Correct answer: B. scandal, misconduct
Explanation:
The most appropriate words to fill in the blank are “scandal” and “misconduct.” Here’s why:
“Scandal” refers to an action or event that causes public outrage due to its moral or legal wrongness, fitting the context of the doping issue in Russia, which has been a public controversy. “Misconduct” refers to improper or unethical behavior, which fits with the context of the alleged state-sponsored doping program.

Why the other options are not correct:
A. “Slander, aspersion” refers to defamatory statements or accusations, which are not as directly related to the issue of doping or misconduct in the context of the Olympics.
C. “Corrode, peccadillo” is not fitting because “corrode” means to damage or weaken gradually, and “peccadillo” refers to a minor offense, which doesn’t capture the severity of the doping issue.
D. “Tarnish, abuse” refers to damaging something’s reputation or using something wrongly, but “abuse” doesn’t fully capture the illegal or unethical nature of doping like “misconduct” does.
E. “None of these” is incorrect because option B is the most suitable.
Thus, “scandal, misconduct” (option B) is the best choice, as it directly reflects the serious and controversial nature of the Russian doping issue.

Correct answer: D. forbade, banned
Explanation:
The most appropriate words to fill in the blank are “forbade” and “banned.” Here’s why:
“Forbade” means to prohibit or make something not allowed, and “banned” means to officially prevent something from happening. These terms are fitting for the context of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) banning Russia from competing in the Games due to the doping scandal.

Why the other options are not correct:
A. “Debarred, exonerated” refers to being excluded or cleared of wrongdoing, but exonerated doesn’t fit with the context of punishment or prohibition.
B. “Precluded, shunned” refers to preventing or avoiding something, but these words don’t carry the same formal or official connotation as “forbade” and “banned.”
C. “Abjured, abstained” refers to renouncing or avoiding something voluntarily, which doesn’t capture the idea of a formal ban.
E. “None of these” is incorrect because option D is the most appropriate.
Thus, “forbade, banned” (option D) is the best choice, as it accurately reflects the official decision of the IOC to prevent Russia from competing.

Correct answer: A. manipulation, manoeuvring
“Systemic C of the anti-doping rules and system in Russia”. So far, we have established that Russia has been banned from the winter Olympics this year due to a doping scandal back in 2014 wherein it was found that large-scale doping was blatantly taking place and was also state-sponsored.
The most appropriate words to fill in the blank are “manipulation” and “manoeuvring.” “Manipulation” refers to the act of controlling or influencing something or someone, typically in a dishonest or unfair way, which fits the context of the alleged state-sponsored doping program in Russia. “Manoeuvring” refers to strategic or calculated actions, which also fits the context of the IOC’s investigation and the way the anti-doping rules were allegedly bypassed in Russia.

Why the other options are not correct:
B. “Handling, intrigue” doesn’t convey the idea of unethical or illicit actions as strongly as “manipulation” and “manoeuvring” do in this context.
C. “Mishandling, compliance” refers to errors or failure in management and following rules, but it doesn’t capture the intentional nature of the doping scandal as well as the words in option A.
D. “Gimmick, gambit” refers to tricks or schemes, which doesn’t align as well with the seriousness and unethical nature of the doping situation.
E. “None of these” is incorrect because option A is the most suitable.
Thus, “manipulation, manoeuvring” (option A) is the best choice, as it accurately reflects the unethical and strategic actions involved in the doping scandal.

Correct answer: C. allowed, permitted
Explanation:
Let’s reconsider the context for “allowed” and “permitted.”
“Allowed” and “permitted” both mean giving approval or consent to something. These words fit the context of the IOC’s decision to let clean Russian athletes compete, even though the country as a whole was banned. The sentence is explaining that these athletes would be given the opportunity to compete under a neutral flag, which is essentially granting them permission.

Why the other options are not correct:
A. “Barred, disallowed” would contradict the idea of allowing clean Russian athletes to participate. It would suggest that all athletes from Russia were completely banned, which is not the case here.
B. “Eligible, middling” refers to qualification and a neutral or average status, but it doesn’t directly address the permission granted to clean athletes.
D. “Caulk, avowed” is unrelated to the context of participation in the Games. These words don’t fit the formal, official nature of the IOC’s decision.
E. “None of these” is incorrect because option C is the most appropriate choice.
Thus, “allowed, permitted” (option C) is indeed the best choice, as it aligns with the decision to allow clean Russian athletes to compete under a neutral flag.

Correct answer: E. None of these
Explanation:
The most appropriate option here is “None of these” because the context of the sentence suggests that the 169 Russian athletes who competed were allowed to participate, but none of the provided options directly convey the idea of athletes being given the opportunity to participate under a neutral flag, which is the key idea in this part of the sentence.

Why the other options are not correct:
A. “Ordered, expelled” refers to being commanded and expelled, which is contradictory to the idea of allowing athletes to compete under a neutral flag.
B. “Invited, asked” implies a more casual invitation, which doesn’t fit with the formal decision-making process of the IOC.
C. “Solicited, invoked” refers to requesting or calling upon, which doesn’t fit the context of formally allowing athletes to participate.
D. “Summoned, evoked” refers to being called upon or bringing something forth, which also doesn’t align with the context of permitting athletes to compete under neutral terms.
Thus, “None of these” (option E) is the best choice, as it more accurately reflects the formal allowance for Russian athletes to compete under neutral status.

Correct answer: D. vetted, examined
Explanation:
The most appropriate words to fill in the blank are “vetted” and “examined.” Here’s why:
“Vetted” means to carefully check or evaluate something, especially in the context of ensuring something meets certain standards, such as in a formal review process. “Examined” means to inspect or look at something closely, which fits the idea of the IOC ensuring that the clean Russian athletes met all requirements before participating. These terms are often used in the context of thorough checks or evaluations, which fits the context of verifying that athletes are clean.

Why the other options are not correct:
A. “Audited, scrutinized” could work but “audited” generally refers to financial or official record review, which is not the most appropriate term here in the context of athletes being cleared to participate.
B. “Considered, checked” doesn’t convey the same level of formal evaluation that “vetted” and “examined” do.
C. “Criticized, assay” implies a negative action or evaluation and is not suitable for the context of allowing athletes to compete.
E. “None of these” is incorrect because option D is the best choice.
Thus, “vetted, examined” (option D) is the best choice, as it accurately reflects the process of carefully checking the athletes before allowing them to compete.

Correct answer: A. form, constitute
Explanation:
The most appropriate words to fill in the blank are “form” and “constitute.” Here’s why:
“Form” refers to making up or being a part of something, and “constitute” means to make up or compose something as a whole. In the context of the sentence, these words indicate that the OAR (Olympic Athlete from Russia) will make up a large part or constitute one of the largest contingents at the Games.

Why the other options are not correct:
B. “Cheer, prelude” refers to actions associated with encouragement or introduction, which does not align with the idea of forming a large group or contingent at the Games.
C. “Abide, include” refers to conforming to rules or incorporating something, which doesn’t match the context of athletes forming a large group.
D. “Embody, exemplify” refers to representing or illustrating something, which doesn’t quite fit the context of forming a large group or contingent.
E. “None of these” is incorrect because option A is the most appropriate.
Thus, “form, constitute” (option A) is the best choice, as it accurately reflects the idea of the OAR forming a significant part of the Olympic contingent.

Correct answer: C. farce, ridiculous
Explanation:
The most appropriate words to fill in the blank are “farce” and “ridiculous.” Here’s why:
“Farce” refers to a situation or event that is absurd, foolish, or exaggerated, while “ridiculous” refers to something deserving of mockery due to its absurdity. In the context of the sentence, the absence of the Russian flag and anthem, while allowing athletes to participate, makes the ‘ban’ seem absurd or like a mockery of the intended ban, making “farce” and “ridiculous” appropriate.

Why the other options are not correct:
A. “Fair, competitive” would imply that the situation is just and balanced, which contradicts the sense of absurdity conveyed by the IOC’s decision.
B. “Reasonable, discern” refers to something logical or easy to understand, which does not fit with the concept of the ban being perceived as a mockery.
D. “Biased, absurd” is partially suitable, as “absurd” fits the context, but “biased” doesn’t fit as well in describing the situation of the IOC’s decision to allow athletes to compete without their flag and anthem.
E. “None of these” is incorrect because option C is the best choice.
Thus, “farce, ridiculous” (option C) is the best choice, as it accurately captures the sense of absurdity in the situation.

Correct answer: C. abide, accede
Explanation:
The most appropriate words to fill in the blank are “abide” and “accede.” Here’s why:
“Abide” means to comply with or follow rules or conditions, and “accede” means to agree or consent to something, especially a demand or request. In the context of the sentence, these words indicate that the athletes would be allowed to participate under specific conditions, implying that they would need to agree to and follow the rules set by the IOC.

Why the other options are not correct:
A. “Adhere, acquiesce” refers to sticking to something (like rules) and accepting something reluctantly, but “abide” and “accede” fit the idea of formal consent and following rules better.
B. “Comply, follow” are somewhat suitable but lack the stronger formal tone that “abide” and “accede” convey.
D. “Co-operate, uphold” refers to working together and supporting something, but doesn’t capture the specific action of agreeing to conditions as well as “accede” does.
E. “None of these” is incorrect because option C is the most appropriate.
Thus, “abide, accede” (option C) is the best choice, as it reflects the action of agreeing to and following the IOC’s conditions for participation.

Correct answer: A. punish, penalize
Explanation:
Upon reconsideration, “punish” and “penalize” can be appropriate in this context, as both words refer to taking action against someone or something due to a violation or misconduct. The IOC is dealing with Russia, a “sporting superpower,” and trying to navigate the complex issue of disciplining the country for its doping violations, while still allowing certain athletes to participate under neutral terms. In this context, “punish” and “penalize” fit well, as the IOC is trying to enforce consequences, but the situation complicates the enforcement against a country with significant influence in global sports.

Why the other options are not correct:
B. “Expel, accolade” involves kicking out and awarding, which doesn’t match the enforcement of rules in this context.
C. “Badge, appraise” involves assigning a title and evaluating, which is not relevant to the issue of punishment or penalties in the case of a country.
D. “Gauge, chastise” refers to measuring and criticizing, but “gauge” doesn’t fit well in the context of managing punishment in this situation.
Thus, “punish, penalize” (option A) is indeed the most appropriate choice, as it correctly reflects the IOC’s actions in dealing with Russia’s doping violations while still navigating the complexity of international relations in sports.