The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) turning down Russia's desperate plea for reinstatement at the Foundation Board meeting in Seoul earlier this week represents one of those cuts.

But it is not the deepest. Yes, it is a blow but WADA's decision to keep the Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) in the wilderness is not the final nail in the coffin.

While it represented another troubling development for Russia, I can't help but think the importance of it has been overstated, particularly as it was no surprise and it was clear that RUSADA had not ticked the final two boxes on WADA's roadmap for reinstatement.

Russia competing at Pyeongchang 2018, or not, and the compliance of RUSADA are linked, of course. Yet they are arguably not definitively so.

As one official told me recently, it does not change much. The situation remains the same as it has for the past few weeks and months and the Russia-Pyeongchang 2018 decision still rests largely on the results of two International Olympic Committee (IOC) Commissions.

Samuel Schmid and Denis Oswald's investigations will form the basis of the IOC's next move, which is due to be announced at the crunch Executive Board meeting in Lausanne on December 5. Those banned and sanctioned by the Commissions will then inevitably take their cases to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

The CAS hearings are likely to set a precedent, one way or the other.

RUSADA regaining compliance would have enhanced their chances of competing under their own flag at Pyeongchang 2018, however, as it would have fed a narrative that Russia truly is healing and would have strengthened their argument.

That being the case, it does not mean the opposite is true. Non-compliance should not necessarily mean no Russians compete in Pyeongchang.

It is also worth remembering that RUSADA was non-complaint when the IOC passed the responsibility over the level of Russian participation at Rio 2016 to the International Federations prior to the Games.

They were non-compliant when 271 Russians - two thirds of the initial team of 389 athletes - represented their country under their own flag. Their victories at the Games in the Brazilian city were greeted with their national anthem.

Regaining compliance with the WADA Code may be a criterion for Russia to be welcomed back as members of the International Association of Athletics Federations and the International Paralympic Committee, organisations which are both due to discuss the current state of play in the coming weeks, but that does not apply to the IOC.

This is an issue even IOC President Thomas Bach and WADA counterpart Sir Craig Reedie, who have not always been on the same page during this whole fiasco, agree on.

"I think everybody would like to see RUSADA up to full speed so that the Russian athletes can be tested," Bach told the New York Times earlier this week.

"The past has to be sanctioned. The question now is about the future, and these are two different things."

After the Foundation Board endorsed a recommendation from WADA's Compliance Review Committee to maintain RUSADA's non-compliance - the decision was unanimous so it was not even put it to a vote - Sir Craig made similar comments in his post-meeting press conference.

"We do not have the right to decide who takes part in international competition," the Scot said.

Doesn't he know it. Following the publication of the first part of the McLaren Report last year, WADA hinted in no uncertain terms that they thought the entire Russian team should be banned from the Olympics in Rio.

This recommendation, as we all know, was ignored by the IOC, who chose a tack which is leading them into choppy and uncertain waters even now.

It goes without saying but WADA do deserve credit for the stance they took in Seoul. They have remained firm on Russia - many feel we cannot say the same for the IOC - and in setting out a 31-point path to regain compliance they put the ball firmly back in RUSADA's court.

RUSADA chose to ignore two key criteria, a refusal to accept the McLaren Report and the Russian Government not releasing electronic data and historic drugs samples from the Moscow Laboratory, and were subsequently denied a way back.

Sir Craig had himself been confident that they would be reinstated, a claim he made following both the Foundation Board meeting in Montreal and again after an Executive Committee meeting in Paris in September.

That optimism quickly dissipated as no sign of acceptance of the McLaren Report or unlocking the gates of the Moscow Laboratory was forthcoming from Russia. 

Officials from the country, including Sports Minister Pavel Kolobkov and Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) head Alexander Zhukov, continued with the familiar theme of denial after the widely-expected verdict from WADA was delivered.

It is their reaction to the decision, rather than the decision itself, which damaged their chances of having a full Russian team present in the little-known South Korean region in February.

Kolobkov and Zhukov in particular lost control of their response, one which reeked of desperation and fury. That will have undoubtedly been well received in Russia - whose public relations effort has continually churned out nonsensical views over the past 24 months or so - but those at the Foundation Board meeting, some of whom are IOC members, would not have been impressed.

Zhukov, an IOC member himself, sent out a stark warning that Russia would never publicly accept the McLaren Report and the evidence it provided. With this being a key part of WADA's roadmap, RUSADA's status will seemingly stay the same for the foreseeable future.

The fact that a boycott of the Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang by Russia is much more likely than Russia accepting the report speaks volumes.

Zhukov's claim also opens up the possibility that WADA will be having the same discussions this time next year, the year after that and even in 2020. Sir Craig and the rest of the organisation are keen to avoid this, having previously stressed the importance of RUSADA's compliance, and they would have privately been furious with some of what was said in the South Korean capital.

"The accusations against RUSADA are simply a joke," was one of Zhukov's quotes.

What is no laughing matter is the words attributed to Zhukov's predecessor and honorary ROC President Leonid Tyagachev in the Russian media on Thursday (November 16), who effectively issued a death threat to former Moscow Laboratory director turned whistleblower Grigory Rodchenkov.

Tyagachev, who served at the helm of the ROC for nine years between 2001 to 2010, said Rodchenkov, currently in a witness protection programme having fled Russia fearing for his life after revealing the sordid details of Russia’s doping scheme, should be "shot for his untruths".

He then went on to suggest Rodchenkov should face a firing squad "as Stalin would have done".

The abhorrent and disgraceful comments added another repugnant layer to an already disturbing saga.

The IOC and its President Bach have been continually reluctant to criticise Russia despite the lurid doping accusations hanging over the nation.

You might have thought Tyagachev'’s comments might have changed that, seeing as they go against the Olympic Truce and the Olympic Charter.

Alas, no. When asked to respond to Tyagachev's interview, given to the Govorit Moskva radio station, the IOC simply said: "The IOC is concentrating on the outcome of the Schmid and the Oswald Commission which will report shortly and will be considered by the IOC Executive Board meeting on December 5."

Make of that what you will, but it does not exactly inspire confidence in the IOC, especially from those who believe Russia should be completely barred from Pyeongchang 2018.

A blanket ban remains a possibility, however, as the cuts might yet prove to be deep enough.