Kyoko Ina receives a 4-year suspension

[Oreo]

AOL news has just announced that Kyoko Ina will receive a four-year suspension for refusing to submit to that drug test. Unbelievable.

Is there more to this than meets the eye? You would think she would have made the "p** police" wait there all night to collect a sample if she had to.

[Dustin]

Article:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20021026/ap_on_sp_ot/fig_ina_suspended_1

This is what bothers me:
"The U.S. Figure Staking Association will carry out the sanction. "

First, cant the AP spell right? :P Second, you think the USFSA would actually stick up for their skater.

Pathetic. This is more than LeGougne and Gailhaguet received for cheating at the Olympics.

[Badams]

i'll tell you one thing...there's NO WAY i would pee for some un-certified person at 10:30 pm! what's wrong with showing up at a decent hour with the correct papers? i don't believe for a second that there's more going on here. the person running the tests should have known better than to show up at night without the proper credentials.

[Melanie Z]

Is this after her appeal or is her appeal still pending? If what Kyoko stated in her statement was fact, then this whole deal stinks. I have become so disillusioned with skating in general. It's like the idiots want to see how much they can p@#s off the fans (and the skaters) before they walk.:roll:

[adrianchew]

:evil: but it doesn't surprise me one bit - which is getting really sad, cause that means I've given up on injustices ever being made right. I'd love to see what the USFSA has to say in an official press release.

[Spinner]

sigh...two words come to mind--'this sucks'. 'Nuff said. Kyoko, if you're reading this, we're so sorry and hope it's overturned soon.

[CMc]

Can't Kyoko do something about this?? Can't she get it overturned??
Can't she appeal?? (I forgot she did already--My bad)
This is absolute horses**t (and the USADA can sample THAT if they want!)!
She's gotta get some kind of restitution for this!:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

BTW what does the article mean "37 Minutes ago"?

[Oreo]

You know, she must be so done with the eligible scene, she can probably hardly wait to begin SOI. First, she and John were ridiculously underscored in the Olympics and now this. I'd seek my life elsewhere.

[adrianchew]

If the USFSA cannot appreciate their top pairs team, with no pair in sight in the upcoming ranks that are near equals as of today, it just seems like its time John and Kyoko took to the show road instead.

[PAskate]

Interesting also that there is still nothing on the USFSA web site on this or any other type of official release.

[adrianchew]

I just re-read - maybe the USFSA hasn't decided - they article just states they're responsible for carrying out the suspension handed out by the USADA? :?:

[duane]

well, it's me again! :)

what exactly is the "injustice" here?

the official arrived late at night. this isnt an issue, because there are no rules against an official arriving in the late evening.

the official didnt have the proper credentials. IMO, if ina had refused to provide a sample because of this reason--and had refused her signature on a form that this stranger requested her to sign--this "scandal" would never have occurred. the official likely would have left Ina's home in embarassment, and the USADA would have sent a properly credentialed official the next day. Ina didnt make it an issue that night (and obviously, the official was a true representative of the USADA. she wasnt an imposter pretending to work for the USADA), so this wasnt seen as a serious issue to a majority of the arbitration panel.

the test could have been taken the next day. yes, it could have been. but it is not up to the testee to decide when a drug test is to be administered.

As someone stated in the other thread, since I&Z had already decided to retire from eligible skating, what is the true harm here? the story is out, and to be totally honest, it has not changed my personal opinion of Ina in the slightest. i think, if anything, this scandal will only enhance Ina's image with most skating fans, and make her much more popular. no one sees her as the villian, or believes she ever was a doper.

[loveskating]

Hello Duane:

I appreciate your perspective...but what burns me up is that someone is sanctioned for 5 years on a MERE procedural issue, when no use of drugs was found.

There certainly were mitigating circumstances and I just hate it when these are not taken into account, by ANY law enforcement anywhere, any time.

It was apparently ok for the law enforcement lady to have her boyfreind with her, who was not credentialed, and that's because she was afraid...but it wasn't ok for Kyoko to be afraid at 10:30 at night, afraid to let someone into her home. This kind of unbalanced view of a situation makes me very angry.

But I agree to a very limited extent with you: I would have told the lady to sit on the porch, drank a gallon of water, and given her something no matter how long she had to sit there.

[CMc]

Well what the heck was this woman so afraid of that she needed her boyfriend to protect her? I've seen Kyoko up close, and she doesn't look the slightest intimidating (sorry, in case you're reading this! :lol: )

I just think it's the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard of!
Do all of the skaters, even the ladies singles, have to deal with this on a regular basis?
Can you imagine these people coming to the Hughes' household and disrupting their lives like this?

[Halo girl]

Good post duane. I agree with all that you said.

loveskating- That's the thing. She couldn't test positive if she refused the test. I know people keep saying she "only delayed" it, but if you are asked to take a drug test, you have to do it on the spot. I'm assuming this was a random drug tests, and they are called that because they can be given at any time, any hours. She refused to take the test, so it's reasonable that there would be concerns about what she might be hiding. Just because someone has tested negative before doesn't mean they will always test negative. We have no way of knowing what the results of her tests would have been, but the USADA was only doing their jobs in suspending her. Should they let everyone be able to say "I think I'll wait until I'm clean" and possibly let an athlete who is a drug user be overlooked? It can't work both ways, so that's why she's in the trouble she's in.

Considering she has been tested many times, she really should know that if she doesn't comply with the rules she could face the possiblity of problems. She really has no one else to blame for what happened. From my understands, she wasn't aware of the problems with the tester's credentials until the next day, so that really isn't an excuse for not taking the test that night. She should have had a glass of water, peed in the cup, tested negative, and complained about what happene to the proper authorities the folowing day.

[Rachel]

I believe Kyoko can appeal to the Court for Arbitration in Sport and she might do it, but I doubt that she would win.

The USADA can take a sample whenever they want to. If it's 2 a.m., you get up and go at 2 a.m. whether you were in bed or not. Kyoko had to agree to this rule to be eligible for the Olys, so she is bound by that agreement to produce when asked. Sarah Hughes is, too. I don't think 10:30 is a terrible hour; it's late, but it's not scandalously late.

The credentials and lack thereof are irrelevant. Kyoko let them in and accepted the woman as a USADA representative.

The boyfriend is irrelevant. Kyoko let him in, too.

None of those things had anything to do with Kyoko refusing to take the test.

She refused because she said she couldn't go. Maybe she couldn't. But the human bladder is rarely completely empty, and if it is, a big glass of water would take care of that.

I like Kyoko Ina a lot, but I think she threw a bit of a hissy fit here and now she's going to pay for it. Drug testing in Olympic eligible athletes is a huge deal and the powers that be in sports have shown no sympathy for athletes who are grumpy at being inconvenienced by the testing. I would feel outrage if the rules were being applied to her unfairly, but she is being held to the same standard everyone else is in this matter. The Olympic scandal is irrelevant--different organizations, different rules, different reasons. Life isn't fair.

If any of you are ever in a position where you are subject to random drug testing, you will find that you will be treated the same way. When you are told to produce, you produce, or there are swift and heavy penalties.

[adrianchew]

USFSA statement...

http://www.usfsa.org/news/2002-03/ina-suspension.htm

[NorthernLite]

Following is the history of suspension time served by various dishonest judges and just a small sampling of the plum judging assignments they were given after being found guilty of cheating:

1) Tatiana Danilenko - 1 year suspension in 1980s; continued to judge through 2002, including 02 GPF and Olympic Games.

2) Yuri Balkov - 1 year in late 90s; assigneed to 02 OG; assigned to current Skate America.

3) Alfred Korytek - 3 years, reduced to approx. 1 (99-00). Assigned to 02 OG.

4) Babenko - see Korytek.

The sum of what all four of *them* served is the same as what one skater is sentenced to serve - except in the case of an athlete, four-years is such a lengthy stretch of time it completely ends the career.

[donnamarie]

I don't understand why she got 4 years suspension, when B&S only got suspended for one year when they actually failed a drug test. What is the difference? And when one looks at the "penalties" which cheating judges have received, the whole thing seems very unfair. Four years is a shocking consequence. Has any skater ever received such a penalty?

Here is the USFSA's statement:

"Although the United States Figure Skating Association (USFSA) acknowledges the decision announced today by the American Arbitration Association/Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) panel concerning Kyoko Ina, we regret the unfortunate circumstances and irregularities surrounding her case.

Kyoko has proudly represented the U.S. at numerous international figure skating competitions including three Olympic Winter Games. She has been a tremendous asset to the development of figure skating in the U.S., both as an athlete and as a person throughout her career."

Seems a bit ambiguous ... I mean, does not say whether or not they will appeal.

[NorthernLite]

Originally posted by donnamarie

Here is the USFSA's statement:
[SNIP]
Seems a bit ambiguous ... I mean, does not say whether or not they will appeal.

That's because Phyllis Howard is still in the process of asking Speediot what she should do and say. :P :roll:

[rack]

Could someone who knows how to do these things post a link to the TSN.ca article on the subject? It offers rather a different take on events.

[victorskid]

Here's the link as requestedTSN story (http://www.tsn.ca/figure_skating/news_story.asp?ID=9914&hubName=figure_skating)

[melanieuk]

It's almost unbelievable but for the fact this is figure skating!

It actually reflects real life crime and its incongruous justice system, in that a drunk person can drive and kill a pedestrian - gets 3 years and license ban.

A houseowner (with a wife and young children asleep upstarirs) stabs an armed burglar (to death) who is breaking into his home - gets 10 years.

[jcspkbfan]

Not only is this a stiffer sentence than LeGougne and Gailhaguet received after the Olympics, I think this is even more than Ben Johnson (infamous Canadian sprinter) received after he tested positive and had his gold medal taken away at the 1988 Olympics! His first suspension was only two or three years, if I remember correctly. Unbelievable. :roll:

I only hope Kyoko will be able to put this behind her somehow and I wish nothing but the best for her in whatever she and John decide to do.

[lBrokenAnkle]

That is an EXCELLENT question, Donnamarie! Who suspended B&S? Obviously not the USADA. Was it the ISU? (ahem) that would explain it, I suppose. B&S were also stripped of their European title, as well as the year suspension.

laura

Edited to add, I think that comparing the ISU punishments to this one is very appropriate, and that the ISU should take a leaf from the USADA's book and have much stricter punishments for offenses as great as those we see getting by with a wink and a slap on the wrist.

Laura

[rack]

Today's NY Times has an article on the suspension, which includeds comments Kyoko Ina made in a telephone interview with them. The article ends: She said she tried to call an agency hotline the next morning but could not get through.

Again, this is a small discrepency, but I believe her original story was that she tried calling that night while the tester was there.

I agree four years is an excessive miniumum sanction. And I still want all of you (except duane) on my jury.:D

[adrianchew]

Same as NY Times article, no registration required though here...

http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?level_3_id=107&page=5440888

[singerskates]

Ina unfortunately did it to herself. If you read the whole article about the suspension, you'd see that she fax them to come over to her house to do the test. If she had not told them to come over to her home, maybe they would have meet her at the rink sometime. She invited trouble. Now, she'll have to go pro or not skate for 4 years. Too bad!

[NorthernLite]

Originally posted by lBrokenAnkle
I think that comparing the ISU punishments to this one is very appropriate


Just to clarify -- this *IS* an ISU punishment, a punishment being given out in accordance with ISU laws. See Hersh:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/international/cs-0210260095oct26,0,4638159.story?coll=cs%2Dinternat ional%2Dprint

<Five-time U.S. pairs champion Kyoko Ina has received a four-year suspension from the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency ... That is the minimum sentence under International Skating Union rules, which allow for a lifetime ban and a $1 million fine in case of such refusal.>

The ISU has a double standard. Ina gets this. But a judge who attempts to fix Worlds gets one year, another who confesses to attempting to fix the Olympics gets three, and many more fed officials behind the scams never even get investigated.

To me, the sole interest of the people running the ISU is not fairness of competition but maintaining a system in which *they* have the potential to influence outcomes. That's why they will punish an athlete severely, but not the judges from certain federations.

BTW the TSN story says:
<... after stating in a fax to the agency that she would be home from dinner at that time. The CAS panel concluded ... that her fax was "an invitation to test at
this hour of the night given her personal schedule.">

I'd like to see the exact wording of the fax. From this, it sounds as if she told them she'd be home at a certain time and expected them to be there. If so, then does that make it more or less plausible that she simply couldn't "go" at the appointed time?

[lBrokenAnkle]

Wow, NorthernLite, thanks for the info. Incredible hopw the ISU views the world. I think if Kyoko didn't follow the rules, I guess this suspension is fair enough, but why then did B&S get a year's suspension for a positive result? And of course let's not even get into the slap on the wrist punishments for fjudges caught cheating (Korytek, Balkov, LeGougne, etc.)

So depressing


laura

[duane]

when an athlete fails a test, the severity of the punishment might be based on what illicit drug is found in their system. perhaps one who, say, tests positive for marijuana would receive a punishment less severe than one who, say, tests positive for heroine or for a performance-enhancing steroid.

one possible reason that B (of B&S) received a lesser suspension is because she didnt "refuse" the test. she submitted a sample, the testers were able to determine what drugs were in her system, and with her explanation of why the drug was in her system, a punishment considered reasonable was levied.

the ISU may consider "refusing" to provide a sample more severe than actually failing a test. with a refusal, what--if any--illicit drugs are in ones system cant be determined. the last thing the ISU or USADA wants is for athletes to refuse compliance with drug testing, so they likely felt a "stiff" punishment was in order as a message.

regarding cheating judges, i agree that their light sentences are outrageous. IMO, any judge found to have cheated should be banned for life. however, perhaps athletes are simply put on a much higher standard than judges by the ISU, and cheating by them is considered much more damaging to the sport.

[Cerulean]

I think that asserting that Kyoko could've just drunk a bunch of water is absolutely ridiculous, as someone who is required to give samples every week at the hospital, I've had hell waiting hours on end and drinking endless amounts of water, but still being unable to 'produce' a sample.While I can understand Duane's viewpoint, it simply isn't that easy, and I hope that Kyoko is able to do something about this, for her own sake, this seems almost unbelievable....

[donnamarie]

The TSN article does throw a few different twists into the mix. Here are some excerpts:

<<Ina, who has paired with John Zimmerman to win the last three U.S. Championships, refused a urine test at her home at 10:30 p.m. after stating in a fax to the agency that she would be home from dinner at that time. The CAS panel concluded that Ina did not make herself available during the day and that her fax was "an invitation to test at this hour of the night given her personal schedule.">>

In her statement, Ina didn't indicate that she knew she might be tested at 10:30 p.m.

<<Ina also chose to sign an athlete refusal form, which is an admittance to violating USADA protocol and a subjection to sanctions. Her boyfriend, who also was present, warned her of the possible media implications.>>

Ina's boyfriend was there? In her statement, she said the tester brought her boyfriend, but didn't mention that her own boyfriend was there.

<< The CAS concluded that the doctor's credential had an expired sticker because she had moved and had not received the proper replacement and that Ina only called the service to reschedule the no-advance test "because it was inconvenient." Rescheduling the test destroys its integrity, the CAS said.>>

Hmm. Who are we to believe? It does show that there are two sides to every story. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between.

[duane]

Originally posted by donnamarie
The TSN article does throw a few different twists into the mix. Here are some excerpts:

<<Ina, who has paired with John Zimmerman to win the last three U.S. Championships, refused a urine test at her home at 10:30 p.m. after stating in a fax to the agency that she would be home from dinner at that time. The CAS panel concluded that Ina did not make herself available during the day and that her fax was "an invitation to test at this hour of the night given her personal schedule.">>

WOW!

now, if this is true, it would mean that:
1. Ina was aware that she was to take a drug test that day, and
2. the reason the official arrived so late in the evening is because Ina was unavailable during the day.

as donna said, there are two sides to every story, meaning we shouldnt be so quick to jump to one side.

[Lark]

Originally posted by Rachel

The credentials and lack thereof are irrelevant. Kyoko let them in and accepted the woman as a USADA representative.

The boyfriend is irrelevant. Kyoko let him in, too.



I am sorry, but the credentials and the boyfriend are not "irrelevant".

If you were suspected of committing a crime, and were arrested by a cop who was under suspension, or for some reason was no longer on the police force, your arrest would be thrown out of court on a technicality. Even if you agreed to go to the police station with the suspended cop, it would not matter. It is not up to you to be aware of the cops situation.

Kyoko agreed to be tested. It is not up to her to be aware of the testers credentials. Kyoko is not a member of the USADA. She is not a record keeper. Kyoko should be allowed to be tested again. By a tester with *CREDENTIALS*!

Also someone mentioned that the suspension does not matter because Kyoko and John were retiring anyways. How would you like to work a job for 20 years and be accused of something wrong right after you retired???

Doesn't everyone think that Kyoko would like her 20 years of service not to be pissed on? :evil:

[kia]

I think the credentials are important but did Ina know at the time the credentials were not valid. If she did then surely she is justified in refusing the test on this grounds alone.
Doesn't the drug testing require that an official representing the skater be there at the time to protect the skaters interests or is that only for junior skaters. Was it her boyfriend there or the testers boyfriend or both.

Did Ina herself arrange the test at that time of night or was that fax from some-one who knew her at the rink..

could the official confirm that she had tried to contact the advice line and if it was not working why not.

Did the official advise Ina of her rights and what consequences she could face if she refused to sign-Did the official know the possibilities or consequences.

Obviously the drug testing authority can not consider ignorance as an excuse but surely in this type of situation they should be responsible to encertain everything is as fair as possible for the sporstsperson as effectively they are ending the career of the athlete. Drug testing was introduced partially to encertain sports are fair to all contestants but more to protect the person from themselves and ambitious associations and the consequences related to use of drugs which may or may not have deletarious and sometimes fatal effects. It should be protective not dragonian

There seem to be many unanswered questions in this case over exactly what happened. If what Ina says is correct it raises many concerning issues over what rights athletes have and what protective measures are in place to protect the rights of sportspeople. If she knew about the test and the consequences and deliberately avoided it; it makes one wonder exactly what she was hiding and in this case the USFA may be justified in their action.

[maruko]

I think some of us might have mixed things up just a little bit. Actually, it was not the ISU who made the decision to sanction Kyoko. The sanction was imposed by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency(USADA)and USFSA is the one who
carried it out. It also was the panel of the American Arbitration Association who refused to listen to Kyoko's excuses. The 4-year sanction was followed because it is how ISU usually go by punishing athethes for refusing drug test. If you think Ina was screwed, it was by the USADA and AAA, not ISU.

I completely agree that ISU's punishment on improper conducts by judges is too light. However, I don't think a 4-year sanction for athletes who refuse to take drug test is too unreasonable. I think 4 years is pretty much the average with other sports like track-n-field, skiing and swimming. I think ISU, like other sports organizations, is taking "refusal" or "asking the test to be delayed" as having something to hide. Imagine if delaying tests is allowed for every athethes(just because he or she claims that he/she can't urinate), no one will be willing to give sample when asked. This way, the real bad-doers will never get caught.

I am with Ina on one thing. It is that there should be more attention given to protect
athethes' rights. Most anti-doping agency are way too harsh with athlete in order to "get" them. I have heard that some skiiers were requested to give samples unannounced just one hour before their competitions.

After reading so many articles from both sides, there seem to be many contraditing points. If the TSN story is true that Kyoko faxed to USADA and told them that she would be home from dinner "at that time", then Kyoko's claim of the test being totally "unannounced" is not entirely believable. Also, after being an Olympic eligible skater for
over 10 years, how can she not know that it is unacceptable for any drug tests to be delayed?
Nevertheless, I will give Kyoko the benefit of a doubt because some facts obviously are lost in between those articles.

[Rachel]

The lack of credentials aren't relevant because Kyoko didn't refuse to take the test because the USADA person wasn't credentialed. If she had, she would probably be off the hook.

The tester's credentials were not suspended; they had expired and had not yet been renewed because she moved. She was still in the employ of the USADA as a tester and Kyoko accepted her as a USADA tester. Since the arbitration court clearly didn't consider the expiration of the credentials a problem, I would bet that there is some sort of contingency in the rules for expired credentials--but I don't know that. I would bet it's like my driver's license, however; it expires on my birthday, but I have 30 days to get a new one before I am in violation.

The ISU's drug testing rules are required by the IOC. Either the ISU complies with the IOC guidelines, or the ISU members cannot compete in the Olympics. The IOC is the ultimate authority there. But in the cases of the judges, the ISU is its own ultimate authority. I think that's wrong and I think that cheating judges should be suspended from judging for life (AFTER a fair trial by an unbiased body), but I still think it's apples and oranges to compare Kyoko's situation to the judges'.

I think the punishment is harsh, but I understand why it's harsh--if athletes are allowed to refuse drug tests, they will. And if exceptions are made for the sake of convenience, then everyone will expect an exception to be made for the sake of convenience.

[Artemis]

On a slightly different note ... isn't this suspension a little more than irrelevant? Sure, she's left the eligible ranks, but wouldn't this suspension also bar her from ISU-sanctioned pro-am events?

[Lee]

Originally posted by Artemis
On a slightly different note ... isn't this suspension a little more than irrelevant? Sure, she's left the eligible ranks, but wouldn't this suspension also bar her from ISU-sanctioned pro-am events?
One would tend to think so -- their names *have* been bandied about as being entered in the Sears Open in Red Deer in early December. I would think THAT event -- and a few others -- are rather *toast* now. So, you're right, not entirely 'irrelevant.'

[rack]

There are a couple of other reasons why it isn't irrelevent.

One is Kyoko Ina's probable acceptance into the US Figure Skating Hall of Fame- an honor she richly deserves. Would that be affected?

And secondly, does SOI have any kind of drug and/or morality clause? I certainly don't know, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did- they're very much packaged as a wholesome-family troup for wholesome-family entertainment.

It's a mess, and I hope for her sake she goes for and wins a final appeal.

[pittypat]

Originally posted by duane
well, it's me again! :)


As someone stated in the other thread, since I&Z had already decided to retire from eligible skating, what is the true harm here? the story is out, and to be totally honest, it has not changed my personal opinion of Ina in the slightest. i think, if anything, this scandal will only enhance Ina's image with most skating fans, and make her much more popular. no one sees her as the villian, or believes she ever was a doper.

The harm is to her good name and if I were in her shoes, I would do everything I could do to discredit this incredible sham. Many people do not follow figure skating close enough to understand this entire mess nor would they give her the benefit of the doubt.

[lynlei]

It is a shame if she indeed receives 4-year suspension.
Even though we don't know all the facts, it still seems to me something is not right.

OK,
earlier that day she faxed, Agency may take it as an invitation, but I also take it that she was willing to go through the procedure. (cooperation)
But when two people showed at her house 10:30pm, she could not go through with it.

I wonder ,
Did USADA ever reply her fax?
If they did not, I would consider testers showing up that late "unannounced"

Apparently tester and Kyoko had some talk to deal with the situation.
Did the tester give her an appropriate answer? NO.

Even though USADA expects athelets to produce sample on command,
not replying or giving out adequate answers to athelets sounds very much flawed process to me.

[Kamey]

I'm a great fan of Kyoko, but unfortunately I have to agree that she's been in the business long enough to know that right or wrong, a refusal would cause suspicion. Therefore, if it were me, I'd make the testers wait until I could comply, especially since an answer was not available. Why allow any speculation whatsoever to tarnish my name? Yes, it was intrusive, and yes, there were irregularities - but she's no novice at this game, and an intelligent woman to boot. She may not like the rules of the game (who would?), but she agreed to them.

My question is, why don't they do hair samples anyway? - less easy to tamper with, less intrusive, and CAN be done at any opportunity. It should be a backup method at any rate, for the occasional 'non-producers' :oops:

At any rate, no matter what my point of view - I'm rooting for dismissal on the basis of a technicality!

K

[PAskate]

Has there been any news on additional appeals? It seems like something should have come out by now.