Drugs in other sports and the media.
Comments
-
Ross Tucker on Paula:
http://sportsscientists.com/2015/09/paula-radcliffe-off-scores-and-transparency/
All this maximum transparency stuff is well and good, but a. it's the cynics equivalent of the 'I never failed a dope test' line as it whatever transparency is given is never as transparent as the they want, and b. you risk getting screwed anyway (OTbut great example of this happening over at Gawker courtesy the Mail)
Tucker playing to the crowds and to his website clicks. Standard.
I clocked him tweeting a guy to works for the IAAF last night, asking the IAAF guy to send him Radcliffe's data as held by the IAAF0 -
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2015-09/statement-from-wada-director-generalLet me be clear and reiterate what has already been stated by the Independent Commission as it relates to the ARD and Sunday Times reports regarding athletes’ blood values: no information in the leaked database from before 2009 – which was before the Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) was introduced – could ever be considered as doping, legally or otherwise. Tarnishing an athlete’s name based on values from pre-2009 would be wholly irresponsible. At best, blood values from this time could only be used as indicators of the need for targeted future testing of those athletes that have abnormal or unusual values. Even athletes’ data from post-2009 – when the ABP had been introduced – is not necessarily indicative of doping. The strength of the ABP is that it monitors selected biological variables over time, via the blood, which indirectly reveals the effects of doping. WADA’s rules governing the ABP are designed to ensure a complete and fair review of ABP profiles and require the unanimous opinion of three experts.0
-
‘No evidence of any impropriety on the part of Mo Farah’UK Athletics today announced the summary findings of the independent audit into its engagement with the Oregon Project carried out by the Performance Oversight Group (POG).
In July we said that there was no evidence of any impropriety on the part of Mo Farah and no reason to lack confidence in his training programme. The Oversight Group have restated that view today. They have also found no reason to be concerned about the engagement of other British athletes and coaches with the Oregon Project.
The review established that the vast majority of the endurance program’s interaction with the Oregon Project is in fact focussed on Mo Farah, with very little other UK Athletics related activity. Coaching and support for Mo Farah will remain the focus of our engagement with the Oregon Project.
The Oversight Group has made a number of organisational and procedural recommendations which UK Athletics’ Performance Director Neil Black will take forward and implement over the coming months.
Obviously since our review was set up USADA announced that it was conducting an investigation into allegations made in respect of staff within the Oregon Project. USADA is clearly the right body to look at anti-doping issues. They have asked us not to give any further details of our review until their work has concluded. We respect their request and are of course giving them our fullest support and co-operation.0 -
The review established that the vast majority of the endurance program’s interaction with the Oregon Project is in fact focussed on Mo Farah, with very little other UK Athletics related activity. Coaching and support for Mo Farah will remain the focus of our engagement with the Oregon Project.
Interesting. Covering their backsides?0 -
Time for football to share the limelight?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11877661/Top-footballers-face-suspicion-of-steroid-abuse.htmlWarning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Time for football to share the limelight?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11877661/Top-footballers-face-suspicion-of-steroid-abuse.html
From the article:
"Uefa has had a very thorough anti-doping programme for many years with over 2000 tests a year and only two occurrence of positive tests, both for recreational drugs, which proves that doping in football is extremely rare."
Hilarious.0 -
Time for football to share the limelight?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11877661/Top-footballers-face-suspicion-of-steroid-abuse.html
From the article:
"Uefa has had a very thorough anti-doping programme for many years with over 2000 tests a year and only two occurrence of positive tests, both for recreational drugs, which proves that doping in football is extremely rare."
Hilarious.
2000 tests a year? And how many professional footballers are there!0 -
Time for football to share the limelight?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11877661/Top-footballers-face-suspicion-of-steroid-abuse.html
From the article:
"Uefa has had a very thorough anti-doping programme for many years with over 2000 tests a year and only two occurrence of positive tests, both for recreational drugs, which proves that doping in football is extremely rare."
Hilarious.
2000 tests a year? And how many professional footballers are there!
By my (back of a fag packet) reckoning that would be around half a test per year per pro soccerballer in the UK.Team My Man 2018: David gaudu, Pierre Latour, Romain Bardet, Thibaut pinot, Alexandre Geniez, Florian Senechal, Warren Barguil, Benoit Cosnefroy0 -
This relates to UEFA so i assume just Champions League, Europa League and Euro qualifiers though?"Unfortunately these days a lot of people don’t understand the real quality of a bike" Ernesto Colnago0
-
This relates to UEFA so i assume just Champions League, Europa League and Euro qualifiers though?
That's still a couple of thousand players.0 -
Ok but that's UEFA, what does the FA do who have jurisdiction over English footy? Rio Ferdinand was done many years ago by the FA......
Eight-month ban for soccer star Rio
England football ace Rio Ferdinand was banned for eight months for missing a drugs test.
The Manchester United defender was also fined £50,000 for failing to turn up to the test on September 23.
The punishment comes after a two-day Football Association disciplinary hearing into the charge of missing the drugs test.
Announcing the decision, a spokesman for the independent commission that heard the case, said: "The disciplinary commission unanimously found that the charge was proved against Rio Ferdinand."
He said the suspension of Ferdinand - the Premiership's most expensive player - would take effect from Monday January 12, 2004. The 25-year-old defender now has 16 days to decide whether or not to appeal against the punishment. But Ferdinand - who was one of England's star players during last year's World Cup in Japan - is set to miss the Euro 2004 finals.
The independent tribunal found Ferdinand guilty of misconduct after he failed to take the test at United's Carrington training ground, despite being selected to give a sample to UK Sport doping officials.
Speaking at a press conference, Manchester United's lawyer Maurice Watkins said the club was extremely disappointed with the "savage" penalty and planned to appeal.
"We are extremely disappointed by the result in this case, in particular by the savage and unprecedented sentence which makes an appeal inevitable. "I can confirm that Rio has the full support of Manchester United and the PFA (Professional Footballers Association)."
Ferdinand left the press conference without commenting to journalists.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-204418/Eight-month-ban-soccer-star-Rio.html#ixzz3mKPQVZcp'Performance analysis and Froome not being clean was a media driven story. I haven’t heard one guy in the peloton say a negative thing about Froome, and I haven’t heard a single person in the peloton suggest Froome isn’t clean.' TSP0 -
Ok but that's UEFA, what does the FA do who have jurisdiction over English footy? Rio Ferdinand was done many years ago by the FA......
Looks like the FA did a similar number of tests last year:
http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/more/anti-doping/testing-programme0 -
Ok but that's UEFA, what does the FA do who have jurisdiction over English footy? Rio Ferdinand was done many years ago by the FA......
Eight-month ban for soccer star Rio
...........
The independent tribunal found Ferdinand guilty of misconduct after he failed to take the test at United's Carrington training ground, despite being selected to give a sample to UK Sport doping officials.
Speaking at a press conference, Manchester United's lawyer Maurice Watkins said the club was extremely disappointed with the "savage" penalty and planned to appeal.
"We are extremely disappointed by the result in this case, in particular by the savage and unprecedented sentence which makes an appeal inevitable. "I can confirm that Rio has the full support of Manchester United and the PFA (Professional Footballers Association)."
Ferdinand left the press conference without commenting to journalists.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-204418/Eight-month-ban-soccer-star-Rio.html#ixzz3mKPQVZcp
A missed test is better than a failed test :roll:
I don't believe football is clean, and is like many other sports that are drifting under the radar. 2000 tests is laughable for such a large professional sport when there are probably double that number of professional players in England. 'If you don't go looking you don't find anything...'
When the difference between earning £100k and playing at league level 2 and earning £1m playing in the top league is minimal and having the extra level of fitness/strength would all that is needed to make the difference
My biggest problem is that the media is so invested in football from a revenue point of view that they would be quickly frozen out if they did any investigative journalism and we may never see the truth
0 -
20 x Premiership Teams x 30 players each = 600
24 x 3 lower leagues x 25 players = 1,800
So at least 2,400 professional players in the 4 main divisions in England, plus all their academy players.
Bet a large number have never had a drugs test in their career.0 -
This relates to UEFA so i assume just Champions League, Europa League and Euro qualifiers though?
78 teams enter the champions league, with squads of 25 players which equals 1950 players.
160 (minus 8 as they come from the champions league after group stages) enter europa league 25 player squads which equals 3800
54 enter euro championships with 25 player squads (not 100% on this) which equals: 1350
so total Uefa players for these tournaments 7100.
Percentage players tested: 28%0 -
I'm sorry but that's nonsense. I doubt there's a great deal of difference in terms of strength and fitness between the average League Two player and the average Premiership player - in fact they are probably more valued attributes in League Two where abilities are more uniform. However, there is vast gulf in terms of ability.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19707306#p19707306]Coopster the 1st[/url] wrote:
When the difference between earning £100k and playing at league level 2 and earning £1m playing in the top league is minimal and having the extra level of fitness/strength would all that is needed to make the difference
Drugs can help a player play at his ability for longer and more often, but it's effect on ability is unlikely to improve much. You can give your average Wycombe Wanderers player all the drugs you like and he won't cut it at any Premiership side.Twitter: @RichN950 -
does anyone know what those tests are even for ?
If you only test for recreational drugs then that is all you will find. Don't you also need blood samples to find some of these things now and football only seems to do a urine test0 -
I've read a few articles on doping and rugby, linked by Paul Kimmage on Twitter. Some interesting reads.
Watching Wales v Uruguay the size of players was noticeably different. OK, the Uruguayan are pretty much all amateurs (handful of semi pro players) so I would expect a different level of fitness from the entirely professional players they faced. But, the Welsh, in comparison were enormous and on a completely other plane of fitness.
I played at county colts level in the 80s and there was a wide range of body sizes playing. Nowadays players are enormous and super fast, half backs look like second rows did when I played.
I believe that rugby counts for a large number of banned UK sports people; so what are the anti doping programmes at the World Cup, and the home nations RFUs?0 -
Just so I'm clear, when talking about football are we to suspend the credulity we give team sky and Paula "Ive never tested positive" Radcliffe? Also are we allowed to claim doping in football now because its as plain as plain can be or because its not the first sport of many posters?
Only i can't keep up with the hypocrisy.0 -
No, we take each and every sport and individual and treat them on their own merits. Your brand of blanket cynicism should be reserved for the intellectually bereft.Just so I'm clear, when talking about football are we to suspend the credulity we give team sky and Paula "Ive never tested positive" Radcliffe? Also are we allowed to claim doping in football now because its as plain as plain can be or because its not the first sport of many posters?
Only i can't keep up with the hypocrisy.Twitter: @RichN950 -
No, we take each and every sport and individual and treat them on their own merits. Your brand of blanket cynicism should be reserved for the intellectually bereft.Just so I'm clear, when talking about football are we to suspend the credulity we give team sky and Paula "Ive never tested positive" Radcliffe? Also are we allowed to claim doping in football now because its as plain as plain can be or because its not the first sport of many posters?
Only i can't keep up with the hypocrisy.
Right then selective cynicism / wilful disbelief it is then.0 -
IWatching Wales v Uruguay the size of players was noticeably different. OK, the Uruguayan are pretty much all amateurs (handful of semi pro players) so I would expect a different level of fitness from the entirely professional players they faced. But, the Welsh, in comparison were enormous and on a completely other plane of fitness.
I played at county colts level in the 80s and there was a wide range of body sizes playing. Nowadays players are enormous and super fast, half backs look like second rows did when I played.
I'd say that's a bad comparison on many levels.
I'm not an expert economist, but the standard of living is likely to be better in Wales than Uruguay. I'm not comparing Uruguay to North Korea, but there was a piece in the Guardian last year about NK escapees living is South Korea. They were playing a football game between the NK's and SK's - the South Korean's were noticeably taller and broader.
Also, Rugby is THE national game in Wales, kids will have been playing from their early teens and the fastest, biggest, strongest will have been cherry picked. They will also have been training and probably lifting from early teens. All of the talent in Uruguay will be pushed towards football.
Rugby only went pro in the 90's, so that may be why there's been a shift in builds etc.0 -
IWatching Wales v Uruguay the size of players was noticeably different. OK, the Uruguayan are pretty much all amateurs (handful of semi pro players) so I would expect a different level of fitness from the entirely professional players they faced. But, the Welsh, in comparison were enormous and on a completely other plane of fitness.
I played at county colts level in the 80s and there was a wide range of body sizes playing. Nowadays players are enormous and super fast, half backs look like second rows did when I played.
I'd say that's a bad comparison on many levels.
I'm not an expert economist, but the standard of living is likely to be better in Wales than Uruguay. I'm not comparing Uruguay to North Korea, but there was a piece in the Guardian last year about NK escapees living is South Korea. They were playing a football game between the NK's and SK's - the South Korean's were noticeably taller and broader.
Also, Rugby is THE national game in Wales, kids will have been playing from their early teens and the fastest, biggest, strongest will have been cherry picked. They will also have been training and probably lifting from early teens. All of the talent in Uruguay will be pushed towards football.
Rugby only went pro in the 90's, so that may be why there's been a shift in builds etc.
That may be. But Welsh rugby tops the UKADA sanctions list. http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/shocking-stats-reveal-scale-doping-97175330 -
It wouldn't surprise me at all.
But lad's who've been training since 13 in one of the biggest rugby countries in the world are going to be noticeably different in build to a bunch of part times. Drugs or not.0 -
No, we take each and every sport and individual and treat them on their own merits. Your brand of blanket cynicism should be reserved for the intellectually bereft.Just so I'm clear, when talking about football are we to suspend the credulity we give team sky and Paula "Ive never tested positive" Radcliffe? Also are we allowed to claim doping in football now because its as plain as plain can be or because its not the first sport of many posters?
Only i can't keep up with the hypocrisy.
Right then selective cynicism / wilful disbelief it is then.
Oh man - I'm with you, Vino'sG - I can't keep up either.
The problem I find with thinking about things on a case-by-case basis is that it can really mess about with the preconceptions that I spend my time trying to shoe-horn reality into.0 -
Ability is pointless if you don't have the fitness levels to be in the position to use it. Yes, if you're pants at football no amount of drugs will make you better but a greater level of fitness will improve your ability to play the game. A killer pass, a perfectly timed tackle, beating the defender to get the shot in are all harder if you are tired.
I'm sorry but that's nonsense. I doubt there's a great deal of difference in terms of strength and fitness between the average League Two player and the average Premiership player - in fact they are probably more valued attributes in League Two where abilities are more uniform. However, there is vast gulf in terms of ability.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19707306#p19707306]Coopster the 1st[/url] wrote:
When the difference between earning £100k and playing at league level 2 and earning £1m playing in the top league is minimal and having the extra level of fitness/strength would all that is needed to make the difference
Drugs can help a player play at his ability for longer and more often, but it's effect on ability is unlikely to improve much. You can give your average Wycombe Wanderers player all the drugs you like and he won't cut it at any Premiership side.Team My Man 2022:
Antwan Tolhoek, Sam Oomen, Tom Dumoulin, Thymen Arensman, Remco Evenepoel, Benoît Cosnefroy, Tom Pidcock, Mark Cavendish, Romain Bardet0 -
IWatching Wales v Uruguay the size of players was noticeably different. OK, the Uruguayan are pretty much all amateurs (handful of semi pro players) so I would expect a different level of fitness from the entirely professional players they faced. But, the Welsh, in comparison were enormous and on a completely other plane of fitness.
I played at county colts level in the 80s and there was a wide range of body sizes playing. Nowadays players are enormous and super fast, half backs look like second rows did when I played.
I'd say that's a bad comparison on many levels.
I'm not an expert economist, but the standard of living is likely to be better in Wales than Uruguay. I'm not comparing Uruguay to North Korea, but there was a piece in the Guardian last year about NK escapees living is South Korea. They were playing a football game between the NK's and SK's - the South Korean's were noticeably taller and broader.
Also, Rugby is THE national game in Wales, kids will have been playing from their early teens and the fastest, biggest, strongest will have been cherry picked. They will also have been training and probably lifting from early teens. All of the talent in Uruguay will be pushed towards football.
Rugby only went pro in the 90's, so that may be why there's been a shift in builds etc.
That may be. But Welsh rugby tops the UKADA sanctions list. http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/shocking-stats-reveal-scale-doping-9717533
Statistics eh, don't you just love them?
More sanctions in the national sport, as opposed to RL, (do they even play that down here? )boxing and weightlifting.
Who would have thought?"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Decent article from Matt Slater on the current state of Rugby Union:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/34314851
And some more classic quotes from Rugby Anti-Doping personnel:
"Our experience is that the rugby fraternity does not tolerate it."
"...the game's "values" of fair play and mutual respect were the difference between rugby union and sports more afflicted by doping."
I wish they'd concentrate on putting together effective detection regimes instead of spurious cultural defences.0 -
There are 12 premiership rugby teams with and average senior squad size of 40, plus 12 in their academies. so that's 624 players in the top flight clubs in England.
There are another 12 sides in the Championship who probably have 36 players on average on their books, so another 432 players.
That's 1056 players at the top end of the game, yet there were only 800 drugs tests carried out by the RFU!
Very slim chance of being caught.
However interesting that world rugby is spending the same as the IAAF.0 -
I would say that I think the bigger problems in rugby are actually at much lower levels where kids or young men are (often truthfully, if unfairly) told or feel that they need to get bigger to be competitive. Given that drug testers at the local club are going to turn up once a decade, if ever, and there are no shortage of gym bunnies flaunting their wares it's not surprising that many take a short cut* (after all it seems to be a human - or at least a man - thing to want to be the body type you are not. So many of my cycling friends envy my ability to put muscle on with barely any effort whereas I'd give anything to be a skinny 50kg climber)
I suspect that if you are genetically gifted enough to be big and strong, plus talented enough as a youth that the temptation is much less as you don't have to "catch up"
(*we had a few wideboys in our uni team that tried it a few times but because they spent far more time in the bar than the gym, they just got fat...)We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0
