A few puffs and a bad rule do Richardson in


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

The bottom line is, she knew the rules and made a choice to ignore them.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Elon Musk sparked up a Camberwell carrot on a podcast yet US governments are happy to give him hundreds of millions of tax dollars, while this woman is kicked out of the Olympics for having a consoling toot after her mother died. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

She's still a great champion athlete and will show the world again what they lost by their insensitive banning her from competing in Tokyo (assuming the Games will go on). She can at least be thankful that she's not serving a draconian sentence in the slammer like so many of her black American compatriots.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

First of all, I do think the rule silly, but rules are rules. Hopefully this will lead to a reexamining and changing of the rules. However, this headline is really misleading. She herself says she "ingested" cannabis products, not "smoked" them (NBC interview). There is a difference. While smoking might not be a performance enhancer, especially for a sprinter (the effects on the lungs and all), ingesting is a different story. We also don't know when she took it. Cannabis products can be used for pain relief and management; ask anybody who has helped someone suffering with cancer. A competitor with a slight injury - a tight hamstring, a bad foot muscle, a sore rotator cuff - might ingest a cannabis product prior to a race to help with that pain - lift the legs a little more, pump the arms a little more - and perform better. I'm not saying she did, but, yeah, cannabis can be a performance enhancer.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

My heart bleeds. She knew the rules. What kind of "athlete" smokes anyway?

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

What kind of "athlete" smokes anyway?

She's not smoking a cancer stick.And she is an athlete unlike you.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

The "controversy" about this is baffling to me. I can understand not liking the rule, but the rule still exists and it has consequences for breaking it. Not too long ago, the speed limit near my house was significantly reduced. It's ridiculous - there's no reason for such a low speed limit on a country road. Despite that, I'm still required to drive at the new speed limit. And if I ignore it and drive as fast as I'd like to, telling the police "Yeah, but it's a stupid law" isn't going to get me anywhere. reflect the change in the world’s attitude toward marijuana

"The world" isn't a single entity. Just because certain Western countries are in agreement does not mean that attitude is reflected across other parts of the globe.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

She knew it was a banned substance. Every serious athlete on the planet knows its a banned substance. Most will not take any over the counter medicines or supplements without checking that they are safe. She also knew she would be tested. Regardless of whether it is performance enhancing or not she was either reckless or just plain stupid. Sorry but absolutely no sympathy at all. Especially when you try to use the death of your mother as a mitigation.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

The enlightened of the internet: St. Augstine was right: an unjust law is no law at all.

Also the enlightened of the law: YOU SMOKED A DOOBIE!? TO THE JAIL WITH YOU!!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The world of sports has been always been in confrontation with the latest science for no real reason, a lot of practices and rules are based on flimsy or disproven data but still officials and organizations resist as much as possible any effort to modernize them.

A complete overhauling has been necessary for a long time, and a lot of problems could be reduced or even completely solved by it, but not until the people that are in charge understand the real value of science (or are replaced by people that does).

1 ( +1 / -0 )

In some places, it is completely legal to partake of marijuana, but not according to the Olympic committee. At some distant point in the future, this will all look very silly.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The one and only important point in this story is that she deliberately took a banned substance. Marijuana being legal or having no effect on performance is irrelevant.

The rules are well known to competitors, they are very straight forward. Should pot be taken off the banned list? I can't see how it would help a sprinter but it could be beneficial to some sports. It's not up to Ms Richardson to decide.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Too bad the fastest female will not be able to compete, if I were a competitor and I won GOLD I would only wonder if its tarnished because I didn't compete against the best!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There will always be an asterisk on this gold, due to the absence of a potential gold medal winner. All because of this ridiculous rule.

They had no option other than to ban her - it's the rules. But the rules are entirely ridiculous, and they need to scrap them before the next Olympics so that there are not more asterisks on more gold medal events.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites