Using the term 'spineless' in the context of Gil, is being most unfair to all invertebrates. 

Apparently, according to Pound, Sharipova was warned a half dozen times. 

She's cooked

17 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Apparently, according to Pound, Sharipova was warned a half dozen times. 

She's cooked

She's hot, dunno about cooked...

17 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Apparently, according to Pound, Sharipova was warned a half dozen times. 

She's cooked

 

For those who mistakenly believe that Maria was taking a huge gamble, think again. The testing procedures and standards in tennis are poor - she was actually fairly unlucky to be caught (in a sense)

I'm absolutely convinced that numerous athletes in a variety of sports take the same low-risk approach - many performance enhancing drugs are not actually tested for by the sporting bodies - they'll do a token urine test and most times the athletes will know when the tests are going to occur (especially in the USA but soccer definitely flies under the radar)

Many PED's can only be shown up in blood tests and often a blood "passport" is needed to nail the cheats. Urine tests will show up "certain" drugs but almost certainly not the PED's the athletes are using. On top of that, many PED's are out of an athlete's system in 2 or 3 days (sometimes earlier than that)

The bottom line is that many governing bodies of the major sports have no real interest in exposing their own drug cheats. The brand and money is of paramount importance.

The worldwide PED issue is a monumental one - and WADA are hopelessly underfunded - they are shut out by most of the large sporting bodies and even if they were welcomed into the fray, they'd need a huge boost in funding - probably 20-30 times their current annual income (or more) - and where would that money come from anyway? - there's no money in it for a rich benefactor.

It's a sad, sorry tale ... and it's only going to get worse.

However, the time is ripe for a major sporting body to get absolutely serious about PED use in their sport ... sadly, it won't be the AFL - it could have been but Gil and his cronies have taken a weak approach. We've missed our opportunity to set a great example.

 

 

58 minutes ago, Macca said:

For those who mistakenly believe that Maria was taking a huge gamble, think again. The testing procedures and standards in tennis are poor - she was actually fairly unlucky to be caught (in a sense)

I'm absolutely convinced that numerous athletes in a variety of sports take the same low-risk approach - many performance enhancing drugs are not actually tested for by the sporting bodies - they'll do a token urine test and most times the athletes will know when the tests are going to occur (especially in the USA but soccer definitely flies under the radar)

Many PED's can only be shown up in blood tests and often a blood "passport" is needed to nail the cheats. Urine tests will show up "certain" drugs but almost certainly not the PED's the athletes are using. On top of that, many PED's are out of an athlete's system in 2 or 3 days (sometimes earlier than that)

The bottom line is that many governing bodies of the major sports have no real interest in exposing their own drug cheats. The brand and money is of paramount importance.

The worldwide PED issue is a monumental one - and WADA are hopelessly underfunded - they are shut out by most of the large sporting bodies and even if they were welcomed into the fray, they'd need a huge boost in funding - probably 20-30 times their current annual income (or more) - and where would that money come from anyway? - there's no money in it for a rich benefactor.

It's a sad, sorry tale ... and it's only going to get worse.

However, the time is ripe for a major sporting body to get absolutely serious about PED use in their sport ... sadly, it won't be the AFL - it could have been but Gil and his cronies have taken a weak approach. We've missed our opportunity to set a great example.

 

 

Very well put and hard to argue with.

With regard to the bolded, I'd like to think they'd be putting in place rules for these big sports whereby if a team is caught undertaking a deliberate cheating program, i.e. Essendon, the team would be hit with massive fines. I believe they just changed the rules to allow team suspensions or something, but they should really be going for the hip pocket. I suppose the same could apply to individuals. I don't recall there being any monetary penalty for the players, so it's definitely an option. With increasing player wages no doubt comes increased temptation to cheat. The disincentive needs to be on a par doesn't it?

I would call it a 'user' pays system.

I'm, just waiting for slobbo to do a two page, heart-felt defence of sharapova in the herald scum and demand the wta sever its ties with wada.

 

4 minutes ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Very well put and hard to argue with.

With regard to the bolded, I'd like to think they'd be putting in place rules for these big sports whereby if a team is caught undertaking a deliberate cheating program, i.e. Essendon, the team would be hit with massive fines. I believe they just changed the rules to allow team suspensions or something, but they should really be going for the hip pocket. I suppose the same could apply to individuals. I don't recall there being any monetary penalty for the players, so it's definitely an option. With increasing player wages no doubt comes increased temptation to cheat. The disincentive needs to be on a par doesn't it?

I would call it a 'user' pays system.

The sporting bodies would need to agree to that proposal - and there lies the problem.

As an example, when Mr Pound was head of WADA, he initiate contact with the big 4 American sports with a view to making those sports clean - all 4 replied with "thanks but no thanks"

They basically told WADA to get lost (or words to that effect) ... and it doesn't end there - FIFA have no real interest in getting tough on their drug cheats and one could say the same about numerous other sports (including tennis)

I posted up this link (below) a while ago in this thread but it's worth a re-read if only for what he says about tennis (keep in mind that the article was from 2013)

Drugbuster Pound says doping is so widespread that he no longer has faith in sport at the top

Quote

Of tennis, Pound adds: 'When you look back at the era of McEnroe and Connors, in their prime they looked like little old men compared to the brutes now, thrashing around for four hours with a force and intensity that's ridiculous. Has tennis got a problem? Of course it has.'

Prophetic words

15 minutes ago, Macca said:

 

Drugbuster Pound says doping is so widespread that he no longer has faith in sport at the top

Really, could you make that guy's name up?

25 minutes ago, Macca said:

The sporting bodies would need to agree to that proposal - and there lies the problem.

As an example, when Mr Pound was head of WADA, he initiate contact with the big 4 American sports with a view to making those sports clean - all 4 replied with "thanks but no thanks"

They basically told WADA to get lost (or words to that effect) ... and it doesn't end there - FIFA have no real interest in getting tough on their drug cheats and one could say the same about numerous other sports (including tennis)

I posted up this link (below) a while ago in this thread but it's worth a re-read if only for what he says about tennis (keep in mind that the article was from 2013)

Drugbuster Pound says doping is so widespread that he no longer has faith in sport at the top

Prophetic words

Thanks for re-posting. Quite damning to say the least.

30 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Really, could you make that guy's name up?

All jokes aside, he's one of my most admired persons in sport.

He rarely slips up and he's allowed to slip up occasionally (no one is perfect) ... The Seb Coe bit looked strange on the surface of it but not all members of committee's and/or boards are in tune with each other - I've often seen honest and hard working individuals get caught up with rogue factions within committee's without ever knowing so.

Our boards at the MFC in the recent past are a good example of that - as a collective, the results weren't great but not every individual on a board should or could be blamed equally - however, that's how things are often judged. All involved are seen as part of the problem when that often isn't the case.

7 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Very well put and hard to argue with.

With regard to the bolded, I'd like to think they'd be putting in place rules for these big sports whereby if a team is caught undertaking a deliberate cheating program, i.e. Essendon, the team would be hit with massive fines. I believe they just changed the rules to allow team suspensions or something, but they should really be going for the hip pocket. I suppose the same could apply to individuals. I don't recall there being any monetary penalty for the players, so it's definitely an option. With increasing player wages no doubt comes increased temptation to cheat. The disincentive needs to be on a par doesn't it?

I would call it a 'user' pays system.

It would be very hard to go down the fine route as many, if not most of the athletes under the WADA code are amateur athletes who make very little money from competing. Many of them have sponsors who may cover their expenses but not much more. I know a gold medalist from Sydney who walked away from the games in debt due to the expense of competing, wouldnt seem right to fine them lots of money for PED use which may well bankrupt them when it would barely be a drop in the ocean for a maria. All you achieve then is to make sport about who ever is richest, it is already on its way to that unfortunately.

7 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Really, could you make that guy's name up?

Whenever I see Maria that guy's name comes to mind.

I have trouble with the fact it was legal up until Dec 31 and the Australian Open in January its not legal. I have read all of the arguments and explanations that I could but this still seems to me to be a bit harsh. Yes you have to draw the line and have a cut off date and the fact she was warned multiple times is damning.

Is it possible there were residual amounts in her system? 

13 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I have trouble with the fact it was legal up until Dec 31 and the Australian Open in January its not legal. I have read all of the arguments and explanations that I could but this still seems to me to be a bit harsh. Yes you have to draw the line and have a cut off date and the fact she was warned multiple times is damning.

Is it possible there were residual amounts in her system? 

All things are possible including that she knowingly took a performance enhancing drug for 10 years to gain an unfair advantage on her rivals - after the drug was "officially" banned she just kept on taking it knowing that there was only a small chance of getting busted - the small chance won out though.

So, it was damage control mode (all carefully thought out) The press conference and aftermath has been beautifully stage managed (not that it has staved off sponsors walking)

There is a lot of public sympathy for Maria based on all sorts of factors (including the biggie - the "like" factor)

It's all so predictable in my eyes. Seen it all before but this one has a number of factors to garner public support - I'm not buying it though.

Yes,,,,she's done it quite well.. Much better than some others 

As least Sharapova has stood up and taken responsibility, something that Hird has done so well!!

As far as pre 1 January 2016 she has no case to answer to because she was working within the guidelines. If not on the banned list no problem.

What I find Hird to understand is with all the support around her the addition to the banned list was not picked up.

A mistake?? Or is she displaying just how she and other players have little fear or respect of the drugs in tennis program.

39 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I have trouble with the fact it was legal up until Dec 31 and the Australian Open in January its not legal. I have read all of the arguments and explanations that I could but this still seems to me to be a bit harsh. Yes you have to draw the line and have a cut off date and the fact she was warned multiple times is damning.

Is it possible there were residual amounts in her system? 

I heard yesterday that it stays in the system for a small number of days ... 3 or 5 or something like that ... so not residual.

What gets me is the "family doctor" prescribed this. Maria has lived in the US since she was 7, is surrounded by a team of managers, coaches, trainers, lawyers, advisors, nutritionists ... everything tightly controlled ... doesn't even scratch herself without a team meeting ... but she still supposedly uses the "family doctor" who prescribed this gear from Latvia which is not even authorised for human use in the US. She's so ill she's needed this gear for ten years straight ... but the brave kid can still struggle on to court time and again to give her all. #heartpumping #heartwarming

Pull the other one, Maria. (I said in my dreams last night.)

1 hour ago, Ted Fidge said:

I heard yesterday that it stays in the system for a small number of days ... 3 or 5 or something like that ... so not residual.

What gets me is the "family doctor" prescribed this. Maria has lived in the US since she was 7, is surrounded by a team of managers, coaches, trainers, lawyers, advisors, nutritionists ... everything tightly controlled ... doesn't even scratch herself without a team meeting ... but she still supposedly uses the "family doctor" who prescribed this gear from Latvia which is not even authorised for human use in the US. She's so ill she's needed this gear for ten years straight ... but the brave kid can still struggle on to court time and again to give her all. #heartpumping #heartwarming

Pull the other one, Maria. (I said in my dreams last night.)

That pretty much covers it for me too TF.

Her whole story beggars belief, she seems to be gaining sympathy because she came out just before the drug agency made their announcement.

No folks she is just another sports drug cheat who got caught.

and yet to be fair... she wasnt actually doing anything wrong until it was banned. Then she was !!

4 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

and yet to be fair... she wasnt actually doing anything wrong until it was banned. Then she was !!

Beeb, I thought all drugs were banned until they were approved.

13 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

and yet to be fair... she wasnt actually doing anything wrong until it was banned. Then she was !!

It's an athlete's dream. Here's some stuff that's performance enhancing, and it's not banned! You can hear them thinking, "I'd be crazy NOT to take it!"

But the dream turned to a nightmare and it's her own fault.

She's now giving a master class in how to deal with getting caught.

13 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

and yet to be fair... she wasnt actually doing anything wrong until it was banned. Then she was !!

well bub, there is technically (or legally if you like) wrong and there is wrong wrong 

i have little doubt, in the grunter's case, that she was using this little known drug, only made in the well know medical centre of latvia, and not available for medical use in most of the world, to gain a performance enhancement for 10 years

the fact she was not in any breach technically till 2016 was merely a fortuitous circumstance for her

6 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

well bub, there is technically (or legally if you like) wrong and there is wrong wrong 

i have little doubt, in the grunter's case, that she was using this little known drug, only made in the well know medical centre of latvia, and not available for medical use in most of the world, to gain a performance enhancement for 10 years

the fact she was not in any breach technically till 2016 was merely a fortuitous circumstance for her

I agree...but until it hits the banned list..well.  just saying

24 minutes ago, ManDee said:

Beeb, I thought all drugs were banned until they were approved.

Only if they fell under SO. These drugs were approved for human use. As to whether they fell under the SO  I confess I dont know. I suspect they didnt.

I wonder if she is really human? More like humanoid. I doubt she is a pure product of just good genes, hard work and a healthy diet. I guess she has been fed a diet of all sorts of performance enhancing substances perhaps ethically wrong but not illegal since she first entered the tennis sausage factory at the age of 7 or thereabouts.