OT: Should Ben Johnson get his gold medal back?

[Maple Leafs]

I'm surprised at how little press the revelations about Carl Lewis' positive drug tests are getting in the States. It seems to be a minor story, if it's even mentioned.

As you can probably understand, there's some bitterness here in Canada over the whole affair. Yes, Johnson cheated. But we always assumed that everyone else was cheating too, and now it sure looks that way. Many Canadians feel like our guy (Johnson) got hung out to dry while others (Lewis, Linford Christie) were hiding behind their country's IOC federations.

So should Ben get his medal back? Should Lewis lose his? Should Johnson's record (since broken) go back in the book?

I'm not asking whether any of it will happen -- I think we all know that this story will be forgotten within a few weeks. But should it be that way?

Here's an article that reflects a lot of what's being said in Canada.
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Track/2003/05/02/77840.html

[JeeberD]

IMO having some Sudafed in your system is a lot different than being totally 'roided up...

[ScottVib]

Difference is when they were caught. Johnson was caught in the post Olympic win test.. Lewis wasn't caught then. The Olympics can't strip gold medals (even tainted) when the athlete passes the test for that meet. Every Gold Medal winner takes a test after the win. Lewis passed his, Johnson didn't, hence Johnson was stripped and Lewis wasn't.

If its an issue of some guys being protected while another was left out to dry.. isn't it the job of the respective countries Olympic Committee's to protect their athletes? So if Christie and Lewis's OC protected them better, while Johnson was left out to dry, I'm not sure really what there is to be bitter about, obviously the US or UK OC's weren't going to out their charges to protect another country's. If the other countries IOC's were able to protect or "hide" their athletes why is it anything to bitter at the other athletes or nations over? Is it their fault they managed to be effective in protecting their athletes?

The fact is for many American's Track is a non-entity except at Olympic time. As a result if there is track news and it not the Olympics (or the US Championships in an Olympic year), you aren't going to hear about it. In Johnson's case he got caught on the World's biggest stage, which made it big news, while the others managed to escape the spotlight; in this case, like so many things in life, timing was everything.

To answer your question, no Johnson shouldn't get his medal back, neither should all the athletes that tested positive in Sydney (their were quite a few). Nor should Lewis be stripped of his, while he cheated (and as they pointed out everyone was doing it) for whatever reason he wasn't caught at that meet when he won them. If he's caught at the Olympics then of course he should have his Olympic Medals stripped too... but if for whatever reason he passed the test, he's got to be allowed to keep it. Now if he feels guilty and gives it up that's a different story, but its not up to the Olympics to strip athletes of their medals if they pass the test administered at the meet.

[stkelly52]

Sounds like a lot of sour grapes to me.

For a more balanced view:

http://espn.go.com/oly/news/2003/0430/1547212.html

[Maple Leafs]

Originally posted by ScottVib
Difference is when they were caught. Johnson was caught in the post Olympic win test.. Lewis wasn't caught then. The Olympics can't strip gold medals (even tainted) when the athlete passes the test for that meet. Every Gold Medal winner takes a test after the win. Lewis passed his, Johnson didn't, hence Johnson was stripped and Lewis wasn't.

True, but many of Lewis' positive tests were in the days leading up to Seoul. It's not like he tested clean his whole life, then failed a test years later (like Christie did). He was caught red-handed before the games, and still walked away squeaky clean.

Originally posted by ScottVib
If its an issue of some guys being protected while another was left out to dry.. isn't it the job of the respective countries Olympic Committee's to protect their athletes?

Dear God, I hope not. I'd like to think that upholding the integrity of the sport is more important than covering the butts of your best-known meal-tickets... er, atheletes. Then again, based on how the US conducts itself in these cases, I have a feeling they agree with you and not me.

Originally posted by ScottVib
... it's not up to the Olympics to strip athletes of their medals if they pass the test administered at the meet.

This would make sense. However, it ignores the fact that the precedent has already been set: Johnson lost his 1987 World Championship world record after his Seoul test, even though he passed his drug test in Rome.

[ScottVib]

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
Then again, based on how the US conducts itself in these cases, I have a feeling they agree with you and not me.

BTW have you read the linked article above?

Here is an excerpt from the article and a quote on the matter from the IAAF.

"The IAAF is concerned that the continuing controversy over these cases is tarnishing the image of the sport unnecessarily and wishes to make its position clear based on what actually happened in 1988,'' the IAAF said.

The federation said it had reviewed the relevant documents from 1988 and found that, although the athletes' names were not disclosed, the IAAF was informed of eight positive findings for ephedrine and ephedrine-related compounds "in low concentrations.''

"The IAAF medical committee felt satisfied, however, on the basis of the information received that the cases had been properly concluded by the USOC as 'negative cases' in accordance with the rules and regulations in place at the time and no further action was taken,'' the statement said.

The IAAF said the athletes who went on to compete in Seoul were "eligible to do in accordance with IAAF rules.''

Baaron Pittenger, who was executive director of the USOC in 1988, said last week that an investigation at the time concluded the level of banned stimulants found in Lewis' system was not significant enough to be performance-enhancing. That prompted the USOC to reverse its decision.

"The rules at the time called for us to determine intent. These levels were less than 10 micrograms per milliliter, consistent with accidental use,'' he said.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally posted by ScottVib
BTW have you read the linked article above?

Yes, Scott, of course I did, you don't need to talk down to me. I found the article to be typical of US media coverage of this story. "Nothing to see here, move along." I notice you kindly ommited the comments by the World Anti-Doping Agency head, as well as Wade Exum.

I suppose we'll never know what really happened. So sure, Lewis ran clean his whole career, if that's what you care to believe, just like Tim Montgomery and Marion Jones are no doubt running clean (it's just a coincidence that they've been training with Ben Johnson's old coach... nothing to see here, and don't forget to buy your Nikes.)

[sabotai]

Bottom line is Lewis passed his test after the event, Johnson did not. That test is the ONLY criteria for awarding medals. Doesn't matter if he tested positive a week before or a week after. If he is clean the day of the event, he gets his medal. Johnson was not, Lewis was.

It seems to me this is a case of "nothing to see here" and the american-bashers out there are just making a huge fuss over nothing.

(note: Before you go jumping on me, I am no fan of the american government or the media. So no, I don't always just take the american position on anything. Just calling it liek I see it here.)

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
I suppose we'll never know what really happened. So sure, Lewis ran clean his whole career, if that's what you care to believe, just like Tim Montgomery and Marion Jones are no doubt running clean (it's just a coincidence that they've been training with Ben Johnson's old coach... nothing to see here, and don't forget to buy your Nikes.)

If that is true, anyone who trained with Ben Johnson, stayed in the same room as him, has similiar eating patterns, used the same bathroom, slept with the same girls and participates in similiar events is doping. It definately couldn't be a coincidence!

[Maple Leafs]

Originally posted by sabotai
Bottom line is Lewis passed his test after the event, Johnson did not. That test is the ONLY criteria for awarding medals. Doesn't matter if he tested positive a week before or a week after. If he is clean the day of the event, he gets his medal. Johnson was not, Lewis was.

I don't necessarily disagree with that logic. However, if you want to take that stance here then you have to also agree that Ben Johnson's Rome record of 9.83 should have stayed in the book (until it was broken years later).

[sabotai]

Sure, if he tested clean at that event the record should have stood. But that's just my opinion. I don't even know what organization makes the rules for recording records and who holds them. Medals and records are different things and I don't know the rules with records.

But if you're asking my opinion, yeah it should have stood (if he passed the rules of the event at that competition).

[JonInMiddleGA]

Are you truly surprised by the lack of media attention to the Lewis story? When precious few people hre really give a flyin' F about track outside of the Olympics?

The rest, as sabotai mentioned, seems like little more than some anti-U.S. bashing and/or whining.

[ScottVib]

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
Yes, Scott, of course I did, you don't need to talk down to me.

I'm sorry you took that the wrong way, I certainly wasn't talking down to you, I just was asking a question.

I'm really sorry if I offended you or made you think I was talking down to you in anyway, it honestly was an innoncent question, unfortunately when reading text sometimes you miss the cues that tells you if something has malicious intent, or was just a simple question.

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
I notice you kindly ommited the comments by the World Anti-Doping Agency head, as well as Wade Exum.

I didn't "kindly" ommit them, I just was pointing out the IAAF's stance on the issue. I thought actually that the IAAF said a lot when it focused on the words "at that time" which to me seems to indicate that while the US Track Federation behaved legally, that it may have been a bit shady. It also seems to indicate that the rules have changed since then, possibly even as a result of this incident.

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
So sure, Lewis ran clean his whole career, if that's what you care to believe.

I don't believe this to be the case at all. I strongly suspect a great deal of athletes, past and present (and probably will continue in the future) were and are doing whatever they can to "get an edge." The difference between the two is that Johnson got caught at the biggest event in the world stage for track; while the others were fortunate not to have gotten nailed there. I certainly don't believe the American or Brit runners were saints, as I mentioned earlier, they were simply lucky for whatever reason not to get caught on the World's biggest stage.

[Blackadar]

Wah wah wah.

[Samdari]

MapleLeafs, you seriously can't be comparing finding trace levels at the trials (2-3 mos before the games, NOT "in the days leading up to the games" as you erroneously claim) of a cold medicine never proven to improve athletic performance with the Ben Johnson off-the-charts level of an anabolic steroid. This is very much an apples and oranges situation. By the way, when Lewis won medals at the games, he tested clean multiple times (they test after every medal winning event) so it probably was because he was clean rather than his obvious doping somehow being missed.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally posted by Samdari
This is very much an apples and oranges situation.

No, you're right, and I'm not trying to draw a direct comparison. I think the question here is "is this a story". I think it is, others think it isn't. (And apparently most people feel like nothing in track and field is a story unless it's an Olympic year, which is fine too.)

Here's what I think: I think that until the Johnson test, the Dubin inquiry and resulting fallout, drug testing in track and field was a joke. I think the atheletes were one step ahead of the tests and knew exactly how to mask what they were using (which, by the way, is why so many "harmless" substances are on the banned list -- they're masking agents that prevent the detection of the really powerful stuff). I think that someone in the Johnson camp screwed up, and further I think when it happened he made the perfect scapegoat because the Canadian contingent didn't have the pull to get people to look the other way.

I also think it defies common sense to imagine that in a time when drug use was rampant, probably moreso than today or any other time in history, Carl Lewis was magically able to beat all the cheaters while running clean. But he was the face of track and field, a multi-million dollar industry all by himself, and I think he could have peed green capsules directly into the cup and he still would have been "taken care of". Which is fine, I suppose, but he also has spent a lifetime looking down his nose at guys like Johnson and Christie. He never missed an opportunity to accuse Johnson of cheating before or after Seoul, yet to this day throws around lawsuit threats if anyone does the same to him.

Considering all that, I think the fact that it he was failing drug tests during the leadup to Seoul, and that the tests were quickly dismissed, covered up and never heard about until 15 years later, should be a story. I'm not surprised that it isn't, but it should be.

[MrIllini]

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
True, but many of Lewis' positive tests were in the days leading up to Seoul. It's not like he tested clean his whole life, then failed a test years later (like Christie did). He was caught red-handed before the games, and still walked away squeaky clean.
Dear God, I hope not. I'd like to think that upholding the integrity of the sport is more important than covering the butts of your best-known meal-tickets... er, atheletes. Then again, based on how the US conducts itself in these cases, I have a feeling they agree with you and not me.
This would make sense. However, it ignores the fact that the precedent has already been set: Johnson lost his 1987 World Championship world record after his Seoul test, even though he passed his drug test in Rome.

blah blah blah, eh?

[MrIllini]

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
Considering all that, I think the fact that it he was failing drug tests during the leadup to Seoul, and that the tests were quickly dismissed, covered up and never heard about until 15 years later, should be a story. I'm not surprised that it isn't, but it should be.

It is a story. There are two links to such stories posted above. One of which tells that the IAAF ruled that the results were nothing more than incidental, and the other being a seemingly bitter piece of rhetoric from a Canadian publication.

Right or wrong, if the IAAF said he was ok, what the hell is there to argue about?