In an average week you come across at least one news story which either makes little sense, or leaves too many unanswered questions.
This week I could not make head or tail of the story which predicted a human head transplant would soon be attempted.
It would occur in some brave corner of the globe which obviously has a surplus of cryogenically preserved heads, and a glut of ghoulish surgeons.
Apart from the unspeakably grotesque nature of this neural nip and tuck, I couldn’t see why it was called a head transplant, and not a body transplant. I’m sure the above-mentioned dome, once in situ, will come out claiming he had a body transplant, rather than the reverse.
After all, the body part of the deal will be mute and therefore unable to mount a rebuttal, save a few resentful upper cuts to the boastful bust. And that might not be good for either side of the stitches.
The second story I felt perplexed by announced that cryogenically suspended blood and urine samples from the Beijing Olympics had been retested to reveal 31 dopers from 12 nations and six sports.
This was hardly perplexing of itself since it has long been known that re-testing would now be part of the global sport anti-doping regimen. Especially since testing technology lags behind the evil boffins who perpetually tweak the molecular codes dictated by stealthy dopers.
The part I couldn’t understand was that even though these guilty 31 would now be ineligible to compete at Rio, nothing was said about the legitimacy of their Beijing achievements.
For example, would medals be stripped, records be removed, asterisks added? But I guess such statements might have been letting the cat out of the bag.
(Even for dirty dopers, there are painstaking protocols required to protect anonymity until the right moment.)
Yet did no journalist quiz the IOC over this? Or perhaps the IOC issued a strict embargo on further elaboration until the total disclosure. If so, it would have been helpful to know.
Instead, we get an AAP story in which Australian IOC officials claim to have no knowledge of Australians being among the positives. Well, if the IOC has shut up shop on the yarn, of course we won’t know.
This was surely one of those stories about not having a story, while being unable to admit it: just one more thing I don’t understand.
HarryT
Guest
Yes. Individuals, each sport, countries and events, should all have a demerit point system similar to a driver's license. This would change the practice of just not looking for cheats , to actively rooting them out.
delbeato
Roar Guru
They're happy to ping individual athletes, but less happy to drag a sport or competition through the mud - i.e. the Olympics. They need to make the hard decisions here and stop protecting their brands.
Professor Rosseforp
Guest
Actually Steve Larkin's article on this page answers some of my questions -- should have read it first!
Professor Rosseforp
Guest
Without casting aspersions at any athlete, I think the walkers shouldn't be talking too loudly about rule breaches -- any walking race I've ever watched has an entire field using actions that should have them disqualified. I get that race walking is a different style of motion to strolling in the park, but every walker I've watched has both feet off the ground simultaneously, and easily visible to the naked eye.
Queries
Guest
Tallant was probably the cheater
Torchbearer
Guest
Would not surprise me if Tallent gets his second gold medal, as the guy who beat him was subsequently caught for drugs. Even his bronze could be upgraded to hold, stranger things have happened.
Professor Rosseforp
Guest
I would like to know how many of the 31 were going to be at the 2016 Olympics anyway. I would have preferred test results from 2012, and maybe even through in international and Commonwealth Games from 2014. There's more chance that these athletes will be competing in 2016. I would like to know how many samples were tested, and on what basis. 31 seems an extremely low figure from a field of many thousands of athletes.
Simoc
Guest
It is as irrelevant as Oz walker Tallant belatedly being awarded gold. It makes a media story but sport is all about being in the moment and winning on the day. Stripped of gold or not they still won on the day, as Tallant lost on the day. That's why they still cheat despite a pretty good chance now of being caught for having doped at a future date.
Gurudoright
Guest
I can't understand why they wouldn't.