Re: Ryan Bailey : Mon Jan 08, 2018 12:18 pm
knockersbumpMKII wrote:
Cop out and very clever by Bailey using his previous mental health to make out he had no idea as to the ramifications of not providing a test.
That they came back 2 days later and he did a 'clear' test is meaningless, a drug such as cocaine has a pretty short 'half-life' IF an athlete had taken it even the day before or two days before, refused a test and dope testers come back 2 days later there's a very high chance that it would be clear especially if the user was doing it infrequently.
The outcome is laughable and the panel swallowed it hook line and sinker.
That they came back 2 days later and he did a 'clear' test is meaningless, a drug such as cocaine has a pretty short 'half-life' IF an athlete had taken it even the day before or two days before, refused a test and dope testers come back 2 days later there's a very high chance that it would be clear especially if the user was doing it infrequently.
The outcome is laughable and the panel swallowed it hook line and sinker.
Surely under these circumstances they should have been given the authority to take a sample of a hair strand in the test 2 days later? As you say the detection time on Cocaine is usually around 2-3 days through a Urine or blood sample - So there is every possibility he has dodged a massive bullet there.
Im sure detection time in a hair strand is usually around 90 days from intake of the drug itself, Surely this would of been the best action to take?
Seriously though, how poor of the doping body to turn up without any sealed bottles?
