View Single Post
Old 19-08-2024, 19:02   #11
Chris
Trollsplatter
 
Chris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: North of Watford
Services: Humane elimination of all common Internet pests
Posts: 38,142
Chris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden aura
Chris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden auraChris has a golden aura
Re: Online Safety Bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh View Post
I think some of the confusion arises because the IBA haven’t specified what the criteria were which she was banned, and in somewhat unusual circumstances.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...73988ffc9005db
If they followed a cheek swab with a visual exam of some kind, then that absolutely would remain confidential - just as nobody would describe the specifics of how they watched an athlete giving a urine sample (which they do).

Look … we are way, way past casting aspersions on what the WBA has said. the IOC has seen the results and could have stopped a PR disaster in its tracks, simply by saying the tests, which incidentally were handled by a CAS-approved lab, were not credible. They didn’t.

The IOC instead chose to ignore the tests and pursued eligibility criteria based on a marker in a passport. That’s a political, ideological choice.
Chris is offline   Reply With Quote