 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Magpietothemax 
magpietothemax
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Agree totally with David's standpoint. A draconian punishment system without gradations of severity is inappropriate for any civilised society. It would be possible to determine whether or not the cocaine levels detected could have had performance enhancing qualities, and if not then the athlete's career should not be destroyed. As David has said, given the current uncivilized punishment regime, there is little hope unfortunately for Sam Murray, and I feel sorry for him, simply because any career destroying sanction is disproportionate to the severity of the infraction. Debating over Sam Murray's "stupidity", IQ, etc is irrelevant to the objective reality of this case. Like David, I hope that if sam Murray has is AFL career destroyed as a result of this, then there will be a protest movement against accepting this drug testing enforcement regime without the possiblity of rational and humane interpretation and relaxation of penalties on a case by case basis.
_________________
Free Julian Assange!!
Ice in the veins |
|
|
|
 |
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Sam who? |
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Magpietothemax wrote: | | Agree totally with David's standpoint. A draconian punishment system without gradations of severity is inappropriate for any civilised society. It would be possible to determine whether or not the cocaine levels detected could have had performance enhancing qualities, and if not then the athlete's career should not be destroyed. As David has said, given the current uncivilized punishment regime, there is little hope unfortunately for Sam Murray, and I feel sorry for him, simply because any career destroying sanction is disproportionate to the severity of the infraction. Debating over Sam Murray's "stupidity", IQ, etc is irrelevant to the objective reality of this case. Like David, I hope that if sam Murray has is AFL career destroyed as a result of this, then there will be a protest movement against accepting this drug testing enforcement regime without the possiblity of rational and humane interpretation and relaxation of penalties on a case by case basis. |
Nope. Totally unfair on the professional athletes, the highly paid, very very fortunate, players, that do the ‘right’ thing. Ie keep your nose clean. A fun drug that can enhance your performance by making you feel bullet proof on match day, (by the way how is that healthy? If we allow it by any degree, surely that a duty of care thing?) is obviously an advantage. Taking those drugs is also illegal. Why on earth should there be any allowance at all? They all know the rules it has been drummed into them over and over and over again. The Thomas case is still fresh in everyone’s minds, the Essendon saga still looms large, there is no excuse. Smart, dumb, arrogant, addicted, peer pressure, no excuse whatsoever. For the greater good, of our game, of player welfare, the punishment must stand.
You need or want that kind of high, you want to take that kind of chance, and jeopardise your health your career, don’t be an AFL player, simple, or wait til your contract is done, so you don’t cost your team a valuable spot on the list.
You take a gamble and lose, no sympathy whatsoever, and yes I’m guessing plenty are drawing a winning hand, and partying it up, I won’t say good luck to them, I’ll say don’t whinge if/when you get caught. If Sams career is destroyed he only has himself to blame.
It’s really simple. Just say no!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Doc63
Joined: 06 May 2004
Location: Newport
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | | Magpietothemax wrote: | | Agree totally with David's standpoint. A draconian punishment system without gradations of severity is inappropriate for any civilised society. It would be possible to determine whether or not the cocaine levels detected could have had performance enhancing qualities, and if not then the athlete's career should not be destroyed. As David has said, given the current uncivilized punishment regime, there is little hope unfortunately for Sam Murray, and I feel sorry for him, simply because any career destroying sanction is disproportionate to the severity of the infraction. Debating over Sam Murray's "stupidity", IQ, etc is irrelevant to the objective reality of this case. Like David, I hope that if sam Murray has is AFL career destroyed as a result of this, then there will be a protest movement against accepting this drug testing enforcement regime without the possiblity of rational and humane interpretation and relaxation of penalties on a case by case basis. |
Nope. Totally unfair on the professional athletes, the highly paid, very very fortunate, players, that do the ‘right’ thing. Ie keep your nose clean. A fun drug that can enhance your performance by making you feel bullet proof on match day, (by the way how is that healthy? If we allow it by any degree, surely that a duty of care thing?) is obviously an advantage. Taking those drugs is also illegal. Why on earth should there be any allowance at all? They all know the rules it has been drummed into them over and over and over again. The Thomas case is still fresh in everyone’s minds, the Essendon saga still looms large, there is no excuse. Smart, dumb, arrogant, addicted, peer pressure, no excuse whatsoever. For the greater good, of our game, of player welfare, the punishment must stand.
You need or want that kind of high, you want to take that kind of chance, and jeopardise your health your career, don’t be an AFL player, simple, or wait til your contract is done, so you don’t cost your team a valuable spot on the list.
You take a gamble and lose, no sympathy whatsoever, and yes I’m guessing plenty are drawing a winning hand, and partying it up, I won’t say good luck to them, I’ll say don’t whinge if/when you get caught. If Sams career is destroyed he only has himself to blame.
It’s really simple. Just say no! |
100% agree with you TP. Well said.
_________________
I hold a cup of wisdom, but there is nothing within. |
|
|
|
|
Magpietothemax
magpietothemax
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | | Magpietothemax wrote: | | Agree totally with David's standpoint. A draconian punishment system without gradations of severity is inappropriate for any civilised society. It would be possible to determine whether or not the cocaine levels detected could have had performance enhancing qualities, and if not then the athlete's career should not be destroyed. As David has said, given the current uncivilized punishment regime, there is little hope unfortunately for Sam Murray, and I feel sorry for him, simply because any career destroying sanction is disproportionate to the severity of the infraction. Debating over Sam Murray's "stupidity", IQ, etc is irrelevant to the objective reality of this case. Like David, I hope that if sam Murray has is AFL career destroyed as a result of this, then there will be a protest movement against accepting this drug testing enforcement regime without the possiblity of rational and humane interpretation and relaxation of penalties on a case by case basis. |
Nope. Totally unfair on the professional athletes, the highly paid, very very fortunate, players, that do the ‘right’ thing. Ie keep your nose clean. A fun drug that can enhance your performance by making you feel bullet proof on match day, (by the way how is that healthy? If we allow it by any degree, surely that a duty of care thing?) is obviously an advantage. Taking those drugs is also illegal. Why on earth should there be any allowance at all? They all know the rules it has been drummed into them over and over and over again. The Thomas case is still fresh in everyone’s minds, the Essendon saga still looms large, there is no excuse. Smart, dumb, arrogant, addicted, peer pressure, no excuse whatsoever. For the greater good, of our game, of player welfare, the punishment must stand.
You need or want that kind of high, you want to take that kind of chance, and jeopardise your health your career, don’t be an AFL player, simple, or wait til your contract is done, so you don’t cost your team a valuable spot on the list.
You take a gamble and lose, no sympathy whatsoever, and yes I’m guessing plenty are drawing a winning hand, and partying it up, I won’t say good luck to them, I’ll say don’t whinge if/when you get caught. If Sams career is destroyed he only has himself to blame.
It’s really simple. Just say no! |
i understand your argument, but totally disagree with it.
i did not suggest that for such an infraction he should escape any penalty. Disincentives can be established with proportionate punishments.
The club should definitely discipline such an infraction with measures to make clear that taking recreational drugs is abhorred.
Your argument that it is unfair to other athletes is just untrue. The only reason it would be unfair to other athletes is if he has in his system drugs that can enhance his performance in the sporting contest.
_________________
Free Julian Assange!!
Ice in the veins |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Debating over Sam's intelligence is not irrelevant, assuming he deliberately took coke during the week. If it was accidental ingestion, different discussion.
If he took it, he knew the rules whether they are appropriate or not.
I don't personally that having a trace of an illicit drug in your system on matchday, in a quantity that is not performance enhancing, should be treated the same as testing positive to a PED.
However, Sam knew what the rules were, good luck getting WADA to change their mind. Their rules are draconian, deliberately so.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Bruce Gonsalves
Joined: 05 Jul 2012
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Curious to know how they handled Sam's absence at the Norwich Rising Star Awards the other day? |
|
|
|
|
Piethagoras' Theorem
the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk
Joined: 29 May 2006
|
| Post subject: | |
|
He was away for personal reasons?
_________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Magpietothemax wrote: | | think positive wrote: | | Magpietothemax wrote: | | Agree totally with David's standpoint. A draconian punishment system without gradations of severity is inappropriate for any civilised society. It would be possible to determine whether or not the cocaine levels detected could have had performance enhancing qualities, and if not then the athlete's career should not be destroyed. As David has said, given the current uncivilized punishment regime, there is little hope unfortunately for Sam Murray, and I feel sorry for him, simply because any career destroying sanction is disproportionate to the severity of the infraction. Debating over Sam Murray's "stupidity", IQ, etc is irrelevant to the objective reality of this case. Like David, I hope that if sam Murray has is AFL career destroyed as a result of this, then there will be a protest movement against accepting this drug testing enforcement regime without the possiblity of rational and humane interpretation and relaxation of penalties on a case by case basis. |
Nope. Totally unfair on the professional athletes, the highly paid, very very fortunate, players, that do the ‘right’ thing. Ie keep your nose clean. A fun drug that can enhance your performance by making you feel bullet proof on match day, (by the way how is that healthy? If we allow it by any degree, surely that a duty of care thing?) is obviously an advantage. Taking those drugs is also illegal. Why on earth should there be any allowance at all? They all know the rules it has been drummed into them over and over and over again. The Thomas case is still fresh in everyone’s minds, the Essendon saga still looms large, there is no excuse. Smart, dumb, arrogant, addicted, peer pressure, no excuse whatsoever. For the greater good, of our game, of player welfare, the punishment must stand.
You need or want that kind of high, you want to take that kind of chance, and jeopardise your health your career, don’t be an AFL player, simple, or wait til your contract is done, so you don’t cost your team a valuable spot on the list.
You take a gamble and lose, no sympathy whatsoever, and yes I’m guessing plenty are drawing a winning hand, and partying it up, I won’t say good luck to them, I’ll say don’t whinge if/when you get caught. If Sams career is destroyed he only has himself to blame.
It’s really simple. Just say no! |
i understand your argument, but totally disagree with it.
i did not suggest that for such an infraction he should escape any penalty. Disincentives can be established with proportionate punishments.
The club should definitely discipline such an infraction with measures to make clear that taking recreational drugs is abhorred.
Your argument that it is unfair to other athletes is just untrue. The only reason it would be unfair to other athletes is if he has in his system drugs that can enhance his performance in the sporting contest. |
The club in recent times did discipline with measure to make it clear, look how that turned out for Sam! Obviously wasn’t deterrent enough.
It’s unfair because this shit taints the sport, and the reputation of all players on the team, and in the competition (culture anyone?) true or not it reflects badly. It’s also unfair because it detracts from momentum, disrupts training, and team balance. And while Ben Cousins was clearly a freak, is it possible to Perform at your best if your a habitual drug user?
Not to mention the fact that taking cocaine is ILLEGAL!
Thomas can count himself very very lucky, he got another chance, I for one didn’t want him too, and it was a long time in to his return that I could forgive him, and say yes, well done you fought back. And now I fully support him, and indeed, it’s sad his name is getting chucked around again, I’m sure he would like this dead and buried. But that’s also part of his lesson. So tell me, what will it take? Because nothing has worked so far. He’s a newbie, a fringe player, not yet irreplaceable, perfect time to make a stand. Does that make me a mercenary? I don’t think so, and I don’t really care, because I didn’t put the drug in his system. A four year ban might just send one massive ripple of fear through the hearts of every other player in the comp.
And again, if you don’t try to cheat the system, you don’t get penalised. Players are not allowed to have recreational drugs in their system AT ALL on game day. End of story.
The Essendon thing gets brought up over and over, so tell me this: if the drug regime they were on apparently without their ‘cough’ knowledge, had worked, and they won the premiership, would that make people see it differently? Because it shouldn’t. Cheating is cheating, regardless if it works.
And gambling on anything comes with risks. If Sam did indeed take a gamble,-I’ll leave a little room here for he brushed up against a block of drugs by accident, then he has to pay the price, whether it was Monday, Tuesday, Saturday, or Christmas and he has no one to blame but himself.
Yes it’s sad. For Sam, for the team. I enjoyed watching him play.but I’m not as sad as I am pissed off at him. When it’s all said and done, if he takes responsibility and picks himself up and dusts himself off, and makes something of his life, I’ll say goodonya. I won’t forginve him though. Lots of cliches here so I’ll add one more, There is no I in the word TEAM!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Doc63 wrote: | | think positive wrote: | | Magpietothemax wrote: | | Agree totally with David's standpoint. A draconian punishment system without gradations of severity is inappropriate for any civilised society. It would be possible to determine whether or not the cocaine levels detected could have had performance enhancing qualities, and if not then the athlete's career should not be destroyed. As David has said, given the current uncivilized punishment regime, there is little hope unfortunately for Sam Murray, and I feel sorry for him, simply because any career destroying sanction is disproportionate to the severity of the infraction. Debating over Sam Murray's "stupidity", IQ, etc is irrelevant to the objective reality of this case. Like David, I hope that if sam Murray has is AFL career destroyed as a result of this, then there will be a protest movement against accepting this drug testing enforcement regime without the possiblity of rational and humane interpretation and relaxation of penalties on a case by case basis. |
Nope. Totally unfair on the professional athletes, the highly paid, very very fortunate, players, that do the ‘right’ thing. Ie keep your nose clean. A fun drug that can enhance your performance by making you feel bullet proof on match day, (by the way how is that healthy? If we allow it by any degree, surely that a duty of care thing?) is obviously an advantage. Taking those drugs is also illegal. Why on earth should there be any allowance at all? They all know the rules it has been drummed into them over and over and over again. The Thomas case is still fresh in everyone’s minds, the Essendon saga still looms large, there is no excuse. Smart, dumb, arrogant, addicted, peer pressure, no excuse whatsoever. For the greater good, of our game, of player welfare, the punishment must stand.
You need or want that kind of high, you want to take that kind of chance, and jeopardise your health your career, don’t be an AFL player, simple, or wait til your contract is done, so you don’t cost your team a valuable spot on the list.
You take a gamble and lose, no sympathy whatsoever, and yes I’m guessing plenty are drawing a winning hand, and partying it up, I won’t say good luck to them, I’ll say don’t whinge if/when you get caught. If Sams career is destroyed he only has himself to blame.
It’s really simple. Just say no! |
100% agree with you TP. Well said. |
Cheers Doc
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
For those interested, here is the WADA list of prohibited substances.
https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/prohibited_list_2018_en.pdf
From page 7, it lists those non PED's by category that are prohibited in competition (which for AFL may mean match day only). It specifically includes Cocaine as well as various forms of amphetamines and even dope.
Now, whether David or MTM or others think it's harsh, that's the list. It's published on their website and all the players are aware of it.
Back in 2006, Wendell Sailor was banned for two years from Rugby for testing positive to Cocaine on matchday, despite his claim that he had not ingested coke within 96 hours of the game.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendell_Sailor#Cocaine_controversy
Note, back then, 2 years was the maximum ban, it's now 4 years.
In 2015, WAFL footballer Dean Cadwallader copped a 4 year ban for testing positive to coke on grandfial day. https://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/wafl/wafl-player-dean-cadwallader-cops-four-year-ban-for-positive-drug-tests-ng-5614abfb90c1238ea2cffa1e137fefa3
Again, for those interested, here's a list of Australian athletes currently banned from competition.
https://www.asada.gov.au/sanctions
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Gees there’s a fair few.
Lot of cyclists and body builders
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
5 from the wing on debut
Joined: 27 May 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | Debating over Sam's intelligence is not irrelevant, assuming he deliberately took coke during the week. If it was accidental ingestion, different discussion.
If he took it, he knew the rules whether they are appropriate or not.
I don't personally that having a trace of an illicit drug in your system on matchday, in a quantity that is not performance enhancing, should be treated the same as testing positive to a PED.
However, Sam knew what the rules were, good luck getting WADA to change their mind. Their rules are draconian, deliberately so. |
We don’t actually know when he took it and how much was in his system on match day.
For all we know he could have sniffed half of Colombia up his nose as he was running down the race and the amount in his system was performance enhancing. |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 5 from the wing on debut wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | Debating over Sam's intelligence is not irrelevant, assuming he deliberately took coke during the week. If it was accidental ingestion, different discussion.
If he took it, he knew the rules whether they are appropriate or not.
I don't personally that having a trace of an illicit drug in your system on matchday, in a quantity that is not performance enhancing, should be treated the same as testing positive to a PED.
However, Sam knew what the rules were, good luck getting WADA to change their mind. Their rules are draconian, deliberately so. |
We don’t actually know when he took it and how much was in his system on match day.
For all we know he could have sniffed half of Colombia up his nose as he was running down the race and the amount in his system was performance enhancing. |
i thought the reporting was that he took it recreationally on a wednesday night before the weekend game.
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 5 from the wing on debut wrote: | [quote="stui magpie"]Debating over Sam's intelligence is not irrelevant, assuming he deliberately took coke during the week. If it was accidental ingestion, different discussion.
If he took it, he knew the rules whether they are appropriate or not.
I don't personally that having a trace of an illicit drug in your system on matchday, in a quantity that is not performance enhancing, should be treated the same as testing positive to a PED.
However, Sam knew what the rules were, good luck getting WADA to change their mind. Their rules are draconian, deliberately so.[/quote]
We don’t actually know when he took it and how much was in his system on match day.
For all we know he could have sniffed half of Colombia up his nose as he was running down the race and the amount in his system was performance enhancing. |
I'm not sure I understand the implication of that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
