http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugb...sh/7840755.stm
OK. So a sportsman has been caught with a recreational drug in his system. His career may be severely compromised, his reputation already is.The 26-year-old has admitted he took a prohibited substance but insisted it was not a performance-enhancing drug.
Stevens has not revealed what he had taken, but said he took the drug while out with friends and that his use of the substance had become a problem.
He has already been attending drug counselling sessions. Stevens could be facing a suspension of up to two years under World Anti-Doping Agency regulations.
If what he says is true, and the drug is not performance enhancing, then what is the problem? Why are they testing for non-performance enhancing drugs anyway?
There are people I can think of (politicians, doctors, drivers and many more) whose performance could well be affected by recreational drugs but we don't, as far as I am aware, test them.
Why should a sportsman be subjected to potentially career ending sanctions when the tested substance does not impact his performance while other professionals whose performance might well be adversely affected get away with it?
(Answers own rhetorical question)
Presumably because while they are testing for some things they might as well test for the lot, but it doesn't seem fair.
Rules are rules I'm afraid.
The rules are harsh, but necessarily so. Without the clear definitions as to what is allowable, there would be many more problems than there currently are.
I'm afraid as a professional sportsman, Steves will have to accept his ban as he knew the rules. However, as he can argue he did not take it for performance enhancing reasons he can be treated more leniently.
Cocaine for instance (although we don't know what drugs he did take) is a stimulant, it increases heart rate and bloodflow. Of course it's not going to enhance his rugby career, probably the opposite, but it is listed as a stimulant and all sports people are then aware it is banned. The only way sport can keep on top of the constantly innovating doping industry is to do these blanket bans.
As a rugby player myself, I'm just glad pies and beer are never going to be on the banned list....
Well without knowing what it was it'd be hard to say. My guess would be that whilst it was used as a recreational drug it could still have performance enhancing effects. There's also the possibility that he's lying, took a PE drug got caught bang to rights and is now lying to try and lessen the impact.
BTW, a quick Google found the Anti Doping rules and all results of the findings are here
The Daily Mail is implying it's Cocaine.
I'm familiar with the list, I've seen it on another forum I post on. Everyone that competes in sport is aware of it.
This guy has lost a lot, and whether or not he has been on PE drugs or not, if it is social pressure that has put him in this position, then again thats just tough. The large salaries that sportsmen (and women) receive are in recognition of the lengths they have to go to to keep them in top condition in a clean way.
Knowing the rugby scene, by and large I believe it to be clean. Creatine and Protein would be the main 'performance' enhancers. But I do know that some 'gear' will be used to build muscle by some players, I've known a few club players to be on something. The level I play at, we've never been tested but theoretically could, so I don't know how much testing goes on outside the top flight.
Would be pretty pointless from the authorities perspective. On the main story the BBC are cheerfully saying it was cocaine. And yes the ban is right - it mirrors a lot of people who have absolute bans on the use of recreational drugs built into their contracts, so let's not get too weepy.Creatine and Protein would be the main 'performance' enhancers. But I do know that some 'gear' will be used to build muscle by some players, I've known a few club players to be on something. The level I play at, we've never been tested but theoretically could, so I don't know how much testing goes on outside the top flight
I don't have much sympathy for his claims that he is a huge victim in all of this. I fail to see how he could have a serious cocaine habit and still perform at the level he does. Professional rugby must be really tough - training, weights, games, recovery - all at extremely high intensity all in the space of a week.
None of their damn business if it isn't performance enhancing, would be my opinion.
In practice he knew what he was doing- what an idiot! As if it wouldn't come out!
There are some sports where cocaine is used as an aid, so its valid it is on the lists.
Which sports, give evidence, this is UKS play the game.Originally Posted by FarSideOfTheMoon
Sure, bodybuilding for one. Helps them not to eat during the 'cutting' stage and attempt to increase their metabolism.
Also you might find use in strongman/weight lifting - some believe cocaine can increase strength.
Actually, there is a wikipedia page that goes into this a bit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_and_stimulants
Cheers mate
Re: Testing for drugs
The whole drug hullabaloo is ridiculous. For the most part, I don't even care about athletes getting tested for recreational drugs, unless they are specifically performance enhancing, or they're suspected of endangering others by being high while doing their thing.
Certain professions should definitely be tested tho, namely AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS and COMMERCIAL AIRLINE PILOTS
ATC: oh, runway three or runway four, it's all good man, just hang tight and fly loosealPILOT: Yeah, it's all good dude. Flyin' easy. You just gotta let your hands work the controls as if you were straight*
* loosely plagiarized from "Heavy Metal" during the scene where the aliens land the spaceship
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks