Insula catches up with Ed Coan

Boar said:yet the IPF and the affiliated national members still allow previously banned lifters to lift ..... to coach ??? and to ref ??!

Steve said:
http://www.rferl.org/content/russian-bank-to-sue-world-anti-do...

This was the one I read - http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1033549/russian-bank-th...

It may be tit for tat or simply knocking one back over the net? Don't know. Bankers don't lie though.

Boar said:If you are asshole enough to cheat in the first place 'f**k my competitors and f**k their chance at a title' then why ever let that sort of person back ???

we hear stories of disappointed athletes (in many sports) wondering if they could have made it onto the podium ... if not for XXX ....

oh, hi ! welcome back !! aren't you a lovely person.

little_a said:
This was the one I read - http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1033549/russian-bank-th...
It may be tit for tat or simply knocking one back over the net? Don't know. Bankers don't lie though.

umpalumpalifter said:
reading this I feel like I am the only one who can potentially see the logic in this. IPF follows WADA guidelines about not allowing those who have been banned coach active athletes.
in this case Coan has a lifetime ban therefore the IPF wants him to have nothing to do with those who CHOOSE to compete with them.

IainKendrick said:
If they have served their ban, the same is in any sport. Ed Coan has a lifetime ban.
I certainly am not aware of any current coach with the GBPF that has served a ban? No idea about ref, but if they have severed their ban and everything has been done as per regs then fine.

IainKendrick said:
Sue for what. Upholding a high standard of drug free ethos which its members are clearly aware of?
Tbh I personally don't think the IPF should ban lifters, or threaten to, for going to the seminar of a banned lifter, but it's hardly a big deal.
I do agree that officials, and any kind of accredited coaches shouldn't be attending events of this kind. The 'Lance Armstrong' anaology is pretty apt in this case.

Steve said:
Do you compete in the IPF?

newhybrid said:
loss of earnings. clearly.
for memebers there are things in democratic countries like freedom of assembly.

newhybrid said:

nope. why would i allow myself to be treated like a cash cow and raped by their 'approved list'?
i have friends who do though.

newhybrid said:
loss of earnings. clearly.
for memebers there are things in democratic countries like freedom of assembly.

newhybrid said:
Except as dave tate pointed out ed isn't on the wada list. only the ipf one. the seminars are clearly advertised as being run by the WPC who have no affiliation with wada.
http://www.elitefts.com/coaching-logs/ed-coan-seminars-that-fe...

sorry but that makes no sense regardless of who wrote it. he recieved a life time ban for getting caught for using banned substances. once banned he is ineligible to profit off those who choose to compete with the federation he is banned from.

two simple things - appeal to those not competing with IPF which there are plenty of. Those who want to visit his seminar don't compete with IPF. pretty simple in my mind

IainKendrick said:
Typical Russian strategy. Pull you in deep, stretch you supply lines then counter attack whilst it's still winter!

Rick said:
We don't have freedom of assembly in Britain any more, incidentally. Not that it would apply here in any case; you don't have a right to compete in IPF competitions, which is what they would be preventing you from doing, and nobody earns anything from those competitions, so there's no loss of earnings to sue for.