The lesson of all of this is that Ben should have phoned his lawyers instead of gone home. As far as Slaney goes, don't make me laugh. There is no difference between her and Ben. They are both cheats. Ben took it like a man and Mary-well...she is still crying about 1984 let alone the drug test. Go back and reread all the posts about Ben. Now who is rehabilitating whom. See the link below. If you want to live litigiously, you die litigiously. Oh man, I could go on and on. Just reviewing some of the posts. How about this one reworded: "...and she has the silver medal to prove it..." Just for starters. Sorry Garry, you are absolutely right about sucking it up but the hypocrisy of some of these America-first messages is mind-boggling to me. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/athletics/news/2001/10/01/slaney_case_ap/index.html
Regards, Martin Ed and Dana Parrot wrote: > > Sorry, but NONE of these athletes lost millions in income, as Ben did, > from > > their suspensions. I doubt Barnes and Hunter combined earned a million > > total in their competitive careers. Mitchell was already at the end of > his > > career and was only earning pick up change. Nope, Johnson had a much > > higher profile than ANY U.S. athlete who has been tagged yet. Slaney is > > the only one close, and she was finally vindicated for what was the > > stupidest type of test that the IAAF could cook up. > > Well. . . I'm not sure that most people would say that Slaney was > vindicated. As far as I'm concerned she is in exactly the same situation as > Mitchell. She tested positive, challenged the science, was cleared by > USATF, and was not cleared by the IAAF. The only difference was that Slaney > caused 10 times the bad press. > > - Ed Parrot
