, 12:41
He lost case.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7503792.stm

Kevin Milkins
18-Jul-08, 13:18
Thank god for british justice and common sense.
And orgers as well for 68.18% say no he should not compete and 31.82% that would let him run

MadPict
18-Jul-08, 17:02
I'm sure the honest atheletes are pleased this drug cheat will not be wearing the GB colours.
Common sense rules for once.

percy toboggan
18-Jul-08, 17:16
I'm sick of hearing about the cheat.
He should disappear underneath a stone of his own choosing and give the rest of us....a rest.

Perhaps he can continue to work on developing his muscles or take up some other hobby to keep himself occupied. He might even decide to get a job!

fingalmacool
18-Jul-08, 18:01
He couldn't win with the drugs so whats the arguement?:confused

golach
18-Jul-08, 19:25
I'm sure the honest atheletes are pleased this drug cheat will not be wearing the GB colours.
Common sense rules for once.
Could not have said it better myself MP, cheating should get you nowhere.

A_Usher
18-Jul-08, 22:13
I have mixed feeling on this. On one hand he cheated and was caught, on the other hand he couldl serve well to show that you dont need to cheat to win races, and could demonstrate the process of rehabilitation.

Cheating does go on, i was in attendence of a recent martial arts tournament where i witnessed some "legal" cheating. Several fighters where taking sudafed, aspririn and redbull, which can give a high and allow blood to flow quicker through the system, potentially giving an edge.

Im on the fence regarding Chambers.

scorrie
18-Jul-08, 23:38
I have mixed feeling on this. On one hand he cheated and was caught, on the other hand he couldl serve well to show that you dont need to cheat to win races, and could demonstrate the process of rehabilitation.

Cheating does go on, i was in attendence of a recent martial arts tournament where i witnessed some "legal" cheating. Several fighters where taking sudafed, aspririn and redbull, which can give a high and allow blood to flow quicker through the system, potentially giving an edge.

Im on the fence regarding Chambers.

Most of the input on this has been shallow, gut reaction with little or no consideration of the bigger picture. I hear blah, blah about Chambers not being allowed to pull on the British colours. Too late for that, he already competed for GB AFTER his ban was served, in the European Championships in 2006. A system that cannot prevent someone from competing in a trial but CAN prevent them from competing in the event itself is seriously flawed. It doesn't say much for Britain's other sprinters, that they are defeated by a 30 year old who has had a very disrupted career, albeit from his own doing. US athlete, turned pundit, Michael Johnson stated that Chambers should not have been trying to compete in the games any, simply because he had no chance of winning a medal. That hardly complies with the supposed spirit of the games and the ethos that it is not the winning but the taking part that counts. I hope that this tedious big head does not start wittering on about the prospects of the "Barges" who will be running in Chambers' place.

MadPict
19-Jul-08, 00:49
Is it right that a clean athelete who has qualified for the GB team should be dropped because a drug cheat like Chambers gets the place just because he is a few 1/10ths of a second quicker?

Chambers probably wouldn't have won a medal anyway - let an honest athelete at least have the experience of competing in the Olympics...

sprint95m
19-Jul-08, 13:21
Cycling has been/is riddled with competitors cheating by taking drugs.
I cannot help but feel that the popularity or otherwise of the individual involved has a bearing on the public's attitude.
Richard Virenque, the now retired French cyclist, was almost a "national institution", such was his popularity in his homeland. Twice he served bans for drug taking (although he never actually failed a single test) and was allowed to return to the sport. Latterly the organisers of Le Tour de France chose to describe him as rehabilitated.

Personally, I have no time for cheats.

_Ju_
19-Jul-08, 14:59
He knew the rules before taking the drugs. He made a choice, was caught and now has to live with the consequences. Full stop.

Anne x
19-Jul-08, 16:03
I'm sure the honest atheletes are pleased this drug cheat will not be wearing the GB colours.
Common sense rules for once.

100% in agreement with you MadPict

scorrie
19-Jul-08, 17:53
This is my last post on this subject as little more can/needs to be said.

What if Chambers IS clean now? As I have already said, he competed for GB in the 2006 European Championships. Other members of the team should have refused to compete alongside him if he is to be labelled "Dirty" for the rest of his life. The 4x100M relay team picked up the Gold medal on that occasion. Darren Campbell did not join in the celebrations as a protest against Chambers' participation but I note that he still collected his medal, so he obviously didn't feel THAT strongly about the affair. Great Britain won Gold medals with a "cheat" in their squad then, yet now they turn around under a by-law and prevent him from competing in the Olympics. Where is the consistency in that?

My own belief is that drugs cheats should be banned for life and I listened with interest to a reporter who explained that drugs cheats who are/were given life bans, have no incentive to turn in those who helped them cheat. The system currently works like plea bargaining in courts, where a shorter ban will be imposed if the athlete co-operates and helps the authorities to identify those who are dishing out chemicals to competitors.

Chambers would not have won a medal in my opinion but if he is clean now he was the fastest GB athlete in winning the trial and he had a right to compete and run to his best position. If he had been allowed to do that and achieved a better result than he had done when taking drugs, then surely that could only be a positive message to other athletes that the drugs don't always work. The "Couldn't win with drugs so what's the point without?" view is shallow and illogical.

hotrod4
19-Jul-08, 17:58
Without being too cynical, whats the odds of Someone from GB & NI getting sent home for testing positive?
Hopefully it wont happen but IF it did, would dwayne then have the right to turn around and "gloat" that someone was cheating and would he be right to do so?

As I said hope it doesnt happen its more of a "what if?"

martin macdonald
19-Jul-08, 18:34
i voted no, but perhaps it would be an idea to have a special olympics for all the cheats.:eek: