The Dance Hall 12: Boston Tea Dance Party

[kwanfan1818]

Good cop-bad cop, along strict gender lines.

 

[VGThuy]

To be fair, if they really don’t know why, then they should be told. I think that’s fair. It would also be appropriate if the response was done by a very public and sternly worded letter in response without holding back and without any consideration for S/B’s image and reputations if the reasons for their exclusions are valid.

 

[Dobre]

Popping into the fray to say that I've liked Eva Bernard ever since her previous partner. I hope she continues and finds a kindred ice-dance partner.

Also I don't think there is any such thing as a one-sided partner split. There is mostly just such as a thing as the first-person-to-post-on-social-media-and-share-their-story-with-umpteen-strangers split.

 

[farahfan]

Why do i feel like this whole thing was planned....Rusfed proposes S/B, they get rejected, they make a video saying they've been treated unjustly, what next?

 

[tony]

To be fair, if they really don’t know why, then they should be told. I think that’s fair. It would also be appropriate if the response was done by a very public and sternly worded letter in response without holding back and without any consideration for S/B’s image and reputations if the reasons for their exclusions are valid.

I 100% agree with this. If they were just told they couldn't go, then that's something else. I reached out to both him and Galliamov before we made our latest video the other day to see if they actually did get, in writing, the reasons why they were not considered but they didn't reply (didn't expect them to).

Why do i feel like this whole thing was planned....Rusfed proposes S/B, they get rejected, they make a video saying they've been treated unjustly, what next?

Nah, don't think so. I think skaters like S/B have been trucking along this entire Olympiad with hopes of this neutral athlete thing coming about to get them back to the Olympics.

 

[Dobre]

Why do i feel like this whole thing was planned....Rusfed proposes S/B, they get rejected, they make a video saying they've been treated unjustly, what next?

The Olympics is held without them.

Same as would have happened if no one had said anything.

 

[kwanfan1818]

Nah, don't think so. I think skaters like S/B have been trucking along this entire Olympiad with hopes of this neutral athlete thing coming about to get them back to the Olympics.

Certainly for the last half of it: the ISU banned Russia in May 2022, and by March 2023, the IOC had drawn up the recommendations for AIN participation in Paris. There was no reason to think this wouldn't be in place for Milan.

 

[Rukia]

I wonder if the truth is somewhere in the middle- s/b did not get notification why but someone else in the russian fed might have and just not passed it along for whatever reason

 

[Karen-W]

Nah, don't think so. I think skaters like S/B have been trucking along this entire Olympiad with hopes of this neutral athlete thing coming about to get them back to the Olympics.

I think they were hoping the ban would be lifted before the next Olympics and weren't really thinking that there'd be any need to prove themselves as neutral athletes. Failing the blanket ban being lifted, if they were forced to go down the neutral athlete path, it seems pretty clear the RusFed thought that any examination & review of their athletes would be perfunctory and superficial.

Personally, I think they (and the RusFed) should tread very carefully down this path of appeal. As was pointed out in the AIN discussion thread in GSD, Gumennik has shown plenty of Russian patriotism on his social media. It wouldn't take much for the ISU to re-review his public appearances & social media activity and determine that perhaps they'd erred in approving him after all. And that would be a far more likely outcome than StepBuk being granted AIN status after all.

 

[Karen-W]

Certainly for the last half of it: the ISU banned Russia in May 2022, and by March 2023, the IOC had drawn up the recommendations for AIN participation in Paris. There was no reason to think this wouldn't be in place for Milan.

IOC & ISU ban occurred in March 2022, not May 2022. But, yes, the IOC was moving toward AIN participation in Paris a year later and there's certainly no excuse for StepBuk's attendance at Putin's address to the Federal Assembly in 2024, given what was known of the AIN requirements by that point in time, even disregarding done from March 2022 through March 2023.

 

[tony]

Personally, I think they (and the RusFed) should tread very carefully down this path of appeal. As was pointed out in the AIN discussion thread in GSD, Gumennik has shown plenty of Russian patriotism on his social media. It wouldn't take much for the ISU to re-review his public appearances & social media activity and determine that perhaps they'd erred in approving him after all. And that would be a far more likely outcome than StepBuk being granted AIN status after all.

Because Gumennik has Russian flags in some pics? Is this the post you are talking about?

This is all so nutty. Cubans in Miami hate everything about Castro's regime and the whole dictatorship to the point that they fled the country, and yet they display the Cuban flag any and every chance they get. I think casey was kinda right with all of this posting constantly about the vagueness. In any event, those excluded really should personally get the reasons listed why they were excluded.

 

[farahfan]

Because Gumennik has Russian flags in some pics? Is this the post you are talking about?

This is all so nutty. Cubans in Miami hate everything about Castro's regime and the whole dictatorship to the point that they fled the country, and yet they display the Cuban flag any and every chance they get. I think casey was kinda right with all of this posting constantly about the vagueness. In any event, those excluded really should personally get the reasons listed why they were excluded.

yah patriotism is a sticky messy grey area.. Alisa Efimova has a youtube channel where she shows plenty of Russian patriotism. I kinda get both sides. starting to think those reasons might actually help clear this up.

 

[Karen-W]

Because Gumennik has Russian flags in some pics? Is this the post you are talking about?

This is all so nutty. Cubans in Miami hate everything about Castro's regime and the whole dictatorship to the point that they fled the country, and yet they display the Cuban flag any and every chance they get. I think casey was kinda right with all of this posting constantly about the vagueness. In any event, those excluded really should personally get the reasons listed why they were excluded.

I agree, and I don't think that posting Russian flags in some pics on social media is in any way similar to StepBuk going to Putin's address, but if they try and play it along the lines of "we're just patriotic Russian citizens, who were invited to attend on behalf of our sports federation..." Then the ISU may very well say "well, any outward signs of Russian patriotism are not allowed, so we're rescinding approval for Gumennik" in order to apply a uniform standard to all AIN nominees.

There's a huge difference, IMO, between posting some national flags (Russian, Cuban, American, Canadian, whatever) on your SM, especially if it's on a national holiday like Victory Day or the 4th of July, and showing up at an event where the President of your country is in attendance & you're posing for photos with said President who is overseeing the illegal invasion of another country that has resulted in massive international condemnation & sanctions. StepBuk are being disingenuous to claim they don't understand why their application was rejected.

 

[tony]

I agree, and I don't think that posting Russian flags in some pics on social media is in any way similar to StepBuk going to Putin's address, but if they try and play it along the lines of "we're just patriotic Russian citizens, who were invited to attend on behalf of our sports federation..." Then the ISU may very well say "well, any outward signs of Russian patriotism are not allowed, so we're rescinding approval for Gumennik" in order to apply a uniform standard to all AIN nominees.

Which would be completely ridiculous.

 

[Karen-W]

Which would be completely ridiculous.

But the ISU may be forced into a stricter standard if StepBuk DO try to play any valid reasons for rejecting them (like going to Putin's address) as "just normal, patriotic Russians". And given that we've already seen them posting this shameless video plea, would I put it past them to continue to be disingenuous about all of their conduct in the past 3 years? Absolutely.

 

[caseyedwards]

Which would be completely ridiculous.

A clear standard must be established if ioc isu are going to have these tests for Russians for generations to come

 

[kwanfan1818]

As was pointed out in the AIN discussion thread in GSD, Gumennik has shown plenty of Russian patriotism on his social media.

According to ISU Communication 2680, eligibility can be revoked retroactively. The athletes had to fill out a form in which they had to sign that they'd declared everything, even if deleted from social media. I would interpret that as if they found that the list was incomplete, if the athlete had lied, or they now know that some signal can be interpreted as supporting the war -- tattoo, decoder ring, body language, tag phrase -- they could, but not if they'd already reviewed what the athlete declared, they can't just change their mind and say, yeah, violation. (By "can't" I mean get away with it automatically.)

In any event, those excluded really should personally get the reasons listed why they were excluded.

Typically, everything goes through the Federations, unless the athlete is "emancipated" from the last Fed by the ISU Council -- never happens -- or when Miki Ando personally asked for and was granted permission to compete at Nebelhorn, even though the Japanese Fed hadn't submitted her.

The Russian and Belorussian Federation had to submit the names, and, typically, the decision and any explanation would have to go to the Feds, not the individuals. There's nothing in the ISU Communication that says that the Federation or the athletes would be given any explanation/rationale for the decision. We don't know if the Russian Fed was given a specific explanation for anyone rejected for doping-related reasons when the approved list of submitted names in 2018 was released without the rejected athletes. We don't know if the ISU ever has to given an explanation. But if the ISU gives an explanation, it's likely to the Feds, and it would be up to them to pass it on or not. (Some Feds might be obligated by their bylaws to.)

The ISU has conflicting information about CAS:

1. In Communication 2680 -- the announcement of the AIN qualification process -- there are two references to ability to appeal to CAS. Here's one (emphasis mine):

The results shown by the doping-tests and special screening will be evaluated for each Nominated Athlete and their Support Personnel by the ISU in accordance with the IOC recommendations and processes successfully implemented in other sports. The ISU Council will establish an ISU AIN Review Commission consisting of three members of the ISU Council and an athlete representative of the Olympic movement for evaluation of the Nominated Athletes and preparation of a proposal to the Council of their admission as an AIN for OWG 2026, including Qualification Pathways for OWG 2026. The ISU AIN Review Commission can take advice if need be and it will act in direct cooperation with the IOC. If the ISU AIN Review Commission determines all eligibility criteria as given have been complied with, it will recommend to the Council to declare the eligibility of the respective Nominated Athlete(s) and their Support Personnel for participation at the Figure Skating Qualification Competition and at the Qualification Competitions according to the Olympic Qualification Documents in Speed Skating and Short Track Speed Skating, and, if qualified, at the OWG 2026 (each, an “Eligible Nominated Athlete”). It is the decision of the ISU Council to grant the status of AIN to Eligible Nominated Athletes and is subject to an appeal to CAS according to article 26 of the ISU Constitution.

Article 26 says

1. Appeals
Appeals against decisions of the DC, and of the Council when allowed by explicit
provision of this Constitution, may be filed with the Appeals Arbitration Division
of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), Lausanne, Switzerland.

2. CAS Jurisdiction
The CAS shall have the power to hear and decide appeals in the following cases:
a) Against any decision of the DC, or of the DC Chair in the case of Article
25, paragraph 8.e).
b) Against decisions of the Council imposing any penalty on or suspension
of ISU Membership of an ISU Member.
c) Against any decision of the Council declaring ineligibility of a Skater,
Official, Office Holder or other participant in ISU activities.
d) Against any decision of the Council sitting as a disciplinary body hearing
charges against a member of the DC.
e) Against any decision of the Council not sanctioning an Open International
Competition relating primarily to the application of the ethical criteria or
technical and sporting criteria. For any other dispute relating to the ISU’s
decision, the ISU will enter an arbitration agreement at the request of the
Applicant to refer the matter to the ordinary arbitration procedure at CAS
in accordance with the Code of Sports-Related Arbitration.

2. But, ISU Communication 2708 -- where they list approved AIN athletes -- says (emphasis theirs),

The current decision of the ISU Council on the AIN eligibility list is final with regard to all applicants and not subject to appeal. This reflects the exceptional and sensitive nature of the current process and aims to ensure procedural integrity and consistency across all applicants respecting their right to privacy.

3. The FAQ says,

Can the list, process or decisions related to AINs be appealed to the Court of Arbitration forSport (CAS)?

• The special pathway allowing a limited number of Individual Neutral Athletes (AIN) to participate in designated Olympic Qualifying events is an exception granted by the ISU Council from the provisions outlined in ISU Communication 2469 . Without this exception, these athletes would remain ineligible for participation in ISU and Olympic ice-skating competitions. As a result, these decisions do not represent additional exclusions and are therefore not subject to appeal(read Decisions of the ISU Council – ISU Communication 2708)

As far as I can see, 1 and 2/3 are contradictory, and the Feds who submitted the athletes, and the atheltes who filled out the form were lied to as far as what the ISU represented their rights as being on application. The ISU can declare what it wants, but it looks like CAS will have to rule first on whether this is appealable, and if the find it so, then go to the merits of the appeal.

 

[morqet]

Isn't it possible that S/B's ineligibility to do with whatever irregularity there was in Bukin's anti-doping record that led to S/B not being cleared for the 2018 Olympics rather than any support or otherwise for Putin?

 

[kwanfan1818]

Stepanova/Bukin competed in Beijing four years later. It would be odd that a review of their application in 2026 would cause them to be rejected on those grounds.

 

[Karen-W]

Stepanova/Bukin competed in Beijing four years later. It would be odd that a review of their application in 2026 would cause them to be rejected on those grounds.

But the 2022 ROC athletes weren't put through the same review as the 2018 OARs were, so it's possible that whatever flagged him to be rejected in 2018 is the reason why they were rejected now.

 

[Dobre]

It's possible that Gummenik is so unscary that no one reported his pro-Russian anything to the powers-that-be.

 

[morqet]

Maybe, but I can't remember what the requirements were for 2022 - I don't recall there being the same process of having to have athletes approved in the way they were in 2018 & can't find the documents on the ISU or IOC website.

This year, there's the clause "Nominated Athletes and their Support Personnel must have not associated in any way with any person serving a period of ineligibility for an Anti-Doping rule violation". So if Bukin is banned in 2018 for something dodgy that showed up in the RUSADA documentation & raised questions there, I'd expect the same thing to kick in here. "Associated in any way" is a very loose definition.

 

[caseyedwards]

S/b always wanted to know what got them banned in 2018! But the official ruling said no one who isn’t “invited” should be considered to have done anything wrong at any time! So that’s why S/b appealed that. They wanted to know. But the ioc said just because you weren’t invited that’s not anything bad. Don’t worry about it. And then CAS ruled not being invited wasn’t a punishment. IOC can invite anyone it wants.

And of course s/b were at worlds 2018 with no problems

 

[VGThuy]

Because Gumennik has Russian flags in some pics? Is this the post you are talking about?

This is all so nutty. Cubans in Miami hate everything about Castro's regime and the whole dictatorship to the point that they fled the country, and yet they display the Cuban flag any and every chance they get. I think casey was kinda right with all of this posting constantly about the vagueness. In any event, those excluded really should personally get the reasons listed why they were excluded.

Thanks to your post, I just realized that the Cuban flag under this communist regime is the same flag that it was prior to Castro taking over . That makes it an anomaly. It’s not that I didn’t know, I just never really thought about it. For the similarly-behaved Vietnamese Americans who are anti-Communist, they would never fly the current national flag . Instead they would fly the South Vietnam one:

 

[kwanfan1818]

He would have had to have pass multiple drug tests since 2018 -- and the violation could have been for years before 2018 -- for at least as long a period of time as Valieva was banned.

However, if there was no explanation for the original drug-related bans in 2018, because they didn't have to, the appeal could be a back-door way of forcing the ISU to reveal their decision-making at CAS, and if it was "because of the 2018 doping-related reason," they'd have to explain that ban as well.

 

[Theatregirl1122]

I think it’s entirely possible there was an explanation and it was not revealed by Russia or S/B’s team very intentionally.

 

[kwanfan1818]

It's possible, but I don't think it's likely: the way the ISU explained the process, which was more clearly written in general than most of its documentation, the only thing they said they'd do is release the names of the athletes that passed their investigation and were allowed into the Beijing competition. They said nothing about notifying anyone, Fed or athlete, if they'd been rejected.

As far as I know, that's what they did regarding the doping restrictions in 2018. The only difference there was that the athletes who were submitted were made public as having been selected for the Olympic team before submission. The Russian Fed made the rejected AIN nominees public with their announcement of the CAS suit, Stepanova/Bukin went public on their own, various athletes and commentators called them out by name, etc.

 

[Dobre]

I think it’s entirely possible there was an explanation and it was not revealed by Russia or S/B’s team very intentionally.

I think it's impossible that the Russian Fed, especially, doesn't know what the first ban was about. The fact that the explanation for that was never released does make it awfully hard to give both the Russian Fed and Stepanova & Bukin the benefit of the doubt now.

 

[kwanfan1818]

The reason for the first failure to qualify was obvious in general, because it was specific to doping. However, the Russian Fed might not have been told it was because of test(s) done on [date(s)] where XYZ was up with the sample(s).

This failure to qualify could have been for one or both of the two general reasons.

 

[caseyedwards]

The ioc made it a point to say they were inviting people who weren’t at 2014 Olympics. S/B weren’t there! Suspicion was placed on those who were there not ones who weren’t!