A leper never changes his spots…
Disgraced sprinter Dwain Chambers claims he has been made to "feel like a leper" on his return to the s
port having served a ban for failing a drugs test.
The 29-year-old yesterday won his battle to be part of the British team at next month's World Indoor Championships in Valencia even though the UK Athletics selection committee were "unanimous in their desire not to select him".
He's a cheat. A two-year ban wasn't enough. Would we have been happy seeing Ben Johnson representing Canada after his cheating was made public, or Justin Gatlin or Marion Jones representing the US again? What about the other athletes who are competing for the UK, do they want to be tarnished with the same brush as Chambers? What about the athletes who aren't competing, because Chambers has their place in the team?
Do we know that the drug cheating he did didn't have any long-term residual effects that are benefiting him now? Do we really know that he's 'clean'? Lot of questions, and sadly they'll continue whilst cheats like Chambers are allowed to compete in Athletics. It's a sport that does its best to prove it's clean - but then rules like this make a mockery of that.
For or against?
Looking through the news pages, it's clear that most athletes are against Chambers' inclusion in the UK team.
Kelly Holmes, Roger Black, Steve Cram, Seb Coe, Paula Radcliffe are amongst those who have voiced their condemnation of his inclusion.
It's interesting to see who is actually supporting Chambers. There's John Regis, American Kim Collins, and Tessa Sanderson - who professes to be vehemently against drug cheating of any sort.
They say he's done his time. I agree. But it's an honour not a right to represent your country. He's forfeited those rights when he cheated. He cheated not only when he was running for himself (and the money that brings), but he was part of the 4 x 100m team that won the gold medal in the World Championships. he cheated all of us.
I don't want to see him in a shirt representing this country.
Thankfully, he will never be allowed to compete in the Olympics again.
I think the headline writer on the BBC site was making a statement with this one.
Subscribe to Yappari
7 Comments so far
Leave a comment
What I don’t understand is the lack of consistency between sports. Footballers can serve a 12 month ban for using nandrolone and then come back afterwards, so why are athletes any different? He used performance enhancing drugs, got given a ban and served it. So why the furore when he comes back to athletics and does well? Just like the shoplifter who serves a jail sentence and then is released. Can they then not live a normal life after serving their due to society?
By Bev on 02.13.08 12:31 pm
If a club wants to employ the cheating footballer then fine. But I don’t think they should play for their country again. They’ve forfeited their right, and let someone ‘worthy’ take that place - someone who hasn’t cheated.
A shoplifter can lead a normal life after their sentence. They’re not going to get a job at a bank though are they? Chambers can go an work in Asda or somewhere - why does he deserve to represent his country at athletics?
By Daniel on 02.13.08 12:35 pm
I think this whole episode, played out in the athletics arena, actually reflects a broader and more sinister issue in wider society - that of ineffective deterrents for would-be law-breakers. Bev makes a good point - why should cheating athletes be treated any differently to cheating footballers?
In my opinion they shouldn’t! Unfortunately, being treated the same in sport, as within wider society appears to mean watering down the penalties to the lowest common denominator - so ultimately they serve as no deterrent to wrong-doing whatsoever.
For murderers - it’s just an average of 7 years behind bars before they can rejoin the rat race. Hardly surprising then, that for a relatively minor drug offence 2 years is sufficient to wipe the slate clean, and get you up and running again!
By Ian on 02.13.08 10:46 pm
Interestingly enough though, one of the main athletics promoters was saying that it’s unlikely Chambers will be able to make a living anywhere close to what he did before through athletics.
He said he won’t be asked to run at any of the major events on the circuit, as the sponsors won’t want him to tarnish the event and their image.
By Daniel on 02.13.08 11:45 pm
If Chambers isn’t going to be able to make a living from Athletics then he may well end up at Asda.
I’m with you on this one Daniel, but I’m also of the opinion that drug cheats, whatever the sport, should be banned totally. As has already been intimated, what kind of message does this send out to the younger end of the Athletics spectrum, when a “big name” cheats and is then allowed back into the sport ?
I’m heavily into cycling and have seen a lot of cheating over a great many years. A zero tolerance mentality is now coming into this sport, with 3 expulsions from the Tour De France last year - 2 of those being “big names”. These riders will never be allowed back, thankfully.
This is the kind of mentality that we need to see in all sports.
By Ian Burnett on 02.15.08 7:23 pm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/7256961.stm
To ‘reward’ the cheat that is Linford Christie, they’re getting him to carry the Olympic torch…
Neverends.
By Daniel on 02.21.08 5:16 pm
Looks like I’ll be cheering on an American at World Indoors for the 60m.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/athletics/7265779.stm
By Daniel on 03.04.08 2:36 pm
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>