Loading...

Search This Blog

Loading...

UNO News Network Video Bar

Loading...

Thursday, July 21, 2016

INDEPENDIENTE DEL VALLE 1 ATLETICO NACIONAL 1: La primera final de la Copa Libertadores 2016 queda empatada



A tres minutos del final, Independiente del Valle rescata una igualdad 1-1 ante Atlético Nacional. La revancha será el próximo miércoles.


En el estadio Olímpico Atahualpa, en Quito, Independiente del Valle jugó el partido más importante de su historia. El equipo que ha sorprendido a Sudamérica recibió a Atlético Nacional, por la final de ida de la Copa Libertadores. A tres minutos del final del juego, los locales encontraron un gol que no sólo deja abierta la serie, sino que ubica a Independiente en otra posición, luego de comenzar perdiendo. Fue 1-1, y todo se definirá el próximo miércoles, en el Atanasio Girardot de Medellín.
El de esta noche no fue el único partido de Independiente del Valle. Al mediodía, los juveniles del plantel enfrentaron a El Nacional, por el torneo local, en un duelo que estaba pendiente, y perdieron 5-2. Una situación curiosa, por decirlo menos, cuando por la noche los titulares tenían un desafío mayor.
Era una fiesta. Y como tal, no faltaron los fuegos artificiales. Eso sí, su tiempo de duración se estiró tanto que alteraron la entonación de himno ecuatoriano.
El partido comenzó parejo, con ambos equipos presentando sus intenciones ofensivas. De todas formas, con el paso de los minutos fueron los verdolagas quienes se acomodaron mejor. En esta labor, la participación de Macnelly Torres resulta importante.
El ex volante de Colo Colo es el armador de Nacional, jugando detrás del 9, Miguel Borja, y teniendo a dos hombres muy veloces por los lados, como Orlando Berrío por la derecha, y Marlos Moreno por la izquierda. Para entrar más en juego, Macnelly retrocedía hasta mitad de cancha para comenzar a hilvanar.
En los 36’, se abre la cuenta. Berrío, en posición de centrodelantero, recibe de espalda al arco, gira, se saca a tres rivales, y saca un remate bajo que derrota a Azcona. Para el local, ese fue un golpe bajo, que los afectó. El entretiempo era necesario, para rearmarse. En el segundo lapso, el cotejo no mostró demasiadas emociones. A Atlético Nacional la ventaja mínima le gustaba.
Repetto metió cambios y al filo del reloj encuentra la igualdad. En los 87’, tras un tiro libre y una dubitativa reacción del meta Armani, Arturo Mina, el eficiente zaguero de los locales, anota el 1-1. Todo abierto para el juego de vuelta. La mala noticia para el equipo de Rueda es que tendrán una sensible baja. El volante Sebastián Pérez, uno de los mejores valores del equipo a lo largo del certamen, se perderá el choque decisivo por acumulación de tarjetas amarillas.

SOCCER MUNDIAL: España elige a Julen Lopetegui como reemplazante de Vicente del Bosque



El nuevo entrenador del combinado hispano fue campeón europeo con la Sub 19 y Sub 21 y hasta enero dirigió al Porto.


La Real Federación Española de Fútbol (RFEF) confirmó este jueves el nombramiento de Julen Lopetegui como nuevo seleccionador español, en sustitución de Vicente del Bosque.
El técnico guipuzcoano, de 49 años, asumirá la dirección de la selección española absoluta tras su prolífico paso por las diferentes categorías del combinado nacional.
Julen Lopetegui ganó el Campeonato de Europa Sub-19 en 2012 y el de categoría Sub-21 en 2013.
También entrenó al Rayo Vallecano (2003-04), al Real Madrid Castilla (2008-09) y al Porto, club al que se sumó en agosto de 2014. Su aventura en la liga portuguesa finalizó en enero de este mismo año, tras su destitución.
Vicente del Bosque asumió las riendas de la selección española el 17 de julio de 2008 y cerró su etapa al frente del combinado nacional con la eliminación ante Italia en los octavos de final de la pasada Eurocopa de Francia. En este periodo de ocho años, conquistó el Mundial de Sudáfrica 2010 y la Eurocopa de Polonia y Ucrania 2012.

THE ROAD TO RIO 2016: Golpe al atletismo ruso: Confirman prohibición de competir en los JJ.OO



El TAS rechazó la apelación que presentó la federación de ese país y 68 atletas tras el castigo impuesto por la IAAF por dopaje.


Rusia perdió su apelación contra la prohibición impuesta por la IAAF al equipo de atletismo para competir en los Juegos Olí­mpicos de Rí­o de Janeiro, una decisión que podrí­a sumar presión sobre el COI para excluir a toda la delegación rusa de la cita olí­mpica del próximo mes.
La Corte de Arbitraje del Deporte (TAS) rechazó la apelación presentada por 68 atletas rusos que pidieron revocar el veto impuesto por la federación internacional de atletismo, IAAF, tras acusaciones de que el estado ruso patrocinó un programa de dopaje y ocultó las infracciones.
El tribunal, con sede en Lausana, Suiza, mantuvo la "validez" del veto de la IAAF apuntando que un paí­s cuya federación nacional está suspendida no puede optar a participar en competiciones internacionales, incluyendo los Juegos Olí­mpicos.
El panel dijo que el Comité Olí­mpico Ruso "no tiene derecho a nominar a atletas rusos para competir en los Juegos Olí­mpicos de Rí­o 2016 considerando que no son aptos para competir según las reglas de la IAAF".
El TAS dijo sin embargo que no tiene jurisdicción sobre la decisión del Comité Olí­mpico Internacional de dejar competir a los atletas rusos, ya sea representando a su paí­s o como "atletas neutrales".
Rusia alega que se trata de una sanción colectiva a sus atletas, apuntando que puede castigar a otros que no han sido acusados.
"El fallo de hoy ha igualado las condiciones para los atletas", dijo la IAAF en un comunicado. "El TAS premia la defensa del derecho de la IAAF para proteger el deporte, para proteger a los atletas limpios y apoyar la credibilidad e integridad de la competición".


THE ROAD TO RIO 2016: Usain Bolt: "Si haces trampa, serás perseguido: es el mensaje correcto"





El velocista jamaicano alabó la confirmación del castigo al atletismo ruso, que no podrá participar en los Juegos Olímpicos.


"Si haces trampa, serás perseguido: es el  mensaje correcto", estimó este jueves en Londres el velocista jamaicano Usain  Bolt después de que los atletas rusos fueran  privados de los Juegos Olímpicos de Río tras un fallo de confirmación del TAS.
El séxtuple campeón olímpico, que corre el riesgo de perder una de sus medallas de oro en relevos tras un control positivo de uno de sus compañeros (Nesta Carter) en los Beijing 2008, rechazó comentar el caso puntual de la situación que viven los atletas rusos.
"No tengo reacciones (a la decisión del TAS). Estoy triste, pero hay reglas. ¿Si pienso que debían ser suspendidos? No tengo comentarios, las reglas son reglas, hay autoridades y no tengo comentarios sobre ese tema", declaró el "Rayo", explicando que "un atleta no se puede permitir el lujo de perder sus objetivos y mirar demasiado qué pasa en los pasillos".
"Para mí, si tomas algo, tienes que ser sancionado. Hay que llevar adelante acciones justas. Si piensan que hay que tomar esas decisiones, pues hay que hacerlo", añadió, respaldando en forma elíptica la medida del TAS.
"Si haces trampa vas a ser perseguido por ello y es el mensaje correcto", resumió Bolt, quien correrá en Rio en busca de más oros.
Este jueves el Tribunal Arbitral del Deporte (TAS) rechazó la apelación interpuesta por 68 atletas rusos que habían sido suspendidos por la IAAF en el marco de un escándalo de dopaje.

RIO 2016 OLYMPICS: Doping, the scourge of modern sport and its beginnings in Moscow 1980 and Los Angeles 1984



Photo: Getty Images
by Gianni Merlo, AIPS President, La Gazzetta dello Sport
LAUSANNE, July 20, 2016 - History books tell us that doping has been sport’s companion from the very start. In the 19th century, it was already in use in men’s sprints where there was also betting. Then, at the beginning of the 20th century, some used strychnine in long distance races.
The system has evolved progressively. After the Second World War, with the world divided in two, sport became an important battlefield and, slowly but surely, doping also became a weapon of propaganda. In the 1960s, the Eastern bloc sublimated some practices which, in the West, were mainly used by small organisations or individuals and what is now known as State Doping started.
EAST AND WEST However, the results obtained by the East stimulated the West to adapt, to find countermeasures. Top scientists were hired on both fronts to find new solutions. Cures for truly ill people became perfect prescriptions for turning normal, healthy men and women into champions.
In the 1970s, the use of anabolic steroids was transformed from an almost innocent consequence of the fraternal cohabitation of bodybuilders and throwers in gyms into a scientific practice; auto-transfusion of blood also became a fashion. This was the secret of the success of the Finnish middle distance runners - Lasse Viren dominated two Olympics. It was immediately copied and ‘enriched blood’ was achieved. Applied science became a real jungle with neither laws nor morals.
BOYCOTTS Then the boycotts of the Olympic Games in Moscow in 1980 and Los Angeles in 1984 came and, in a certain sense, doping became ‘legal’. Don’t get me wrong, anti-doping laws were drafted but it was only a façade because, in effect, every federation turned one, if not two, blind eyes to the use of pharmaceuticals. Spying was in vogue to discover what the neighbouring country had found that was better. The East had its rigid state organisation, the West diligently copied and sometimes even succeeded in finding chemically more effective solutions.
PACT WITH THE DEVIL We mentioned Moscow 1980 and Los Angeles 1984; many senior executives made a pact with the devil, with the excuse of safeguarding the Olympic ideal. Their delegations would take part with a sort of secret safe-conduct to avoid the net of anti-doping. Yes, some athletes would be found positive but only provisions that were a ‘front’ would be taken, perhaps even agreed. Athletes who had tested positive in their home countries happily left for Los Angeles and weren’t discovered. A violent controversy broke out in the United States because many athletes, who hadn’t passed the domestic test, were put into the Olympic squad just the same.
PRINCE DE MERODE The news that the reports and proof of various positive cases had disappeared from the hotel room of Prince de Merode, head of the IOC medical commission at the time, caused a sensation. The political choice of not hitting those who had cheated effectively legitimised doping and we’re still paying the consequences.
BEN JOHNSON The high profile disqualification of Ben Johnson from the Seoul Games in 1988 was another ‘front’ operation. He paid while many were protected by the long shadow of his scandal. Certainly, programmes to try and stem this malignant cancer were subsequently drafted and put into practice but real sanitization work at senior executive level has never been done. Many senior executives involved in Moscow 1980 and Los Angeles 1984 kept their jobs and became liable to blackmail by those who preferred to choose the short-cuts offered by doping.
NOTHING CHANGES The East continued its State-sponsored policy while, in the West, the doping ‘multi-national organisations’ multiplied and were concealed up to a certain point. So much so that we reached the paradox of Victor Conte, the creator of the artificial paradises of Balco, who went to a press conference just before the Olympic Games of Sydney 2000 to defend C. J. Hunter, the shot putter, Marion Jones’s husband, from the accusation of doping. He’d been found positive a few days before. Conte thus showed his power to the world and prospered for some years until the agent Novitzsky raided his laboratory and thus unveiled all the deceit. However, what made an impression on us was that, before then, the sports authorities had never said anything and hadn’t even sketched out a plan to stop him. The transversal organisation started with Conte because it involved more sports and also started to tip its hat at illegal betting.
THE LAST STAGE Now we’ve reached the last stage -- that of criminal organisations that aren’t satisfied with selling steroids or other drugs but also blackmail athletes to hide their sins once they’ve won titles and money. What is really too much is that Rodchenkov, head of Russian anti-doping, who is now blabbing all the Russian secrets to the FBI, was also head of the blackmail organisation, a maestro… Lamine Diack, chairman of the IAAF, gave a free hand to his son Papa Massata to do business in blackmailing. First they were drugged and then robbed, a sure system with no risks.
THE MILESTONE July 18, 2016 will remain an important date in the fight against doping. The publication of the McLaren report, the head of the independent commission created by WADA to investigate what happened at the Winter Games in Sochi 2014, has highlighted an old habit of the former Soviet Union - state doping. Time has passed, but nothing, as we said, has changed. This time we have gone from simple cover ups or alterations of analytical reports to the manipulation of anti-doping samples! The discovery are major flaws in the control system. The question that comes naturally is: Is it really impossible to imagine a system without these flaws, or is the system leaving them there deliberately to continue to allow fraudulent practices, keeping them logically hidden? Russia has been properly investigated and must now pay for its sins, but in how many other countries would a thorough investigation bring an emergence of serious sins? We fear in many.
MORE INVESTIGATIONS Recently, there have been round-ups in Spain with the arrest of Jama Aden, coach-handyman but he, too, is only a pawn in a larger game. Who covered up for him in the past if he really is involved in sports dishonesty? Many managers and coaches were rounded up for questioning by the police in Kenya and anti-doping officials conducted a dawn raid on the Kenyan athletics Olympic camp in Eldoret on July 12, where athletes were required to give both blood and urine samples.
ETHICS Nowadays athletes are subjected to rigorous testing and the constant reporting and observation is reminiscent of living in a goldfish bowl. But who oversees those who are the so-called observers? Ethical commissions are fashionable but who knows why they never examine things in-depth and are never stimulated to check the DNA of the senior executives. If there isn’t a cultural revolution at the senior executive level, the desire to fight the crime effectively will only be an illusion.

RIO 2016: El drama de Yelena Isinbayeva por total castigo a Rusia: "Gracias a todos por haber enterrado al atletismo"






La doble campeona olímpica soñaba con su tercer oro y se sumó a los lamentos rusos por el rechazo del TAS al castigo por dopaje sistemático al atletismo ruso.


Rusia "lamenta profundamente" la decisión del Tribunal Arbitral del Deporte (TAS) que rechazó la apelación de los 68 atletas rusos suspendidos para participar en los Juegos de Rio, declaró este jueves el portavoz del Kremlin, Dmitri Peskov.
"No podemos más que lamentar profundamente" esta decisión que afecta a los "atletas que no tienen nada que ver con el dopaje", declaró a la prensa Peskov,  estimando "poco probable que la responsabilidad colectiva pueda ser aceptada".
Uno de los casos más importantes es el de la "zarina" rusa de la pértiga, Yelena Isinbayeva. "Gracias a todos por haber enterrado al atletismo. Esto es puramente político", afirmó a la agencia de noticias rusa TASS la garrochista que tenía la ilusión de ganar su tercer oro olímpico en los Juegos de Rio, que se  disputan del 5 al 21 de agosto, antes de retirarse de la actividad profesional.
Por su parte, el ministro ruso de Deportes, Vitali Mutko, afirmó que la decisión del TAS es "política" y "sin fundamentos jurídicos". 

IOC to 'explore legal options' of collective ban on Russia: are all Russian athletes guilty or sanctions should be case by case?




by Sonja Nikcevic, AIPS Media
LAUSANNE, July 19, 2016 – Following an emergency meeting of its Executive Board, the IOC has issued a statement on the aftermath of the McLaren report, which confirmed allegations of long-term state-sponsored Russian doping.
“The findings of the report show a shocking and unprecedented attack on the integrity of sports and on the Olympic Games. Therefore, the IOC will not hesitate to take the toughest sanctions available against any individual or organisation implicated,” IOC President Thomas Bach said immediately after the report was published on Monday.
A statement by the World Anti-Doping Agency followed soon after, outlining its clear recommendation that Russia and all of its athletes should be banned from the Olympic Games in Rio – ‘collective responsibility’, to use a term of Thomas Bach.
While many expected a neutral, delicate stance from the IOC, despite the McLaren report rocking the very core of sports integrity – yet again, Tuesday’s statement brought words of carefully stated encouragement for those who have called for the IOC to step up and take a harsh stance – even an unprecedented one, and act on the “zero tolerance policy” it so likes to quote.
“With regard to the participation of Russian athletes in the Olympic Games Rio 2016, the IOC […] will explore the legal options with regard to a collective ban of all Russian athletes for the Olympic Games 2016 versus the right to individual justice.”
This was followed by assurances that no action will be taken before Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has its ruling on Russia’s track and field athletes and the IAAF on 21 July.
What seems to be more and more likely though, it that the Russian flag could not fly at the Olympic Games in Rio, an outcome that seemed as close to impossible just weeks ago.
The IOC has organized its own Disciplinary Commission chaired by Guy Canivet which will “start disciplinary actions” against the Russian Ministry of Sports and all those names in the McLaren Report. It was also made clear that no Russian Ministry officials would be granted accreditation to the Rio Games. This means, that for the second day in a row, all fingers have been pointed at Russia’s Minister of Sports Vitaly Mutko.
The IOC’s ‘immediate reactions’ to the McLaren Report have been to remove its backing from any upcoming international sporting events to be held in Russia. A direct mention was given to the EOC’s 2019 European Games. The competition that may have come to mind first for many though is the FIFA World Cup, set to be held in Russia in 2018. The head of the Organizing Committee is, who else, Vitaly Mutko, who also sits on the FIFA Executive Committee.
The full statement by the IOC is below:
Today, the IOC Executive Board (EB) expressed its appreciation of the work of the “Independent Person” (IP), Mr Richard McLaren. The IOC fully supports his request to continue and finalise his work, in particular since so far the “compressed timeline of the IP investigation did not permit compilation of data to establish an anti-doping rule violation” (IP Report page 4).
The International Sports Organisations will now have to evaluate the IP Report and then take the appropriate measures, according to their respective rules.
1. This means for the IOC that, following Rule 59 of the Olympic Charter, the EB has today started disciplinary actions related to the involvement of officials within the Russian Ministry of Sports and other persons mentioned in the report because of violations of the Olympic Charter and the World Anti-Doping Code. To accelerate this procedure, the IOC EB has established a Disciplinary Commission and has, following Bye-law 1 to Rule 59 of the Olympic Charter, delegated the task of establishing the facts and granting the hearings required by Bye-law 3 to Rule 59, and by natural justice.
As members of this Disciplinary Commission the following people have been appointed:
Guy Canivet (Chair) (Vice-Chair of the IOC Ethics Commission and former member of the French Constitutional Court)Robin Mitchell (Vice-Chair of the IOC Medical and Scientific Commission, Member of the IOC Ethics Commission)Yang Yang (Athletes’ representative on the IOC Ethics Commission)Andrew Ryan (Executive Director of ASOIF)Wolfgang Schobersberger (Representative of the International Winter Sport Federations, Member of the FIS Medical Commission).
The Commission can refer to any external expertise and support to fulfil its mandate.
2. With regard to the participation of Russian athletes in the Olympic Games Rio 2016, the IOC will carefully evaluate the IP Report. It will explore the legal options with regard to a collective ban of all Russian athletes for the Olympic Games 2016 versus the right to individual justice. In this respect, the IOC will have to take the CAS decision on 21 July 2016 concerning the IAAF rules into consideration, as well as the World Anti-Doping Code and the Olympic Charter.
3. Given the urgency of the matter the IOC EB has already taken the following provisional measures:
The IOC will not organise or give patronage to any sports event or meeting in Russia. This includes plans for the European Games 2019 organised by the European Olympic Committees (EOC).

The IOC will not grant any accreditation to any official of the Russian Ministry of Sport or any person implicated in the IP Report for the Games of the XXXI Olympiad Rio 2016.


The IOC will initiate reanalysis, including forensic analysis, and a full inquiry into all Russian athletes who participated in the Olympic Winter Games Sochi 2014 and their coaches, officials and support staff. For this purpose, a specific Disciplinary Commission is set up under the chairmanship of Mr Denis Oswald. Following the report of this Commission, the IOC EB will impose all the appropriate sanctions.


Because of the detailed references to the manipulation of samples during the Olympic Winter Games Sochi 2014 the IOC asks all International Olympic Winter Sports Federations to freeze their preparations for major events in Russia, such as World Championships, World Cups or other major international competitions under their responsibility, and to actively look for alternative organisers.


The IOC asks all IFs for a full inquiry and, in case of implication in infringements of the World Anti-Doping Code, sanctions against Russian National Federations by the respective IF. Such inquiries should be coordinated with the work of the IP, Mr Richard McLaren.

These provisional measures apply until 31 December 2016. They will be reviewed by the IOC EB at its meeting in December 2016.
4. The EB reiterates and supports the measure already announced by the Olympic Summit on 21 June 2016 to reverse the “presumption of innocence” of athletes from Russia with regard to doping. This means that the eligibility of each Russian athlete will have to be decided by his or her International Federation (IF) based on an individual analysis of his or her international anti-doping record. The EB also took note of the actions already being undertaken by the IFs in cooperation with WADA with regard to targeted international tests of Russian athletes in accordance with the declaration of the Olympic Summit.
5. In this context, the IOC asks WADA to extend the mandate of the IP, Mr Richard McLaren, to communicate the names of Russian athletes implicated in the “Disappearing Positive Methodology” and the alleged manipulation of the doping tests performed by the Sochi laboratory to the respective International Federations and, where appropriate, to the IOC, in order to allow them to take swift action.
6. Since, for the IOC as an international non-governmental organisation, the Russian Ministry of Sports and its subordinated organisations such as the Center of Sports Preparations of National Teams of Russia (CSP) and the Russian Federal Research Center of Physical Culture and Sport (VNIIFK) are beyond its reach, it will forward the results of its inquiries to UNESCO and WADA to take further measures and sanctions in application of the UNESCO “Convention against Doping in Sport“ and the World Anti-Doping Code.
7. The IOC EB notes with great concern the deficiencies revealed by the IP, Mr Richard McLaren, in the fight against doping. Therefore the IOC reiterates the call of the Olympic Summit on 21 June 2016 to fully review the anti-doping system by requesting WADA to convene an “Extraordinary World Conference on Doping” in 2017. The Olympic Summit on 8 October 2016 will propose further measures in this respect. This will include proposals to clarify and increase transparency of the respective responsibilities in the fight against doping; the accreditation and supervision procedures of WADA accredited laboratories; and the WADA “International Standards for Laboratories” (ISL).The IOC is reinforcing the request issued by the Olympic Summit on 17 October 2015 to make the entire anti-doping system independent from sports organisations.