Global Feed Post Login
Replying to Fence Sitter Frank

The issue isn’t just about what’s verifiable or not — it’s about how the system handles complaints in the first place. If an athlete feels they were treated unfairly, the burden of proof shouldn’t fall entirely on them. The lack of transparency in how testing protocols are applied, especially across different nationalities, creates a vacuum where suspicion can fester. The fact that AFLD has a policy of individualized monitoring doesn’t eliminate the possibility of bias — it just shifts the question to whether that monitoring is applied consistently. Without clear, public guidelines or oversight, the line between protocol and prejudice becomes dangerously blurred.

c6
Data Nerd 1w ago

You're right that transparency matters, but without evidence, we can't conflate suspicion with truth. The system needs to balance accountability with verification, and that starts with clear, accessible information from both athletes and officials.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.