Bolt vs Gatlin, ‘Good vs Evil’ and the media’s apparent ignorance and inconsistency on drugs in athletics

The above was posted on the Telegraph website today, and what a joke piece of journalism if ever I’ve seen one. But it echoes the inconsistency of the reporting of ‘drugs cheats’ and random demonising of some individuals in sport.

Justin Gatlin vs Bolt- good vs evil or just bullshit spouting?

Let’s first clarify that of the starting line-up of this 100m final, 4 of the main contenders (Gay, Powell, Gatlin and Rogers) have served bans for doping. Yet the media and the BBC commentary are focussed on slagging Justin Gatlin off and making him out to be evil. Upon Bolt winning the race Steve Cram commentated “He may have saved the sport”- are you serious? How about every single other race in the championship that included previously banned athletes including some British athletes who had missed tests in dubious circumstances?

With more and more athletes testing positive and retrospective tests now showing positive with the improving drug testing techniques what does the future hold? Bolt has “saved the sport”, I wonder what they’ll say if (or when) he and others held in such high regard test positive. It will all just be shown to be a inconsistent journalism and highlight the fact that 90% of athletics (and professional sport) is fuelled by PED’s.