Discussion in 'Other Sports' started by owa, Dec 5, 2017.
Spengler Cup, here we come.
Russia's just a big mess all around.
Good thing they have that USA back-up plan going.
They deserve it. Good thing that clean athletes can still compete as a neutral though, so they don't get punished.
Best. Olympic Hockey. Ever.
So what happens with the hockey team then?
I would guess they would be able to play if they passed the drug tests, but as OAR.
Those uniforms are going to suck.
Russian athlete during the opening ceremony:
KHL will likely decide not to send its players, and then there won't be a Russian team.
But yes, like Ken mentioned, if they did go it'd be an Olympic neutral team.
But what will happen to Nigel Dawes?!
oh, i guess he plays for Kazakhstan
Big money, corruption, cheating.. this is today's sport. Whole World is like that, not just Russia, so these idiots should ban all countries.. these days all athletes are using some shit, it's just all about how good you are at hiding it.
It's true, but if they just ignore a country getting caught breaking into their testing facility and tampering with hundreds of tests then it's pretty much the wild west at that point.
False equivalence. The Russian government was actively helping their athletes cheat on a wide scale, it's not the same as individual athletes or teams cheating elsewhere.
It's International Olympic Committee.. this is the place full of lies and terrible people, they are as bad as FIFA and they are the biggest cheaters in the first place.
Your whataboutism doesn't change the fact that Russia deserves the ban.
Definitely not all of them deserved to be banned, but of course now they can't represent their country.
The ones that aren't banned can still participate in the Olympics.
Representing whom? IOC lol.. if they win something it won't count as Russia's medal. They can participate at IOC's stinking rules.
It will still count as a personal medal.
If the IOC is this intolerable, why would you want them to attend anyways?
The ones that did nothing and want to represent Russia should have the right to represent their country like other athletes. If I was one of them I'd stay at home if I couldn't represent my country.
I will never participate in anything with stinking IOC flag attached to my name because it's like representing them, not my country. I hate them with a passion, they ruin sport more than anyone.. but that's just my point of view, I don't expect anyone to agree with me.
Letting Russian athletes compete under the Russian flag wouldn't be punishing Russia though. Russia isn't being punished because a bunch of their athletes cheated, they are being punished because they were actively running the cheating and using their security services to cover it up. The only way to punish them is to bad the country.
All this is based on the testimony of one whistle blower, who was arguably his own man in this, who has had a history of being admitted into a mental hospital. His word is simply being accepted uncritically, without due process.
you're the biggest anti-russia hack on this board going, and im sure that youve got all this from "lovely, neutral, western media" which is as full of bs as anywhere in the world esp when it comes to dealing with russian affairs.
Except this isn't even true, he was the first person to come forward and they corroborated his story through their investigation and the official documents he handed over to them, which were verified.
Two of his colleagues who were involved just happened to drop dead right after he came forward as well, what a coincidence.
Both you and Phil are just parroting talking points from RT at this point. "Western media", using false equivalencies, whataboutisms, accusing me of being anti-Russian, etc.
I'll take credible news sources like The Washington Post or The New York Times that has actual journalistic standards and isn't just publishing state propaganda any day over Russian state media.
I'm in no way anti-Russian, I'm anti-Russian government. I don't support any corrupt regime that steals from their own country, murders opposition, suppresses free speech, etc.
they dont have journalistic standards, they just pander to anti-russian gov blowhards like yourself
i cant deny that it took place, but the extent to which it was state-sponsored is the issue which i have insofar as there not being concrete proof. the only people whose heads have rolled for this are mutko and nagornii, but still in some positions. again its the athletes that suffer for this.
i just dont feel that there has been enough significant critical analysis. but of course whenever it is russia involved it will always be guilty until proven innocent.
Right...two of the most respected news organizations in the world for factual reporting don't have journalistic standards, but you trust actual state run media that has time and again been proven to be publishing everything from misleading stories, to outright lies, to conspiracy theories.
especially when it comes to russian affairs i dont trust these "factual" newspapers have. the truth lies in the middle. im willing to accept that. youre not, and will never take into account the russian accounts.
and for the record i dont read RT or sputnik. i read russian newspapers which are not 100% "state-controlled"
What sort of proof are you looking for that you would think warrants a country ban? Their anti-doping officials were scrubbing urine samples so that their athletes would pass the tests despite doping, and higher officials than them not only knew this was going on but were actively involved in doing it. It wouldn't even matter if the scheme stopped there, that would be enough to deserve a ban as that is organizational.
I'm willing to accept any account that is properly sourced and factually correct. When you come into the thread reading off talking points that are either misleading or false, as you have also done in the past, it's pretty difficult to take your account seriously. I don't believe Washington Post, New York Times, The Guardian, Der Spiegel, Reuters, Associated Press, Agence France Presse etc. because they are western media, I believe them because they have a long and proven track record of factual reporting. None of them are perfect and sometimes they get things wrong, but they are quick to correct it and are very reliable.
The two largest news agencies in Russia are state owned, the state owns almost all the broadcast channels, the large print media is owned either by the state or by state supporting oligarchs (but the print media situation is much better than the digital one), etc. So I am curious to what your preferred sources are for Russian news.
tbf out of those the guardian is significantly the worst (shaun walker and alec luhn especially). have been pointed out for , whilst also being incredibly anti-russian biased. luhn is the worst of all, often doing things to get himself arrested and then trying to look like a martyr.
ftr i read novaia gazeta, kommersant and whenevr i get a chance to watch tv news, i do watch rossia-1, probably taken from ria novosti, but also sometimes watch tv dozhd.
rt and sputnik are like they are to counter the overwhelming media bias that exists in english language media, and honestly, lack of russian expertise that exists in the west. for example when you have leading american democrat politicians confusing korea and crimea. little to no russian people domestically will read news published by these two media outlets.
its all about the narrative. when the whole western press narrative is founded on the idea that russia is a dictatorship which poses an existential threat to the west, it is incredibly easy to fail to undestand the complex processes at work beneath that. russia will always be the "easy enemy" which the west looks to discredit at any opportunity to score points, simply because russia will not simply bow down and accept certain things regarding western politics and society, to which there are significant political, societal, historical and cultural reasons.
you have to understand, russia has been a democracy for 25 years, and the first few years of this "western-style democracy" (and yes, i do say democracy, because as putin announces his candidacy for the 2018 elections, his opinion rating has done, and will remain at 75-80%. this is both people who actively support him, and those who, from experience say that there is no-one else remotely qualified to govern) crippled the country, and left people absolutely destitute. this is a massive memory for a large proportion of an aging population. this is another opportunity for russians to embrace that narrative of victimhood, because it has been an ever constant narrative that russia is to blame for so many of the world's ills, yet many other countries, due to their position as allies, especially to america, get a free pass.
I am with @DevilsFan in this one
Nah, this won't happen.
You've yet to present a single argument in this thread without using a logically fallacy, and here you go again. What does a Democratic politician have to do with media bias or factual reporting? Politicians in the US don't own or control the news media, and their knowledge (or lack thereof) and comments on matters isn't the topic at hand.
As for your justifications for RT and Sputnik, give me a break. You're defending news organizations that routinely publish state propaganda, conspiracy theories, and outright lies with little to no regard for the truth or factual reporting because of some vague concept of media bias and lack of Russian expertise. Even if there were legitimate overwhelming anti-Russian bias in the news media, that still in no way justifies resorting to lying and shoddy reporting. That isn't a counter to bias, it's just bad journalism.
Russia is nominally a dictatorship, but that may not be the most accurate term as it's an oligarchy instead of a dictatorship by one man. Putin is the strong man leader who represents the oligarchy, but the country in no way operates as a democracy. That you are slamming "western-style democracy" in your second paragraph tells me that you know this to be the case but don't actually want to admit it. Many countries refer to themselves as democracies and even have laws or a constitution based around that concept, but don't actually function in that way, and Russia is one of them. Functioning democracies don't murder political opponents, seize the assets of or exile opponents, suppress opposition voices, suppress freedom of speech, control the media, violate freedom of assembly, etc. Putin is guaranteed to win as he, or his chosen stand in, have won every election since 2000 and have done everything they can while in power to strengthen their grip on the Russian political system.
Russia is a threat to the west, but I almost never see any articles claiming it is an existential threat. I'm sure they exist, but that is hardly the common narrative in 2017. During the Soviet Union era when there were fears around mutually assured destruction due to a nuclear war, that was most definitely the narrative. Now the threat revolves around vying for influence around the world and electronic threats such as the election tampering Russia has conducted to a number of countries recently.
Russia was in terrible shape after the fall of the Soviet Union and the introduction of democracy, but don't for a second sit here and tell me things were going great in the 1980s as the communist regime collapsed in on itself. Such a massive and sudden change from a single party state with a command economy to a multi-party democracy with an essentially unregulated free market was going to cause massive upheaval and many were going to suffer in the change, that doesn't necessarily mean a western style government couldn't work, it just would have taken time. That being said, Russia has never really been under that type of government, they have pretty much since the days of Kieven Rus' been under some sort of totalitarian regime, so democracy and personal freedom is a very new thing to the area and isn't going to function overnight.
lol man who has never been to russia, cant speak the language and probably never talked to a russia trying to give me a lesson on what russia is after i've lived here for nearly year and been studying it my own life. gg.
show me the official documents. show me the official proof for all youre saying BEYOND just what newspapers say. political opponents, like who? for example if you throw nemtsov here, he was murdered by chechens pissed off at him over what he said at the country. there is never any definitive proof, documentary or otherwise for that, and the idea that russia is just an incredibly top-down run system is just not right. there is a lot of scope for low and mid tier officials to shape the course of events, for one reason or another. dictatorial. to imply that putin is dictatorial within russia itself is just plain false and you should retract that statement. many things within russia lie beyond the scope of his control. provincial governments, city councils, the actions of local officials.
suppress opposition freedom of speech, now this is an interesting one, particularly because navalnii has constructed his whole political program on the theme of his martyrship, whereby he will do things that know he will get him arrested in order to then look like a hero from uneducated people. so, navalnii, first and foremost, has often had his desires to be president undercut by the fact that he embezzled money whilst working in the kirov provincial government? we are supposed to forget that because he is this shining beacon of democracy that the west seems to love? forget that he is a criminal, WHICH, by constitution, forbids the right of an individual to run for president. well then gj, but navalnii will continue to appear. i cant remember what month it was (april or may) i think when there was the last big anti-corruption meeting in march, moscow city officials permitted a march to take place in one area of moscow. this was communicated, it was still within the central area of the city. but navalnii being navalnii decides this isnt for him, so takes his people to one of the biggest streets in moscow, shuts it down and has this unauthorised protest there. IN ANY COUNTRY a person who would cause such public nuisance would be arrested. you say there is no opposition, zhironovskii and zyuganov are consistently on television and in the media.
so yeah, essentially do something other than just regurgitate media narratives at me. also (this is coming from an actual historian btw, not just some guy thats read wikipedia pages), might wanna touch up on your knowledge of totalitarianism, we've come a long way since arendt.
all in all, russia has its democracy, the west has is. russia is content to let you have your democracy whilst the west seeks to constantly undermine russia's. russian people are happy for you to live as you want, people in the west, nope russian people are, on the whole, happy with their politics (beyond regional corruption which does remain a significant issue), and to say theyve been bullshitted or brainwashed into thinking that way is flat out wrong.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-09-20/wanted-russia-experts-no-expertise-required here's something to ponder.
girls girls you're both beautiful
Just come to russia, see it, feel it and you will love it
And just in case
If you have a receipe for a doping preparate it doesnt make you a "clean athlete" - its just a paper
If some guy says he has proofs but cant really explain them with strong facts then theres something wrong
Propaganda is a latin word
Dont worry, be happy
I read this in Bryz' voice
russia doping, +7, rainy.
The IOC is just getting revenge for having to stay in crappy, unfinished accommodations in Sochi...
This thread is everything great about Russia gonna Russia.