It’s surprising that Dick Pound failed in his attempt to become the boss of CAS, the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
I thought his colourful comments on Floyd Landis – Nazi frogmen, virgins, Harleys etc – would make him a shoe-in for the job.
POUND: “I don’t pre-judge cases. I’m enough of a lawyer to know that there’s a process. What I do react to is when you get all kinds of shit attacking the methods and saying that the system is biased against athletes. All those sorts of things were coming out of the Landis camp. I don’t sit back and turn the other cheek again and again and again. I say they’re talking bullshit and here’s why.”
News of the weird: The top Google result for ‘dick virgins’ is Cyclingnews.com, with the rest not being quite so nice.
However, what’s really weird is that Pound is actually one of the foxes running the CAS henhouse. Judge Bill Hue on Trust But Verify wrote:
“Dick Pound IS a member of the CAS Court and has been for some time, including the time during which he was Chair of WADA.
“Richard Young [Outside counsel and lead attorney for USADA in the Landis case] is also a member of that court…CAS is hopelessly compromised.
“Their world is quite small. We have to accept their draftsmanship of rules, with their prosecution of cases they feel constitute a violation of rules they created and their judging of their own draftsmanship,decision to prosecute and application of ‘law’ they created to cases they deem a violation of those ‘laws’.
“Now we understand that they also and finally review their decisions as appellate judges of their own draftsmanship, prosecution, and application of their law to cases they prosecute as violations of that law.
“It is small wonder that Richard Young is so adamant about the ‘guilt’ of athletes he prosecutes to the point where he virtually testifies himself. He wrote the law. He knows the standards he wrote. He knows HIS laws and standards were violated.
“As judge, he would know much more about the subject matter than pesky things like presentation of evidence and cross examination and credibility of witnesses and impartial evaluation of science.
“[There’s] actual conflict of interest inherent in this bizarre adjudicative system.”