http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/athletics/7112577.stmRandy Cornhole wrote:Answer me this one question please?
Dwain Chambers gets tested positive for drugs, banned for two years. Comes back and is unable to compete due to an British olympic ruling. Fair enough those are the rules.
Christine Ohuruogu fails to take 3 drug tests and as a result is found guilty and banned for two years. (the same ammount of time a Dwain Chambers) She comes back and is allowed to run?
If you fail to take a drugs test then you are charged as if you are guilty, hence the two year ban she received.
There is something wrong here in my book.
What they are saying is that if Dwain Chambers had not bothered to take his drug tests he would still have been banned for two years but would have been able to run in the Olympics!!!
You cant have one rule for one and another rule for another...
The BOA said in a statement: "The panel decided that Christine Ohuruogu's appeal had been successful due to significant mitigating circumstances."
BOXING
Thought Somjit did great and Manus didn't deserve his victory. The Cuban was a far superior boxer but head butts don't impress the judges

Did you see the French fighter screaming after throwing away a lead? Wow. What a paddy. I don't blame him though. He wuz robbed. If anyone deserved to be penalized it was his opponent who kept charging in with his head down and mauling, not boxing. Definite injustice.
I think the scoring system in some of these sports needs to be changed. Competitors have little incentive to attack, they just try to counterpunch, then run away for the rest of the fight. As soon as you are behind, you are forced into attacking, where you just get picked off.
Far too many contests where nothing happens.