Wolves striker tests positive for cocaine

[£440,000]

story here

 

I really don´t get why a player should receive such a lengthy ban for taking recreational drugs. No one could ever claim that cocaine is performance enhancing and if he´s doing it in his free time then what´s the problem?

 

Rooney gets a two match ban for something that could possibly have caused serious physical injury to another player but a young lad failing a drugs test can´t play for six months.

 

I´m not saying that Rooney should have received a longer ban, rather that the punishment meted out here is ludicrously harsh.

[shaq]

story here

 

I really don´t get why a player should receive such a lengthy ban for taking recreational drugs. No one could ever claim that cocaine is performance enhancing and if he´s doing it in his free time then what´s the problem?

 

Rooney gets a two match ban for something that could possibly have caused serious physical injury to another player but a young lad failing a drugs test can´t play for six months.

 

I´m not saying that Rooney should have received a longer ban, rather that the punishment meted out here is ludicrously harsh.

Agreed - it's ridiculous that no disinction is made between Performance-enhancing drugs and recreational drugs.

[The Hitman]

Because it's illegal,you've gotta try to uphold the integrity of the game. Remember there are kids about who look up to these guys,even strikers at Wolves have some fans.

[floyd]

He could of done a Ferdinand, and done a runner.

[£440,000]

So taking drugs is exponentially worse than stamping on, punching or headbutting another player?

 

I don´t even think they should be testing players for recreational drugs.

[Hassony]

So taking drugs is exponentially worse than stamping on, punching or headbutting another player?

 

I don´t even think they should be testing players for recreational drugs.

[Tones]

I agree with him. If someone likes to unwind with a few joints of green after a hard match then wats the major problem with that. Cannabis is definately NOT a performance enhancing drug.

Edited July 10, 2006 by t1971

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

it could perhaps be used to mask other drugs?

[£440,000]

it could perhaps be used to mask other drugs?

 

Such as?

[John am Rhein]

I don´t even think they should be testing players for recreational drugs.

 

I think that's dead right.

 

What's more I think it's time the players collectively took a stand against this: i.e. ONLY accept tests for performance-enhancing drugs.

[surf]

Cafeine

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

Such as?

hash..

[crisps]

 

I don´t even think they should be testing players for recreational drugs.

 

get crouch on speed before a match then eh

 

..

Edited July 10, 2006 by mikeyj

[£440,000]

Crouchie on speed would have the first touch ability of Djibs.

 

Not a good idea.

[Bald Devil]

I think that if the authorities didn't test for recreational drugs then the clubs would. They'd have to protect their reputations from the rats of the press. (Who are probably all beak heads themselves).

[Stevie H]

what's the legal precedent on drug-testing in the workplace? i know plenty of private companies do it as a matter of course, so i'm not sure how footballers could or would argue against it.

[blago]

Maybe they should be fined by the authorities but there is no way they should be banned from playing. It makes no sense at all. They haven't gained any edge over an opponent by taking a recreational drug.

[JohnnyH]

. (Who are probably all beak heads themselves).

 

What's a beak head? I think I'm losing touch with the latest terminology.

 

I think the sooner they make all drugs legal the better ( and I mean ALL drugs). The government can tax it like they do cigarettes and they can regulate it to try and take the drugcrime away from it. Then if people want to poisin themselves and snort/inject themselves to death, then let them! Would also stop players been banned.

[mally]

What's a beak head? I think I'm losing touch with the latest terminology.

 

I think the sooner they make all drugs legal the better ( and I mean ALL drugs). The government can tax it like they do cigarettes and they can regulate it to try and take the drugcrime away from it. Then if people want to poisin themselves and snort/inject themselves to death, then let them! Would also stop players been banned.

 

hello saxondale

[Tones]

what's the legal precedent on drug-testing in the workplace? i know plenty of private companies do it as a matter of course, so i'm not sure how footballers could or would argue against it.

 

I can see why your employer would want to test you for use fo drugs, and in the same way if you were a footballer your club would want to test you. They pay your wages and they want you to be at your best which you wont be if you are using drugs. But many dont enhance performance, they do the opposite. Why the FA has to hand out 6 month bans is hard to understand. You are not having an unfair advantage.

[Gilps]

I can see why your employer would want to test you for use fo drugs, and in the same way if you were a footballer your club would want to test you. They pay your wages and they want you to be at your best which you wont be if you are using drugs. But many dont enhance performance, they do the opposite. Why the FA has to hand out 6 month bans is hard to understand. You are not having an unfair advantage.

 

I can see why an employer would want to, but that's not th same as saying they should be able to. Where do you draw the line? Can they monitor your drinking to ensure it doesn't interfere with your performance? How about sending someone round to make sure you're tucked up in bed by 11.00 on a week night so you're nice and fresh?

[Cooldude]

If your employer caught you sniffing a few lines, you'd most likely get the sack

 

If a footballer gets caught, he only gets suspended for 6 months

 

Compare to that, footballers are having it easy, especially they're paid 20 times more than the average joes

[£440,000]

How about sending someone round to make sure you're tucked up in bed by 11.00 on a week night so you're nice and fresh?

 

Doesn't Mourinho do that with his lot?

 

If your employer caught you sniffing a few lines, you'd most likely get the sack

 

Your employer is only likely to catch you doing that if he tests you. Unless your private activities have a negative effect on your work performance, it's none of your employer's business.

 

I'm sure that there are quite a few top level footballers who have the odd line. If it's not affecting their performance then it's none of the clubs' business.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

I'm pretty sure, with drugs being illegal, that it's contractual - they can put the 'right' to test you in your contract.

 

After that it becomes an issue of 'performance', you can be sacked for being a Meff, but as it's legal, it's much harder. Unless you turn up a******d & set waaaaaaaaaaay over the mark

[lawrie]

What's a beak head? I think I'm losing touch with the latest terminology.

 

I think the sooner they make all drugs legal the better ( and I mean ALL drugs). The government can tax it like they do cigarettes and they can regulate it to try and take the drugcrime away from it. Then if people want to poisin themselves and snort/inject themselves to death, then let them! Would also stop players been banned.

 

If you know someone heavily into drugs then you will also know they are not the only ones to suffer. On this basis I cannot agree with the legalisation of all drugs at all.