Will we be implicated in this doping scandal?

[Caesar]

None of this will come as any surprise to anybody with a passing knowledge of the inner workings of rugby league in this country.

A lot of people in a lot of clubs, including ours, have been edgy about this for a while. A big scandal was inevitable. The Augean stables need a thorough clean.

 

[chinorocks]

Rumour has it its the 2011 Sharks under investigation. 2 pretty high profile members of our forward pack in that side...

 

[Spot On]

And one of them was bloody horrible last season.

 

[Zoidberg]

On Fox they were saying 14 sharks players are being told to come forward and cop 6months suspension or wait to be found out and get a 2 year suspension. All heresay but that's big if true.

 

[Jobdog]

They're saying these drugs that were allegedly taken didn't appear on the banned list at the time. So how can you ban someone for doing something illegal if it's not illegal?

 

[chinorocks]

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[chinorocks]

Its like going back and stripping the Dragons 11 premierships because they would have breached the cap had there been one...

 

[drago brelli]

They're saying these drugs that were allegedly taken didn't appear on the banned list at the time. So how can you ban someone for doing something illegal if it's not illegal?

I think ASADA look at it this way......the 'sports guru' who gave the players the substances knew the substances would benefit the player in their performance. These things are not vitamins. The substances are performance enhancing, the sports guru in question knew this. Therefore the players took performance enhancing substances at the time even though they weren't banned at the time. Unfortunately, ignorance is no excuse. In other words this whole thing could be retrespective. Let's wait and see.

 

[The Showstopper]

A player has a onus to make sure they check what they put in their bodies is legal. There is a website which explains it all. Ignorance is dying fast in today's world. It is no longer an excuse as dragon brelli has already said. I on the other hand feel bad for players who trust their clubs to hold up the duty of care and that is done half heartedly. When you are employed you tend to trust your boss to look out for you. In an ideal world................

 

[Whats Doing]

There are apparently 22 current and former sharks players across the NRL implicated

 

[Rudderriffic]

A player has a onus to make sure they check what they put in their bodies is legal. There is a website which explains it all. Ignorance is dying fast in today's world. It is no longer an excuse as dragon brelli has already said. I on the other hand feel bad for players who trust their clubs to hold up the duty of care and that is done half heartedly. When you are employed you tend to trust your boss to look out for you. In an ideal world................

This completely misses the point that Drago responded to. The substances in question were NOT on the banned substance list at the time they were consumed. Short of whipping out the crystal ball, what due diligence should these players have done to prevent themselves from being punished by a retrospective application of the rules?

If the information released so far is in anyway accurate, ASADA's proposed sanctions can be likened to giving drivers speeding fines today for travelling at 70km/h in an 80km/h zone two years ago because the sped limit changed to 50km/h 8 months ago. It is ludicrous.

 

[The Showstopper]

This completely misses the point that Drago responded to. The substances in question were NOT on the banned substance list at the time they were consumed. Short of whipping out the crystal ball, what due diligence should these players have done to prevent themselves from being punished by a retrospective application of the rules?

If the information released so far is in anyway accurate, ASADA's proposed sanctions can be likened to giving drivers speeding fines today for travelling at 70km/h in an 80km/h zone two years ago because the sped limit changed to 50km/h 8 months ago. It is ludicrous.

It doesn't miss any point. I understand it is retropsective. My point is the players should have known what they were taking by asking and checked it to begin with. Instead they allegedly just pick up a bunch of pills given to them and downed them or accepted injections provided and and didn't question it. Duty of care should involve full disclosure. Hence why the ignorance thing does not wash.

The swimmers who took stilnox have said on several occcasions they were always encouraged to check what substances they put in their bodies. What about Warne. Took Lasix to lose weight cos his mum gave it to him! Only an imbecile would let someone inject them with anything before they knew what is was for. Ask yourself this. If you were asked to inject yourself or be injected with with calf's blood would you be comfortable just going 'oh okay'. That in itself beggars belief.

 

[Pika]

It doesn't miss any point. I understand it is retropsective. My point is the players should have known what they were taking by asking and checked it to begin with. Instead they allegedly just pick up a bunch of pills given to them and downed them or accepted injections provided and and didn't question it. Duty of care should involve full disclosure. Hence why the ignorance thing does not wash.

The swimmers who took stilnox have said on several occcasions they were always encouraged to check what substances they put in their bodies. What about Warne. Took Lasix to lose weight cos his mum gave it to him! Only an imbecile would let someone inject them with anything before they knew what is was for. Ask yourself this. If you were asked to inject yourself or be injected with with calf's blood would you be comfortable just going 'oh okay'. That in itself beggars belief.

So just to clarify, the players should have checked the list before they agreed to the injection.

Having checked the list and found the product was not prohibited they are still at fault for taking it.

Makes sense.

No. Wait.... my head hurts..

 

[Rudderriffic]

It doesn't miss any point. I understand it is retropsective. My point is the players should have known what they were taking by asking and checked it to begin with. Instead they allegedly just pick up a bunch of pills given to them and downed them or accepted injections provided and and didn't question it. Duty of care should involve full disclosure. Hence why the ignorance thing does not wash.

You are still missing the fundamental point in this that these substances were not banned when the players were using them. Read what Pika wrote above, it is spot on.

The point you make of the players having to be aware of what they are taking is irrelevant in this instance. The case is not being made that they were not aware, but that the supplements used at the time did not contravene any published list of prohibited substances. It is pure speculation to say the players did not do the appropriate checks, as with the information released currently, any reasonable person checking the legality of these substances in 2011 according to ASADA would have found they were not listed as prohibited.

 

[Zoidberg]

Like, for example, if players take something that is legal today and it gets banned in 2 years, so they stop taking it as soon as its banned, but get in trouble for taking it before.

And if they have taken current banned substances, while I agree YOU are responsible for putting it in your body, the clubs pay doctors money to give the players these things trusting that they know what their doing and to make sure it's legal. The players trust that they're being looked after the right way. It's a bit hard on them...not like the sharks won much anyways

 

[Big Tim]

The players are paid to represent the club on and off the field. They are not employed to check that the supplements they are given by the club doctor or sports scientist is above board. Why would they?

The club would be in much more trouble than them if found to be intentionally breaking the rules.

If the players took something that wasnt illegal at the time of ingestion, how can they be held liable? How can the sports scientist be held liable? It is his job to give the players a physical edge.

Would you ban Red Bull from F1 because they develop a wing, within the guidelines as written at the time, that gives them a 2% aero advantage?

 

[Hanscholo]

No the info i have is that the offences occurred in 2012 not 2011. They took the peptide in 2011 and 2012, it was on the banned list in 2012. I dont even think the Spanish inquisition style WADA can back date offences to prior to it becoming banned.

If that is the case that means one Newcastle player has been given the same offer the rest have been given. As i see it only one played for the sharks in 2012, as it was stated on the footy show tonight that all of the ex sharks from 2012 got the same offer the current sharks got. Which is extremely disappointing and frustrating.

 

[Zoidberg]

Ray Hadley's usually full of crap but he's right on this one. Punish the club and the doctors who gave the players these pills. Don't punish the players for trusting the team "experts".

 

[drago brelli]

Ray Hadley's usually full of crap but he's right on this one. Punish the club and the doctors who gave the players these pills. Don't punish the players for trusting the team "experts".

Don't listen to Hadley, he's a complete wanker. What he's saying is wrong. If Dank had anything to do with your club or if you have any players from the Cronulla team of 2011 then you will be investigated. That sports witch doctor has played an extremely high stakes game with some clubs and he's been found out. He knew what he was doing.

 

[Alex28]

I hear tonight from a couple of guys who have a source in the media that we could be in a bit of trouble...