We are so fickle and cowardly

[Blurock]

Funny that neither Phelps or any of the other competitors made any comment or raised an objection. Any athlete will object to receiving silver or bronze rather than gold. If there was any cheating, they would have exposed it.

To compare "cheating" in swimming to what is going on in cricket is ludicrous. Cricket has become one of the most corrupt sports due to betting and the large amounts of money involved. This is ongoing and involves bookies, players and administrators. So much so, that one can not always believe the outcome of a game. More so in the shorter versions of the game.

[ChrisNG53]

Come on guys lets not try to gloss over cheating and give it a complexion of acceptability. There is no dispute whatsoever that Cameron used an illegal kick. He admits it without qualification that is was illegal.

He told the Sydney Morning Herald that he took extra kicks, but defends himself by insisting he's not the only one.
''If you're not doing it, you're falling behind," he said. "It's not obviously - shall we say - the moral thing to do, but I'm not willing to sacrifice my personal performance and four years of hard work for someone that is willing to do it and get away with it."

So I call him as my witness in saying -- "It's not obviously - shall we say - the moral thing to do". If it is not the moral thing to do it means that it is "immoral", i.e, tainted with immoral turpitude, wrong, impermissible .. etc .. etc
Now please distinguish this from the examples I have given about cheating in golf, me obtaining my Ph.d or an athlete using a banned substance. There will be differences of form, not substance.
And with respect, the attitude that "truth is elusive", "in the eye of the beholder" .. etc . .is usually a refuge of those who seek reason and justification to deny it. Fortunately, in this instance, there can be no question of what is true and what is not true. The facts are common cause. We only have to decide whether or not, on the facts, Cameron cheated. He did. He admits it. He says he did it because others also do it. Nothing could be simpler.
Had there been a timeous objection the IOC would have been forced to review the underwater camera footage and we would not have been having this conversation. He would have been disqualified.

On reconsideration, I accept that I am being too generous to Hansie on all the evidence. Concomitantly, in our "sheep" mode we are being quite fantastically accommodating of plain and simple cheating by Cameron because this farm needs heroes so badly it would appear.

[Blurock]

The "cheating" that you are referring to is taking advantage of a loophole in the rules. This is done in all competitive sport as the one who knows the rules best and play to the referee's interpretation thereof has an advantage over the ignorant. Rugby is an example of that.

Many world records were broken and medals won in full body suits, which obviously gave the swimmer and advantage over the one without one. This confirms what tec0 said about money for the right equipment. No swimmer without money for a tailor made full body suit would be able to compete against the ones that had.

The interpretation of the rules is technical and I am not an expert. I maintain that this was not blatant dishonesty and corruption as is the case with match fixing in soccer and cricket. If it was, the second and third placed swimmers would have objected. The Aussie press is trying to make a big thing out of nothing, because of their own poor performance and small haul of medals at the games. Ask yourself why no other reporters thought it newsworthy.

[Just Gone]

Well said Blurock. .......... its a loopehole and an objection should have been made within the proper timeline......... but true to form australia always tries to f**k it up for SA.

The bottom line is we took the gold home!

[ChrisNG53]

The "cheating" that you are referring to is taking advantage of a loophole in the rules. This is done in all competitive sport .....:

With great respect there is no "loophole" here. No one has suggested it. Cameron has not claimed it. You need to provide support for this novel excuse. You are the first person to suggest that whether or not the kick was illegal is not covered by the rules of what is breast stroke.

The reality is that the "loophole" was the organically induced one, adverted to be Cameron, that others were also doing it. This may explain why there was no objection. Seems probable. The fact that there is general or widespread deviance about something does not constitute a "loophole".

This is the sort of excuse that we strongly pooh pooh and object to when advanced by our opulent lot at the top when they say "aah well the reason why I felt compelled to waste pubic funds and get myself another Merc 500SL, with bells and whistles, at enormous public expense, is because the rules are....." obfuscation .... rationalizations ... ducking diving about what is right and what is wrong. At least, with our beloved Ministers it IS a "loophole' in that the relevant protocol does not, in fact, expressly prohibit his/her ravenous appetite.

The kick used by Cameron was impermissible/illegal. Once he used it he was no longer doing breast stroke. He was cheating. If Phelps did not also use the kick, he was cheated out of the Gold. The swimmers who came 3rd and 4th were also cheated out of medals if they did not swim illegally. It is that simple.

[ChrisNG53]

What makes you think that Cameron has cheated? Because some "suurgat" Aussies raised an objection? Do you trust the Aussies? Do you know enough about the swimming rules to say for sure that he had cheated? Why did nobody else object?

I am sure that the other contestants would have objected if there was the slightest doubt about the outcome of the contest. I think Cameron is a great athlete and he has made us proud. He is a deserved champion!

For your information I was not at all aware that the issue had been raised by Aussies. I picked up the thing from Cameron's own statement(s).

[Just Gone]

He won. why dont you just be happy for him and support him. Its not as if he took money like the cricketers to LOSE a match! You go Cameran :-)

[ChrisNG53]

He won. why dont you just be happy for him and support him. Its not as if he took money like the cricketers to LOSE a match! You go Cameran :-)

I sincerely believe that Cameron may still have won. He is an incredible swimmer at that stroke.
Happy? No, definitely not. I feel frustrated and disappointed that a class act like him felt he needed to cheat. I am appalled that cheating in that stroke is connived and colluded at. I play golf, and have won a club championship. So has my son recently and he hopes to turn pro soon. I golf it is the norm that a player will call even an unintended breach on himself.

This was the Olympics. It is supposed to be the ultimate test of athleticism and sportsmanship. It is very apparent that the highest standards of sportsmanship are otherwise enforced across the board. No question whatsoever, e.g, just one false start on a sprint and you are gone.
That is why it is tragic, sad and disappointing!; that in this one event there seems to have been a collective mindset that cheating is OK.

And that is, in part, why I have raised this issue. At a certain point it explains much of the ills of the World and our own society. We have already agreed, quite enthusiastically in another thread, that SA is a very anomic society. Anomie starts with bending rules, "finding loopholes", seeing everything as grey instead of the black and white that it actually is, excusing misconduct, rationalizing deviance in its many forms.

So, insofar as Cameron admits that he won by employing a kick that is not part of the breast stroke, but still feeling comfortable with this, he represents the anomic society of which he is part, and its culture. Insofar as we wish to justify, excuse rationalize and obfuscate his actions we reinforce our anomie.

Now we should therefore not be surprised, nor complain, when our leaders excel at this. After all we, as the subjects, have applauded deviance.

[adrianh]

I fully agree with Chris, we are happy to bend rules when it suits us and we are happy to complain when other bend rules and it doesn't suit us. Cameron knows perfectly well that what he did was illegal but we feel its ok because he won. What would ee have said had he been beaten by somebody who kicked four times instead of his three.

You see , there is no such thing as truth. Some see his actions as taking advantage of a loophole, some see it as justified and some see it as illegal.

Another 'truth' problem; should Caster be allowed to compete with women on a one on one basis...is it true that she is a man and a woman....'truth' in this case is what we agree it to be, nothing more.

[ChrisNG53]

I fully agree with Chris, we are happy to bend rules when it suits us and we are happy to complain when other bend rules and it doesn't suit us. Cameron knows perfectly well that what he did was illegal but we feel its ok because he won. What would ee have said had he been beaten by somebody who kicked four times instead of his three.

You see , there is no such thing as truth. Some see his actions as taking advantage of a loophole, some see it as justified and some see it as illegal.

Another 'truth' problem; should Caster be allowed to compete with women on a one on one basis...is it true that she is a man and a woman....'truth' in this case is what we agree it to be, nothing more.

Thank you Adrianh. Yours is the first unequivocal endorsement of support out of possibly thousands as this has been also posted on many other social media sites.
As regards "truth" I accept that philosophically truth is indeed elusive. The reality, however, is that it is made to be so by purposeful, intentional, convenient intellectualism .. MOST of the time. No question!
You remember the nonsense about Virodene .. later followed by Thabo Mbeki's denialism. So truth is usually elusive among honest men, honestly seeking it as with the fancy sub-atomic super nuclear collider particle stuff. The rest of the time it is simply denied and obfuscated as a matter of dishonest, fanciful, mischievous, even diabolical minds.
As regards Caster I am informed that it is simply a matter of chromozones in her case. She just DOES not have any male chromozones. You know the X Y stuff . ... and that is regarded as ultimate proof and definitive that she is female.
So I accept that as the truth. However it is obvious that she has an overabundance of male characteristics, Apparently we all have cross-gender characteristics and it is often more pronounced in some. I think that is why I just love pink shirts. I am just bemused as to why it took so long for the scientists to settle her issue. A chromozone test can take as little as an hour.
It is interesting (and obvious) that she has been "hiding her form". Nobody will be more shocked than me if she is beaten.

[adrianh]

The notion 'loophole in the rules' is also an interesting one. We know that although the posted speed limit is 60, we won't get fined if we do 69, so we do 69. When we do get fined then we complain because the cops should not be bothering with us bending the rules a bit, they should rather be fining the taxi's who, in our view, bend the rules a lot more than we do...

...so its ok to bend some rules when it suits us and to complain when others do it....

[Dave A]

Chris, what is your position on the making of law that cannot be enforced?

[tec0]

ChrisNG53 > Are we sheep or are we critics? Did I accept that gold was won via cheating? No I did not but what can I do about it? Firstly why must I? Is there not enough media on this, is there not enough questions being ask? Is admitting guilt not good enough? What about returning the gold will that satisfy you?

What exactly is the problem here? So you wish to make me a sheep you want me to admit that I am a follower with no meaning no will of my own. Your frustration is noted alongside your views.

Tell you what, review every game every sport in the history of humanity and you will find that many mistakes was made many people cheated. But that is because we are human not perfection.

Never forget that being human includes being flawed.

I am a sheep just because I didn’t fly to England to jump up and down on a camera man demanding someone to give his gold back!?

Maybe I didn’t act because my rationality pointed to the fact that it IS NOTED by all involved. Secondly I am not an expert so on what will I base the tantrum and demands? What exactly do you want a layman “in this sport” to do?

You cannot demand something if you don’t understand it, and that is not being a sheep it is called being rational.

[ChrisNG53]

Chris, what is your position on the making of law that cannot be enforced?

In jurisprudential terms it is a VERY BIG NO, NO. This is because it precipitates a culture of disrespect for the law. So the rule is that if you cannot enforce the law, don't make it.
The classic case is the historical one involving Prohibition. Its "unenforceability" spawned organised crime and the Mafia. The rest is history.
It is also why Courts will not grant what is known as a "brutum fulmen", i.e useless thunderbolt -- even if you are entitled to win the case. If the court's order cannot be enforced it will not grant it.

[ChrisNG53]

Sorry Teco -- I am not at all with you. When you have clear facts, indisputable facts, you are in a position to make a judgement call .. on those facts. That is why you are a member of homo sapiens. You can't just choose to see the facts as unclear because your heart starts dictating this.

On your stance it would be quite impossible to have courts of law as, in so many cases, the facts are actually NOT clear and have to receive very rigorous and trying resolution.
That is simply NOT the case here. The facts are simple enough.

As a human being it gives me NO pleasure to have to point this out. Cameron is a decent human being. He has family and friends. They are all effected by what happens to him and what is said about him.

However, the public interest outweighs his personal interests. It is nearly always the case that someone has to dispassionately say what is wrong. I have spent over 35 years doing this on an entirely dispassionate basis. Only once was I reversed on appeal.

However, I still insist that this one you can judge for yourself. It is really that simple.