Excellent, well-reasoned document: Miracle that in these days any newspaper in the world found the space to run it in its entirety. Well done “The Gleaner”.
This article brings up the key point in the argument.
Camps with Jamaican athletes generate money from whoever can host them and forcing athletes to attend ensures money for the cronies. That’s what it’s really all about and you can be sure money has changed hands already!
Into whose pockets?
Preparation? Team spirit? With this bunch? Give me a break!
We know relay prep had nothing to do with the camp cause they were making up the team 90 minutes before the race!
I saw this a few days ago. For thos who have not seen this yet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3QPyz0zMBk
From Veronica Campbell-Brown’s IAAF diary:
"… Prior to settling in the German capital for the World Championships, team Jamaica had its camp in Herzogenarauch or “Herzog” 
as it is commonly referred.
“Incidentally, it was in Herzog as well that Jamaica had its pre-Olympic camp in 2004. With minimal distractions, it is quite useful a place to prepare. …"
“… I did not participate in the 4x100m and a lot has been made of that, incorrectly I might add. I have however put that aspect of Berlin behind me except to say that my boundless devotion to Jamaica should never be questioned and I am happy Jamaica won the 4x100m being especially glad for “Simmy” and Kerron winning their first ever senior global gold medals. …”
It may be a useful place, but that isn’t the point. Why must athletes be separated from their own coaches who got them there? If this can’t or won’t be arranged, they should stay out.
I had many examples of this in my own early career- getting athletes back with lower than expected results and changes to their technique at the lasty second etc- even once getting someone back with their feet reversed in the blocks.
After a short while a policy was put in place by Gerrard that the coaches of team athletes needed to be there above all others. Of course, at the first opportunity, this policy was overturned cause looser coaches would never make teams otherwise.
Can you imagine a scenario where Steven Francis is not a team coach when half the team are with him??
I fully understand what you are saying and agree.
DUH can’t believe I missed this before, Herzogenarauch is where JAAA’s principal sponsor Puma is based so I expect there will have been some nice social functions arranged at the same time.
(EDIT: Charlie,) I fully understand what you are saying and agree! I was just surprised by the name of the place mentioned by VCB (“the home of the sporting goods companies Adidas and Puma”, of course, no?). But then I realised it’s 23 km northwest of Nuremberg, so… Back to some geography lessons, I hate geography and it shows!
Yes, John, that’s what I realised, too, while looking up the place out of curiosity… And of Adidas for VCB. 
THREE-MONTHS BAN: GOSH, THIS MEANS THEY’LL MISS ALL THE BIG TRACK MEETS BETWEEN NOW AND CHRISTMAS… wait, there … aren’t… any! kk.
Page last updated at 22:14 GMT, Monday, 14 September 2009 23:14 UK
Jamaicans given three-month ban
Blake (right) and 100m world record holder Usain Bolt are training partners
Four Jamaican athletes have been suspended for three months after admitting taking a banned substance.
The four are sprinters Yohan Blake, Marvin Anderson, Allodin Fothergill and Lansford Spence.
Each tested positive in samples taken at the Jamaican National Championships in June this year.
Commonwealth 100m champion Sheri-Ann Brooks also tested positive but this was thrown out because her B sample was tested without her knowledge.
Doctor Patrece Charles-Freeman, executive director of the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (Jadco), accepted Monday’s ruling from Justice Ransford Langrin, who chaired the Jamaica Anti-Doping Appeal Tribunal.
“I think the Appeal Tribunal understood the case and their decision was a fair one,” said Charles-Freeman.
606: DEBATE
Give your reaction to the three month bans given to the Jamaican athletes
Relay runners Blake, Fothergill, Spence and Anderson as well as Brooks were withdrawn by Jamaica from the World Championships in Berlin last month.
All five athletes tested positive for methylxanthine at Jamaica’s championships which ran from 26-28 June, but were initially cleared by a disciplinary panel on the basis the substance was not on the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) banned list.
But Jadco then appealed against the verdict stating the substance had a similar structure to tuaminoheptane, a banned stimulant according to Wada.
Blake, who won bronze in the 100m at the world junior championships in 2006, is Olympic champion Bolt’s training partner and has recorded the fifth-fastest time over 100m this year.
Anderson is also a 100m runner, while Fothergill and Spence compete in the 400m.
complete and utter bullshit!
WILL THE JAAA PENALISE OR APOLOGISE TO COACH FRANNO’S BRILLIANT MVP SQUAD NOW THAT TECHNICAL MANAGER DON QUARRIE’S BERLIN REPORT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED?
Jamaica Track & Field: Berlin reports crucial to closure
TRACKALERTS
Posted by admin on Oct 10th, 2009 and filed under Inside Track
By Orville Higgins,
Sports Vibes broadcast on KLAS Sports Radio on Friday, Oct 9, 2009.
It is understood that the manager’s reports are now in from the Berlin Games. To date we haven’t heard a peep from the JAAA about what impact these reports have had or exactly what course of action they are going to take. For a topic that was ‘ all the rage’ a few weeks ago, this one now looks likely to slip below the radar. Or wouldn’t it?
I am among those who have a real interest in seeing how this one will pan out. It seems to me that the JAAA cannot allow the manager’s report to slip away quietly, a lot is riding on this report, the JAAA are almost obligated to make much of it.
The hierarchy of the JAAA made the serious decision of trying to send home six MVP athletes from the Games. They insisted at that time that they were well within their rights to do so. The two parties have different views on how communication was made between them – stating whether the camp was mandatory or not. The manager’s report should shed some light on this issue, one way or another.
The issue of Veronica Campbell-Brown’s refusal to run in the relays must also come up in that ‘management’s’ report. Or wouldn’t it?
I remember talking to Donald Quarrie after the Games and he made it clear that he felt Veronica had behaved less than exemplary – although he did say that he wouldn’t be pursuing the matter.
At that time, something about that statement seemed a little strange to me. I couldn’t understand why the technical director of a country’s athletics team was accepting the fact that an athlete under his charge stepped out of line but wasn’t interested in seeing that athlete face punishment.
I felt at the time that irrespective of how you feel about a person representing Jamaica at the highest level, you were duty-bound to see them face sanctions for indiscretions they had committed, especially a situation as serious as; directly refusing to compete for the country. Not taking actions will lead to several implications which could come back to haunt us down the road. Mr. Quarrie’s report on that issue is therefore crucial.
I didn’t think much about it then, but now I wonder. Can a manager pick and choose what he puts in a report, or is he duty-bound to report on all the issues, especially the more fundamental ones?
If you had listened to Donald Quarrie’s interviews and read what he was saying at the time, it was clear he thought Veronica was wrong by refusing to run but he was clearly not too keen on seeing her punished. Can his report now just omit that particular incident? Can his report now put a different spin to what he was telling us at the time? Can a private report differ from your public utterances and still be considered credible?
The JAAA have said that they will read the manager’s reports carefully and then decide from these reports whether the MVP athletes will face a disciplinary committee or not. They have said that it is not automatic that the athletes will face sanctions but from where I sit they have no choice, they must pursue a course of action against the athletes who were supposedly in breach. The very least that has to happen is that the athletes must face a disciplinary panel.
This disciplinary panel may well rule that there should be no sanctions against the athletes, but that’s not the point. The real story is this – if they don’t face a disciplinary panel, then the JAAA’s will be seriously embarrassed. They must have a disciplinary committee handing out some kind of ruling. If not, it is going to be obvious that they were too hasty and too keen to take the actions they did in Berlin. I repeat. The manager’s reports are crucial in deciding the fate of those athletes and then again, the managers’ report might not even matter.
Let’s put this all in perspective. The JAAA were convinced that the athletes clearly breached their rules by not attending the supposedly mandatory camp and they were prepared to kick them off the team at that time.
This means, regardless of what is in those reports, they must put these people in front of a panel, to justify their actions in Berlin or they should come out and apologize to the MVP people for trying to throw them off the team.
Will the ‘feel-good’ vibes of performing in Berlin mean that the JAAA’s should forget about this whole thing? Should that matter?
If they’re smart, they’ll try to make the whole thing disapear but no one has accused JAAA of that.
We’ve seen what happens in the past when two rival groups enter an all-out war.