{"id":426793,"date":"2020-04-11T09:57:04","date_gmt":"2020-04-11T16:57:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.swimmingworldmagazine.com\/news\/?p=426793"},"modified":"2020-04-11T13:46:16","modified_gmt":"2020-04-11T20:46:16","slug":"inside-with-brett-hawke-podcast-a-chat-with-olympic-champ-roland-schoeman","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.swimmingworldmagazine.com\/news\/inside-with-brett-hawke-podcast-a-chat-with-olympic-champ-roland-schoeman\/","title":{"rendered":"Inside With Brett Hawke Podcast: A Chat With Olympic Champ Roland Schoeman"},"content":{"rendered":"

Inside with Brett Hawke Podcast<\/strong><\/p>\n

Brett Hawke<\/strong> has been a highly successful athlete and coach in the sport, and now he is producing superb content through his podcast<\/a>, Inside with Brett Hawke. The two-time Olympian has produced 29 episodes to date, and his latest episode featured a discussion with sprint great Roland Schoeman<\/strong>, who is serving a 12-month anti-doping suspension. However, the FINA Doping Panel has revealed that Schoeman did not intentionally consume the substance GW501516<\/strong>, which was likely contained in a supplement Schoeman was taking.<\/p>\n

The FINA Doping Panel, after a review of Schoeman’s case<\/a>, declared that the athlete conducted himself with \u201chonesty, integrity \u2026 and due diligence \u2026 in a relentless and costly search for the truth.” Schoeman noted that he spent $16,000 to uncover the truth of his positive test, the first of his career. Schoeman won medals of each color at the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens, including leading South Africa to gold in the 400 freestyle relay.<\/p>\n

Part of the Doping Panel’s report read:<\/p>\n

\u201cFINA has not sought to prove that the Athlete\u2019s anti-doping rule violation was intentional, there is no evidence that his rule violation was intentional, and under the unique circumstances in this case the Athlete was able to establish as required by FINA DC 10.2.1.1 that his anti-doping rule violation was not intentional. In this regard, there was strong evidence of the Athlete\u2019s honesty and integrity and of his diligence in seeking to comply with the anti-doping rules and of his relentless and costly search for the cause of his positive test and this evidence was supported by testing evidence (explained further below) which supported the conclusion that his ingestion of the prohibited substance was not intended to enhance performance or to allow him to \u201ccheat\u201d and this evidence was coupled with evidence of a significant impediment, not of the athlete\u2019s own making, which prevented him from testing the precise batches of products used by the Athlete at the time of his positive test; therefore, the FINA DP finds that his rule violation was not intentional and he could not be subject to more than two years ineligibility pursuant to FINA DC 10.2.2.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Hawke’s podcasts appear regularly and can be found on his YouTube page<\/a>. He also recently chatted with David Marsh<\/strong> and Ryan<\/strong> Murphy<\/strong>. Those episodes can be found below:<\/p>\n

David Marsh Interview<\/a><\/p>\n

Ryan Murphy Interview<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n