So to summarise there is no evidence of Chambers showing "staggering arrogance" then?
Can we talk about Carl Myerscough now?
percieved arrogance is no reason to suggest chambers should be banned.
i like the fact that he's not hung his head in shame and gone away quietly. it's an aggresive event he's obviously a driven man.
as someone else says, it's madness to just ban him for one event.
i will be rooting for him, a final is his best realisitic chance, but i hope he gets a medal.
and i hope all the people slagging him off cry into their daily mails.
Shirley the "colonial" comment as re. the Brit's attitude to the lifetime ban, which turned out to be unlawful, proven thanks to Chambers - seems right to me.
For what it's worth lawyers don't just say things in public if Chambers' lawyer has made a statement every word has Chambers approval
Yes your evidence is very convincing its not like the lwayer mad eit clear as to whose views he was expressing and you have made a compelling [s]innuendo[/s]case
Agha said: "[b]In my view[/b], as hosts for the 2012 Olympics, this delicate and emotive issue required international diplomacy, foresight and responsibility.
"What we have received has been a crude and defiant display fuelled by misguided statements such as 'we have standards and the rest of the world doesn't'.
"It has, [b]in my view[/b], been an exposure of colonial arrogance that even the most extreme and blinkered should have realised could only serve to marginalise British opinion on the international stage."
Its like no one actually cares what the facts are from the OP onwards and just wants to hurl abuse at Chambers
The colonial means the UK atempting to impose our "better" standards on the rest of the world and preaching about how good we are in comparison to them …seems fair seeing as we are out of step .
[b]the staggering arrogance on this thread[/b] is more worthy a title here
Good luck to him, he served his 'time'.
I don't care if they are all drugs enhanced in 2012 Olympics ... bloody celebrities ...
Mark Foster said
‘[b]My big thing is if Dwain Chambers hadn’t been caught he would still be doing it[/b]. The fact it was a two-year ban — just a ticking-over period — and then he came back to athletics. It’s nothing against Dwain, but he’s a cheat. I don’t like cheats.’
LOL at the deluded people who think that most of the athletes are clean.
Most of them are at it, it is just the stupid ones that get caught.
funny, in any other walk of life, a rehabilitated drug addict/offender getting back into his career and doing well at it would be a success story.
But not sports?
Erm, yeah Emsz, it's a bit different.
The colonial means the UK atempting to impose our "better" standards on the rest of the world and preaching about how good we are in comparison to them …seems fair seeing as we are out of step
I can understand why she said it [Chambers' Lawyer], but in this case I agree with the BOA's stance and think WADA and the IOC should follow suit. Saying that I don't doubt some grandstanding has been taking place, which is probably what prompted the colonial arrogance quote.
cynical, why?
Sports is part of our lives isn't it? He's done his punishment hasn't he?
So.... As an analogy... if you were having.... ahem .... 'difficulties' in certain departs and you reached for the little blue pill as a solution.
If, then, your good lady subsequently discovered that your towering, Ron Jeremy-esque sexual athleticism and prowess, was artificially drug-induced, would she be within her rights to show you a red card, and run off with one of your mates?
Chambers' lawyer is a he - surprised me too.
Binners,
sex and pies, right?
😆
Edit (doesn't need pills....oh yeah!! ) LOL
Of curse the use of the word "colonial" is playing the race card. Thats the only reason to use it.
Sex and pies sounds like an absolute dream ticket! 😀
Simultaneously or consecutively?
Either really Uncle Jezza. I don't see any good reason why they should be mutually exclusive
TJ Colonial and Why must it be playing the race card?
It refers to the way that the UK treated foreigners in general and about an attitude we had to the world about being superior - as only the BOA has this rule and demanded others get in line it seems a fair comment. As for your the "only reason" [ do you lack as either black or white is the reason you get into to so many "debates" on here.
Dont take that as an invite to have another one about this as you have made your mind up and debating what it means would be pointless.
Junkyard
Para 709.1 of the Bar Code of Conduct provides that a barrister
must not in relation to any anticipated or current proceedings or mediation in which he is briefed or expects to appear or has appeared as an advocate express a personal opinion to the press or other media or in any other public statement upon the facts or issues arising in the proceedings.
Not likely that Siza Agha went off on one without his clients express knowledge and consent.
There are /were plans to relax this rule but any lawyer who made public statements about a clients affairs without clearing them with the client could find themselves in deep problems.
I don't see the colonial reference as necessarily implying race either.
Of curse the use of the word "colonial" is playing the race card. Thats the only reason to use it.
I come from one of the former colonies and I'm (roughly) the same race as most of you on here. The word rankles sometimes, despite having nothing to do with race, but I think that it has different meanings and implications to different people, and in this case think TJ is right- there's definite 'overlord' undertones.
I don't think it's particularly playing the race card in this case - I read it as more about the BOA's perceived patronising and superior demeanour towards the rest of world sport.
"We do it the right way, it's everyone else who is wrong."
I wouldn't be in the slightest bit bothered to see DC sitting out a life ban for cheating, but when you see that London will be welcoming a number of foreign athletes who are competing after drug bans (including a couple who have served multiple bans) it starts to look a tad odd to be taking such a contrary position.
When a black guy uses "colonial" even by proxy then he must know it will be perceived as " you are treating me badly cos I is black" and I cannot see it would not be done without this intent.
TandemJeremy - MemberWhen a black guy uses "colonial" even by proxy then he must know it will be perceived as " you are treating me badly cos I is black" and I cannot see it would not be done without this intent.
Fair enough, but some of us can.
TandemJeremy - Member
When a black guy uses "colonial" even by proxy then he must know it will be perceived as " you are treating me badly cos I is black" and I cannot see it would not be done without this intent.
So now [i]you're[/i] treating people of different races differently?
I thought better of you.
chewkw - Member
LOL @ sponsors ... London 2012DOW... supply more pesticide to the farmers please ... oh look poor farmers in the 3rd world ... let's give them more pesticide please.
Thames Water ... errmm ... it's in the Thames so you drink it first.
GlaxoSmithKline ... Dwain Chambers ... I bet they sponsored you?
etc ...
2 rather obvious points to make in your stupid post.
1) Dow make more stuff than I care to even imagine (and I've worked for them on a project!) the shear number of pies they've got their fingers in is mind boggling! Would you rather they didn't sell pesticides to poor farmers?
2) The last 2 are listed as 'suppliers' not 'sponsors', 8 million poeple drink thames water every day and aren't dead. And GSK are more likely to be supplying toothpaste plasters and antiseptic than nandrolone and EPO.
When a black guy uses "colonial" even by proxy then he must know it will be perceived as " you are treating me badly cos I is black" and I cannot see it would not be done without this intent.
well it was his lawyer and the by proxy is not proven.
I fit was "must" as you suggest we would be having no debate and no dissenting voices to your opinion of what the word means.
You may be correct in that it was meant in this way but some disagree.
it is the certainty with which you state your opinion that I was complaining about. Reasserting it as a definite again despite people disagreeing [ and some agreeing] shows you will never ever get this point no matter how often someone tries to explain it to you.
JunkyardPara 709.1 of the Bar Code of Conduct provides that a barrister
must not in relation to any anticipated or current proceedings
it is not a current proceeding it has ended and cannot go higher so I assume this does not apply and why the lawyer was so keen to say , twice, that it was their view.
Interesting point though I did not know of that rule but IANAL
Reasserting it as a definite again .............
When a black guy uses "colonial" even by proxy then he must know it will be perceived as " you are treating me badly cos I is black" [b][i]and I cannot[/i][/b] see it would not be done without this intent.
No offence but that just shows the point I was trying to make ...we know you cannot see any other reason even when people give you some. I know its your opinion. the issue was more why you act /see like this [ in absolutes] even when people disagree.
When a black guy uses "colonial" even by proxy then he must know it will be perceived as " you are treating me badly cos I is black" and I cannot see it would not be done without this intent.
or
when the lawyer of someone who is black speaks at a conference and uses the word colonial it is a poor choice of word. Whilst it may be that they mean to highlight the BOA's perceived patronising and superior demeanour towards the rest of world sport. However, the use, to some , will appear to be the equivalent of playing the race guard, is it coz i is black, whether this was the intention or not.
Would you like me to rewrite all your posts with appropriate caveats, it may be a FT job [ you could correct my typos] 😉
🙂
Of curse the use of the word "colonial" is playing the race card. Thats the only reason to use it.
So he accused the BOA of "Collonial Arrogance"
The BOA said
..... ‘We have standards and the rest of the world doesn’t’.
Could it just be possible that was the sort of Collonial Arrogance he was referring to, and criticising, and not actually not playing "the race card" in relation to Chambers in any way whatsoever ?
nealglover....thats how i read it too....nothing to do with race, instead implying a superior 'we know best' attitude being taken by GB athletics.
Got no problem with it personlly, the world ran a lot better when we were in charge.
[i]the world ran a lot better when we were in charge.[/i]
Unless, of course, you were a Zulu, or a fuzzy wuzzy, or any other type of 'darkie'....
Dwain Chambers is obviously a truly remarkable man. He may not win an Olympic Gold or come first in many things going forward. But this is a genuine first and gold medal use of the English (opps is that colonial?) language. To use the adjective in this context without the merest hint of a racist undertone is a truly remarkable achievement and for that I salute him. Can we award him a STW gold medal and nominate him for an MBE for services to non-prejudicial use of language? Such and inspiration to us all. Thank you Dwain.
[Not often I agree with you TJ 😉 so particularly nice to say, I think you are spot on here!]
[edit - I know he didn't say the word, but agree that it is highly unlikely that he didn't sanction its use]
i would read the actual thread first as it was his lawyer who said this stating it was his opinion twice whilst doing so. A point made numerous times by me and with links to the quotes etc by others.
Dont worry almost everyone else on this thread has not let the facts get in the way of some dwain bashing .
Yes we should give him the STW scapegoat award for being punished for what someone else says.
EDIT: Nice edit BTW [ why to be fair you did when i was typing
Still i assume you can explain why the lawyer was as clumsy as say it was his opinion twice then? 🙄
I am sure that Dwain will do the honourable thing then JY and pass on the award with his thanks (and cheque for professional fees) - he's that kind of guy!! 😉
[sorry JY it is annoying when edits happen X-post] I guess his lawyer is doubly talented. What a duo. Makes me even prouder.
Pretty sure a lawyer can work out the difference between in my opinion and my client feels.
"In my view as hosts for the 2012 Olympics, this delicate and emotive issue required international diplomacy, foresight and responsibility. What we have received has been a crude and defiant display fuelled by misguided statements such as 'We have standards and the rest of the world doesn't'.
"It has in my view been an exposure of colonial arrogance that even the most extreme and blinkered should have realised could only serve to marginalise British opinion on the international stage.
"In complete contrast WADA have in my view been the model of professionalism and dignity in the face of the most extreme provocation. Lessons should be learned by their example. Agha added: "Having not been party to the CAS case, Dwain and I will now need to take time to privately digest and consider the reasoning behind the decision."
so in my opinion three times and one mention of Dwains view which he is clearly suggesting is unknown at present.
it is a new high [low] in stw ignoring what was saod to have a rant about the guy they dont like
Having to use "lawyers" speak regularly, "in my view' is just a simple by-pass phrase it is not the ronseal of professional language!!!. But thanks for reposting JY, makes me even more confident that TJ was correct in his assessment. We can revel in being the low life of STW together - only a bit of fun though, in my view. 😉
So what's yours TJ - a pint of 80'?
thisisnotaspoon - Member2 rather obvious points to make in your stupid post.
Ignorant is bliss and the truth hurts doesn't it? Are you an ignorant maggot or a maggot that thinks pesticide is good for you? Yes, pesticides and maggots ...
1) Dow make more stuff than I care to even imagine (and I've worked for them on a project!) the shear number of pies they've got their fingers in is mind boggling! Would you rather they didn't sell pesticides to poor farmers?
I used to sell product labels to Dow and Monsanto ... and many more multinationals ...
I would rather they stop or sell less of the pesticides to the farmers because of the environmental and health damage it would cause to the local community. Most 3rd world farmers will over use pesticide to the level that their produce will be dangerous for consumption but they do not know that. Obviously that is bad business for those chemical companies if the farmers understand the danger of pesticides because profit comes first. Local community? Sort that ...
2) The last 2 are listed as 'suppliers' not 'sponsors', 8 million poeple drink thames water every day and aren't dead. And GSK are more likely to be supplying toothpaste plasters and antiseptic than nandrolone and EPO.
Eerrrmmm ... do they have to advertise themselves? So they supply water or medicine so what? Why put themselves in the same page as sponsors? Are they better than other water treatment companies or pharmaceutical companies? They have already monopolised the market so they want more?
🙄
So you don't thinkk it's even possible that the "colonial arrogance" he was referring to was the quite obvious "colonial arrogance" that was displayed by the BOA in saying .....
"we have standards, and the rest of the world doesn't"
It's certainly the only "colonial arrogance" I can see.
But don't let logic stop you.
Fill yer boots.
No that's simple arrogance (some might say common sense?). The adjective 'colonial' adds a pejorative tone that has a long history with a well accepted meaning. He's a lawyer and hardly likely to be stupid. Carefully thought out with words chosen precisely, in my view (of course).
On the second pint of 80' now, just waiting for TJ! 😉
funny, in any other walk of life, a rehabilitated drug addict/offender getting back into his career and doing well at it would be a success story.
Emsz - I'm not sure that the average thief or smack head has cheated their way to the top in the same way. There's no reasonable parallel to any other walk of life where someone takes the "easy" way out, takes drugs and then somehow gets ahead of everyone else (Limitless being a film and not very good film at that).
I can easily understand how it becomes emotive for athletes in particular when they see someone who took money and results away from clean competitors and directly affected people's success and livelihoods. On the other hand, the trader doing a couple of lines of coke of an evening when I worked in the city bothered me not at all.
The adjective 'colonial' adds a pejorative tone that has a long history with a well accepted meaning.
I agree entirely.
And in the sense it was used, regarding "colonial arrogance" it refers to the fact that the BOA are arrogant enough to think we are better than everyone else.
As is displayed perfectly by the phrase ....
... We have standards, the rest of the world doesn't
Seems to fit your description of the "accepted meaning" quite well don't you think ?
