May 14

Chimy Ávila: “My representative was talking to Barça”

first_imgBarcelona interest: “They did not contact me, but I know that my representative spoke with them. It is nice to know that people loved me in Barcelona.”The hardness of its beginnings: “At Empalme Graneros I was hungry, sad, happy, I learned to walk, to kick the ball. Every time I take a breath, I reflect and remember it.” Sharing costumes with Messi: “In the national team or at Barça? Where God forbid. But if I grab the captain’s armband, it’s going to be screwed up for me to take it off (laughs).”Soccer in your area: “It has happened to me many times to be shooting penalties and at four in the morning to start running because two started shooting themselves. He who forgets where he comes from, does not know where he is going.”Chimy Ávila, a soccer worker: “I collected cardboard, I worked in a demolition plant, I cut the grass of the neighbors … I did everything before dedicating myself to soccer.”Recovery support: “Ramos encouraged me, his brother called my agent to get interested. It will be because of the hosts that he hit me and I never complained. Felipe, from Atlético, also kicked me, I got up and said ‘what’s wrong, you’re Crazy? ‘But nothing happens, I’m used to shooting penalties to a goalkeeper with a gun to my waist. “ Enjoy your passion: “If I have been through so many risks in the neighborhood, why shouldn’t I be happy here? I don’t feel pressure. There is pressure from those who have to feed their children, get up at night to work on a farm. Soccer it’s not pressure for me. “last_img read more

July 21

Should we support Dwain Chambers in a Great Britain vest

first_img Share on Facebook Athletics Facebook Facebook Twitter I really fail to see what the fuss is about. Under the current rules he is eligible to participate so what is the problem. Stop trying to move the goalposts while the game is being played. If he is allowed to compete under the rules, then he should be allowed to compete. Change the rules if necessary, but you can’t do retrospective under athletics laws. People really are creating a fuss about nothing. 0 1 Share via Email 0 1 Email (optional) Yes: Simeon Williamson, British sprinter and rival for a place in the national squadThe current rules say that if you’ve served your time, which Dwain has, that you should be allowed to come back. And that’s what he has done so I don’t have a problem with that.But I do think that the rules should be changed so if you get caught in future you should be banned for the rest of your life because you are a drugs cheat. That does not apply to Dwain, though, because he has served his ban under the current rules so we should get off his back. But the rules should be tightened in the future – going forward I don’t think people should be given a second chance.It is not like Dwain is getting off lightly with things, though, because as things stand he will also miss the Olympics for the rest of his career and that is the biggest thing in an athlete’s life. The world s are the next biggest competition after the Olympics but they are not as special. I think it is right that he should not be allowed to run at the Olympics again.Dwain did not set a good example to other athletes but at least he admitted what he did, which half the other athletes who are banned for drugs off ences never do. I don’t think it is true that Dwain has damaged the reputation of British athletics because there are other drugs cheats out there, like the shot-putter Carl Myerscough and there wasn’t such a big thing about him.He served a two-year ban a few years ago but he was at Sheffield for the trials for the world indoors team and he has been selected for the championships. There has been no suggestion that his presence has damaged our reputation. I think people are looking a little at the man rather than the issue here because Dwain has a bit of a reputation.Dwain is one of our best medal chances. He is joint fifth in the world in the 60 metres at the moment so he has a real chance of success. We should be grateful we have got someone like him. He is a talented sprinter who made a wrong decision at that moment in his life. newest Report The other athletes I’ve spoken to are behind Dwain 100%. Obviously there are a few people out there who are against him but the ones I’ve spoken to are behind him.I’ll be cheering him at the worlds as part of the team like I will be for any other athlete, but if I’m there hopefully I’ll be running past him when I do. I’ll be one of the first people to congratulate him, if I get the gold and he gets the silver.No: Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson, five-time Paralympian with 16 medals including 11 goldsThere should be one rule: if you test positive for drugs, that is it, you are out for life. If that was brought in across track and field, then people would know where they stand. It is why, if I was in the British team, I would not be comfortable with Dwain Chambers back. In a way, I feel sorry for Dwain with the position he is in now because people either love him or hate him.I support UK Athletics and its chief executive, Niels de Vos, in taking the stronger stance in what he is trying to do for the sport. Dwain won by being allowed to run at the trials and you have to live with that. What is crucial now is how the sport moves forward and how it seeks to change the rules to make the ban more stringent for athletes seeking a return after a suspension for failing a drugs tests.At the moment, Dwain is complying with what the rules say. For example, you look at someone who has come out of jail. They have served their time for their crime, but does it always mean that their sentence was the right length?There are many reasons why athletes take drugs and there should be a stringent penalty because if not, what is the point of having all these rules?I do not know huge specifics of Dwain’s case but unlike the past with the more organised doping problems in, say, the old eastern European countries when you did something or else, the responsibility has now been put back very firmly on the athlete to be aware of what they are taking.Equally, I do not think he should be allowed to run at the Olympic Games as the argument goes on about whether he would overturn the rule preventing him from competing. But it is not just about Dwain. No athlete who has been suspended for taking banned substances should have the opportunity to compete at the either the Olympics or the Paralympics. It is the biggest occasion in the life of a sports person, the culmination of everything, and it is how you are recognised and measured, whether you are a good or an average athlete. I would fundamentally disagree with the rules changing to allow someone who has served a drugs ban to go to the Olympics or Paralympics.Yet, when it is about money, glamour and status, people will cheat and I can see why . Winning is addictive. If you are competing in front of 110,000 people and you are the one who everyone is cheering, it is unbelievable. I have been in that situation. It is incredibly powerful. Modern culture is about being the best but is also about celebrity and having your face in the paper.Sport is the same. It is not just about winning your race, it is about all the other opportunities it brings you, and some of the benefits is can bring. The money is huge from sporting success but it is not what is really about. It is about achieving it the correct way and not crossing that divide. 3 … we have a small favour to ask. The Guardian will engage with the most critical issues of our time – from the escalating climate catastrophe to widespread inequality to the influence of big tech on our lives. At a time when factual information is a necessity, we believe that each of us, around the world, deserves access to accurate reporting with integrity at its heart.More people are reading and supporting The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever before. And unlike many news organisations, we have chosen an approach that allows us to keep our journalism accessible to all, regardless of where they live or what they can afford. But we need your ongoing support to keep working as we do.Our editorial independence means we set our own agenda and voice our own opinions. Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias and not influenced by billionaire owners or shareholders. This means we can give a voice to those less heard, explore where others turn away, and rigorously challenge those in power.We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism, to maintain our openness and to protect our precious independence. Every reader contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you. Support The Guardian Share on Facebook Facebook | Pick Share on Facebook comment Reuse this content,View all comments > 4 Share on Facebook Share on Facebook Share on Twitter 1 Share on Twitter Share on Facebook comments (93)Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion. 13 Feb 2008 18:48 Share on Twitter Twitter Reply Show 25 Facebook Facebook 100 Share on Pinterest Twitter Should we support Dwain Chambers in a Great Britain vest? expanded | Pick Report It’s depressing to see the number of athletes and ex-athletes who are queueing up to criticise Chembers. He made a mistake, he paid the price, and now he deserves the chance to start again. That’s just a fundamental human right, isn’t it? We all make mistakes. Let’s drop the vitriol and show a bit of generosity here. Facebook Facebook Staff Share on Facebook Share on Facebook Share 13 Feb 2008 16:39 Report Share on Facebook | Pick Topics Share Order by oldest | Pick 13 Feb 2008 18:16 0 1 Twitter | Pick dialaview Reply SwissPhil 13 Feb 2008 18:36 | Pick | Pick | Pick 13 Feb 2008 16:55 Shares00 Share on LinkedIn Share 0 1 13 Feb 2008 15:58 Twitter Comments 93 Report Reply Share I passionately believe that rehabilitation must be the cornerstone of any punishment system. The alternative is that all we are out for is vengance and that is inhuman. Chambers did his time, as did Carl Meyerscough but I have not heard anyone demanding that his british records achieved after serving a 2 year ban all be expunged or he be removed from this world championship team. There are many people in the sport who strongly believe that Drugs cheats do not deserve a second chance Kelly Holmes has made a very vocal plea in this case and Paula Radcliff’s position has been made very clear in the past to name but two. These are people who have suffered, and suffer again and again when drugs cheats are exposed and I understand their frustration. All I would say to them is that it doesn’t matter how it is done but there will always be people who try and cheat. Many are young, impressionable and easily lead astray. Only in the fewest cases does fear of punishment affect these people’s decisions. Many of these people simply need to be lead in the right direction and Paula and Dame Kelly are doing a fantastic job of that. Two things really disturb me with this case: 1) The blatant double standards (re chambers and meyerscough) makes me suspect that some people at UKA have some other motive for what is happening here. 2) Old organsiations were swept aside with the reasoning that they were no longer fit for purpose. Now we have a organisation winging about an Athlete when if any failure is there it is the failure of UKA not to set their rules out in such a way to achieve what they say they want. This does not sounf like a competent, well run organisation to me. All in all I can’t get rid of the feeling that Chambers is being hung out to dry. There are many who will say that he deserves it, and while I do not find him a very sympathic person I do not agree with this treatment. Reply Report LauncestonLad trendychorlton The whole illegal substances in atheltics thing seems like a joke, it’s all about who gets caught. You can’t seriously try and tell me that all of those pious athletics “legends” who have done the media rounds condeming Chambers were all 100% clean? I mean pur-lease Facebook Twitter Share on Twitter 3 Facebook Facebook Share on Facebook Share on Facebook Report Facebook Reply Sorry there was an error. Please try again later. If the problem persists, please contact Userhelp Share on Facebook Report Facebook phezpot Facebook 13 Feb 2008 16:33 0 1 | Pick Facebook Facebook 2 PrivateDic: “… he made a mistake.”I’m sorry, but that’s plain rubbish. He deliberately took drugs to give himself an advantage. How is that “making a mistake”? He was a cheat, pure and simple. If he hadn’t have been caught he may still have been using them even now, who knows. Such people only admit to “making a mistake” when they get caught. Up until that point, there was nothing wrong with it, and so it reflects very badly on his personal honour.However, in the context of the discussion and the rules as they stood when he was disciplined, he has served his time and so should be allowed to compete. Whether he should be considered as a suitable role model is another question, and I feel that he isn’t suitable at all. Report Mancuniswede Twitter xyzzy 0 1 Share on Twitter 0 1 ChinofJim Share on Facebook Share on Facebook Report | Pick Share on Twitter Sportblog First published on Tue 12 Feb 2008 19.02 EST stuartgoodwin Iammoney Reply Twitter Share on Facebook | Pick 13 Feb 2008 17:52 | Pick Reply david32knyte Reply Share on Twitter Reply Facebook Report Twitter | Pick Report 0 1 This is absolutely stupid. Under the current rules, then yes he has gained the right to be picked. The whole problem could have been avoided however if they’d banned him for life (as they should have done).He’s a disgrace. No shame. He’s got a nerve competing again. His example, both vocally and by his actions, is the worst kind to set for kids coming into the sport.Change the rules. Make sure anyone cheating in future is thrown out for good. Then maybe we can all avoid seeing these sorry excuses for athletes in our national colours. Report Reason (optional) Reply collapsed Dwain Chambers Share 13 Feb 2008 17:50 ” Dwain did not set a good example to other athletes but at least he admitted what he did, “If he hadn’t got caught, would he still have admitted what he did ? Share Report Share Share via Email Report Twitter Share Share on Facebook 13 Feb 2008 17:25 Facebook Share on Twitter Reply Sportblog Twitter KeithNorris Report Twitter 0 1 Share on Twitter Joys | Pick Twitter oldest “The other athletes I’ve spoken to are behind Dwain 100%. ”Because they only think drugs are bad when they’re taken by devious foreigners. A few years ago you couldn’t move for smug English athletes wearing little ribbons to show they wanted blood testing for drugs: they all spoke out in favour of Christine O and, to hear you tell, they’re all for Dwain C too. What makes Christine O a good person but makes the motorcycling test-evaders in Greece bad people? A British Passport.Chambers, like Millar, didn’t `own up’. He didn’t see that what he did was wrong. He got caught, so admitting to it was somewhat moot. Chambers hasn’t taken part in drug testing for the past year, so for all we know could be running on the benefits of a year’s steroid use. Same technique as other athletes who’ve made a return: by being banned they’re outside the testing regime, so can train with the benefits of steroids to speed up recovery, and then they can run competitive races with a few weeks without time for the benefits to ebb away. Even if that’s not the case, how do we know it isn’t?Athletes only disapprove of drugs when it’s not their team mates. Chambers could turn up with a syringe sticking out of his arm and so long as he was wearing an England shirt he’d be OK. On the other had, the merest whiff of suspicion about foreign heptathletes and it’s a major issue that must be dealt with.The solution’s simple: if anyone wearing a GB shirt fails a drug test, the whole current team is out of the Olympics for eight years, with selection starting again from scratch. That way a little self-regulation might creep in. As things stand, I’d never permit my children to get involved in athletics if I could possibly avoid it, as it has no credible drug testing regime (ignoring tests because it’s a bit of a drive in the rush hour is a reasonable excuse, apparently) and the athletes themselves grow more and more creative in their excuses.London 2012: like the Hacienda 1988, except we’re paying for it. Share on Twitter Twitter Twittercenter_img | Pick 0 1 Share on Twitter Reply Share on Facebook | Pick No, we should jeer him in a steroid-coloured tutu. | Pick Share MichaelVaughanMyLord hedders8 Wess88 The Recap: sign up for the best of the Guardian’s sport coverage 0 1 13 Feb 2008 14:42 Share on Facebook 13 Feb 2008 16:47 Share Reply JahLion | Pick Where was all this anti-drugs sentiment when Carl Myerscough was banned for using steroids in 1999?Where was it when Janine Whitlock was banned for using steroids in 2002?Where, for that matter, was it when Chambers was selected for the European Championships in 2006 upon completing his ban?Myerscough and Whitlock have both returned, have represented the UK in World and Europeans Champs both in and outdoors, and nobody seemed to give a toss. They’ve set British records galore, and for all intents and purposes they’re rehabilitated into the sport, with the only restriction placed upon them being that they both have Olympic bans.Is there any particular reason why Chambers is being singled out for criticism? Is there any particular reason why UK Athletics’ statement went all-out to show their distaste for “having to” select Chambers while allowing themselves to select Myerscough with absolutely no comment whatsoever?Chambers has made some poor decisions, but coming up with the length of his ban isn’t one of them. The bans are weak, on this most people can agree, so why isn’t the bile directed towards the authorities that can do something about it? Share on Twitter Share 13 Feb 2008 17:50 0 1 i want to hear what steve cram thinks of all this. Share on Twitter 0 1 25 0 1 13 Feb 2008 18:11 Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Twitter 2 Reply Share I don’t understand why there wasn’t this fuss when he first arrived back in athletics. The only person then who was upset about Chambers’ return then was Darren Campbell. Perhaps him turning his back on athletics for American football has upset a few people in the athletics world. Of course a lot of his comments about the sport cannot have helped ease the tension for his return, but he seems to be being victimised above other drug cheats.I can sympathise with other athletes comments about a ban for life, as if they have been working their butts off for 10-20 years, I can’t imagine there can be many worse feelings than being beaten by a drugs cheat. But I’m sure that drugs cheats are not the criminal masterminds they are made out to be, but probably desperate people trying to take a short cut to achieve optimum results. In Chambers case, i’m presume he also put in 10-20 years of hard work, and that itself has driven him into cheating. I wouldn’t ban drug cheats for life, but perhaps make it a criminal offence that is punished by a jail term. That could help reduce the lower level drug abuse in gyms and athletic clubs around the country. xyzzy – good point about the testing last year even though you failed to mention it wasn’t chambers fault – also do you actually really believe a ban for 8 years is realistic. Take your self righteous “ban everyone” head out of your rear and cop on so people don’t think your a ranting imbecile with no tangible solutions. If the testing was fullproof, first time offenders could be banned for life but it isn’t thats why the rules are there. Chambers served his time and is being victimised. The debate above was no contest – the NO argument was full of ideals and rhetoric but no substance while the Yes argument spelt it out in real terms. Twitter 13 Feb 2008 17:30 13 Feb 2008 16:54 Facebook Threads collapsed 0 1 Report Tue 12 Feb 2008 19.02 EST The crucial point in all this is that he IS clean now. He runs without drugs in his system. So he should be entitled to challenge for the medals. For us to brand him a “cheat” forever based on past indiscretions is grossly unfair. Do you honestly think if he was banned for life all young athletes would stop using drugs? Of course not. He is clearly an exceptional athlete who has served a full two year ban which could very easily have ended his career. Many people would have quit the sport forever. He hasn’t and has instead been prepared to accept that he has natural talent which he should not waste and has trained harder than ever to make a clean come back. We should applaud him for this. How many of you would have the guts to do what he is doing knowing that much of the media and public don’t support you and knowing that many of the people you race against are probably still doing drugs? I’m backing him 100%. Unless he takes drugs again of course… Share on Facebook Yes, served his time. Let him run. I think Dwain is right that you can’t win a sprint gold without drugs. Carl Lewis shouldn’t have been at the 88 olympics after failing a trials drugs test but took the spoils. My point being i think they’re all on drugs and the public are soo naive to think there is this evil ‘drugs cheat’ underworld. I think the majority of gold winners and record holders are guilty. I’m not defending them, just saying don’t come down on them so hard when found guilty. They are not exceptions. It would damage athletics beyond repair if the truth was outed. Conspiracy time! They are keeping it hush hush. Unlike the tour de france which is trying to out all cheats. Damage done there, however, the average speeds continue to rise. They are still drug riddled. Someone please tell me there is proof that all top athletes don’t take drugs. I have never heard anything to counter this [Edited by moderator] Share on Facebook 0 1 Twitter | Pick 0 1 Since you’re here… Report Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Messenger Reply Twitter Share on Facebook 1 Report 13 Feb 2008 18:30 Reply Report Reply Report Share Share on WhatsApp Share on Facebook “I passionately believe that rehabilitation must be the cornerstone of any punishment system.”This is a little different as athletes who have cheated to build up muscle in the past still benefit from their drug use by the muscle they built up and quicker recovery times so he still has an advantage over a competitor who has never cheated but relied on hard work. Rehabilitation would be fine if this left the playing field level but I’m not sure it does when it involves some drugs. However that is a case for making the bans for life if we are serious about discouraging drug cheats not for acting against individuals. I think we should be talking of changing the rules to ban all cheats for life not of targeting certain cheats who are less popular than others. Twitter Reply Facebook Reply Share 13 Feb 2008 18:19 Reply I am quite uncomfortable with banning someone for life for a first offence. This assumes that the testing and conviction process is foolproof (Diane Modahl anyone?). Letting a drugs cheat back into the sport is one thing, but banning someone who is innocent for life is surely many times worse. Twitter 13 Feb 2008 18:30 Twitter 13 Feb 2008 19:14 Facebook RoyA1 | Pick Share Blessed Share on Twitter | Pick Report JoeH Share on Twitter Share Share on Twitter Reply Simeon won this argument hands down. Chambers served his time under the rules and is now eligable to come back. Tanni’s argument is based on ‘I don’t agree with the rules so lets change them and apply them retrospectively’. Also, Simeon made the point that Chambers has to be treated equally to other athletes such as the shot putter who have come back to the sport. In the London Evening Standard the other day, Matthew Norman made (for once) a good point. The question shouldn’t be whether Chambers should go to the Olympics and whether he is fit to the represent the country. The question is whether this country derseves to be represented by Chambers. THe BOC contract that attempted to stiffle athletes rights to free speech, so as not to offend the sensibiltiies of a hidious regime that continues inflicts human rights abuses, was a scandal way beyond anything Chambers has done or is attempting to do. I really think that the sports chiefs are grateful for the ‘controversy’ that they are trying to stoke over Chambers, as it deflects attention away from what I thought was a true and real disgrace | Pick 50 Share on Twitter Report 0 1 KeithNorris 0 1 Share on Facebook phezpot I agree with LauncestonLad. What other solution is there apart from this compromise/sceptism? The sport seems beyond the point of ever being drug free so just be scpetical and enjoy the tumbling world records! Twitter Reply Twitter Facebook 13 Feb 2008 16:18 unthreaded Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Facebook Phicus Please select Personal abuse Off topic Legal issue Trolling Hate speech Offensive/Threatening language Copyright Spam Other 0 1 PrivateDic Share on Twitter Share Share on Facebook Loading comments… Trouble loading? Share on Twitter Facebook Share Report 0 1 Share on Twitter | Pick 0 1 13 Feb 2008 14:01 Read more Athletics Sign in or create your Guardian account to recommend a comment Share Facebook | Pick | Pick Reply 13 Feb 2008 19:01 Share xyzzy, Your point about Chambers not being tested often enough during the past year is a very good and valid point. Its pointing at the wrong person. This is the incompetence of UKA for not having closed the loophole a lot earlier. Share 0 1 Share Share Reply No. He’s a cheat. He deliberately, conspiratorily, systematically took illegal substances to enhance his performances. It wasn’t a minor infraction. And it wasn’t a little oversight. His selection is a disgrace. The sport is rotten. 0 1 Report i dont like athletics. 4 recommendations I heard Chamber’s lawyer on the radio. He announces that Chamber’s can be a real role model to young people if he is allowed to compete.A drug taking cheat. Some role model. Reply 13 Feb 2008 18:49 0 1 All Yes we should allow him to run, although I am not sure I will support him. My assumption is that virtually all of the sprinters take drugs and that if they are successful then it is only a matter of time before they are caught. I hate the hypocrisy of the sport in that Athlete’s are fawned over by the media until they are caught. I personally would prefer either scepticism or a Laissez-faire approach, where all drugs are legal, but they must be declared and this declaration checked against blood tests. This is not because I advocate drug use, but it would at least be more honest. [Edited by moderator] 13 Feb 2008 13:58 Share on Twitter Report Share Facebook Twitter Share on Twitter Share on Twitter Close report comment form Firstly both viewpoints here are essentially very similar, both beleive that drug cheats should suffer life time bans. However, as stated above this is not currently the case. I’m not sure how Dwayne Chambers has managed to come out of the scandal as such a pariah, he admitted his drug use, and came clean about drug use before he was caught (costing him a lot of money). I don’t understand quite how he is seen as such a devil and yet former drug users such as David Miller are lauded as reformed characters who made a mistake and now are whiter than white. Share on Twitter LeCoqSportif Report Share View more commentslast_img