I thought CAS’s burden of proof was “speculatively possible”
WADA’s motus operandi
A Russian athlete just got stripped of an Olympic medal based on “a suspicious blood” test
Couldn’t actually prove she had doped (which she probably did but besides the point) but hey! Close enough is good enough right?
I thought CAS’s burden of proof was “speculatively possible”
WADA’s motus operandi
A Russian athlete just got stripped of an Olympic medal based on “a suspicious blood” test
Couldn’t actually prove she had doped (which she probably did but besides the point) but hey! Close enough is good enough right?
I thought CAS’s burden of proof was “speculatively possible”
WADA's motus operandi
A Russian athlete just got stripped of an Olympic medal based on “a suspicious blood” test
Couldn’t actually prove she had doped (which she probably did but besides the point) but hey! Close enough is good enough right?
I don’t think you understand how the biological passports work. Without a lot more evidence, this doesn’t appear to be an issue. Note that her coach isn’t saying the system is wrong, he’s trying to claim “a childhood head injury” means she reacts differently at different altitudes.
I’ve been a little underwhelmed as to Simpkin’s output thus far. I know he’s only been back in to full time training since Jan, but watching him at Hawthorn he seemed to be quite a lot more prolific than he has shown to this point. I think he’s good enough and should improve as the season progresses to become a vital member of the B22.
Does he look like he’s still short of a gallop or is it just me?
Yeah, when I watched him at Hawthorn he seemed to be a solid player who looked better than he was in a champion side. He will play a role and is an experienced AFL body, nothing more and I doubt he will be looked at by anyone for 2017 as journeymen of his variety are usually overlooked in favour of kids.