Read on Twitter
THREAD - About 1wk ago, I wrote an article about Christian Coleman that inaccurately claimed ‘it had been established’ that Coleman had been tested between 30 & 40 times per year. In fact, Coleman said that he is tested between 30 & 40 times per year: https://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/christian-coleman-case-are-we-catching-dopes-or-dopers/
The error was pointed out by @Jamie_langley1 & was corrected. I apologise. Coleman was tested 11 times by @USADA in 2019, however tests by other ADOs could mean he is tested more than that. In 2018/19, he was tested 20 times by USADA alone: https://www.usada.org/sanction/whereabouts-violation-case-against-christian-coleman-withdrawn/
The correction doesn’t mean that Coleman is being untruthful. Tests by the AIU or WADA could push up numbers. It also underpins the article's main point, which is that use of tracking technology could lessen speculation over whether an athlete that misses tests is doping or not.
Rather than allowing Coleman to miss a test, use his phone data to locate him and test him. Coleman has said he supports this.
I also suggested that an AAF may have been caused by sabotage. This was a personal view based on the circumstances of a case and I should never have expressed this via the @sport_integrity feed. After being alerted to this, I deleted the post. Again, I apologise for this.
It has been suggested (again) that I express such views to drum up business for Mike Morgan, who owns the website. As is stated on the site, Mike Morgan doesn’t dictate what The SII covers or how. I cannot work for free and am grateful for the financial support he has provided.
There are people who hide behind pseudonyms on Twitter that subscribe to the view that all athletes are guilty. Everyone is doping. Always blame the athlete. Scepticism is absolutely crucial. A determined doper will always have an excuse.
But so is balance. Always holding the athlete as always guilty in every case is unfair. The anti-doping system isn’t perfect and athletes who had no intention of cheating are often sanctioned.
This is exactly why The Sports Integrity Initiative was set up. To highlight such cases, and to highlight that not all athletes are guilty in every case. Unfortunately, some people cannot accept this.
The ‘dopey dopers’ are caught by testing, while investigations catch real cheats. There are exceptions to these general rules. But whereabouts failures and blister creams do not mean that somebody is intentionally doping, however much some people would like that to be true.
I welcome corrections, clarifications, or comments to any article on The SII from anybody - it is a crucial part of what I do. But I will not engage with people that operate behind pseudonyms. I do not know who these people are, or if they have an agenda (see Fancy Bears). END
