posted Feb 25, 2008

In answer to dazzlingdublinblue..... Common sense prevailed.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

Based on recent performances, if any of the Scottish players are on performance enhancing drugs, they ought to sue the manufacturers.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

My first thought was that Scottish rugby and performance enhancing could never be used in the same sentence at the moment.

The real point is that this shows the depths to which we have sunk - when the players and the establishment don't seem to know what is and isn't acceptable. The majority of the blame probably lies with the 'blazers' who are lost in the real world.

Just what is Dr. Robson employed to do?

How long is it since Budge Pountney stormed out because he couldn't stand their incompetence and the fact that SRU 'high heid yins' wives' tickets came ahead of any players needs?

My guess is nothing has changed and the old guard are still in charge bumbling along in the same old way.

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

theresgonnaebeashow :

What utter drivel ! I wondered how long it would take someone to turn this around to "it's the SRU's fault"...predictable, boringly predictable.....

"Just what is Dr Robson employed to do"...well, he's been the Lions doctor as well, I seem to recall...so somebody must rate him....

And what on earth does wives tickets have to do with someone taking a substance that could have got him banned?

You have a particularly rosey outlook on the SRU, don't you?

If you want something to actually get agitated about, try the fact that certain players who have been banned for taking steroids have come back to play international rugby, as there have been several of those. Check them out on the internet, they are easy to find...and if anyone believes they are confined to one nation, they are mistaken. Sadly, international rugby is not free of drugs cheats and anyone who believes otherwise is stunningly naive.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

It's ridiculous that the SRU played MacLeod on Saturday, he should have been suspended while under investigation. What if he'd been found guilty today and Scotland had won on Saturday? Would the team have been penalised?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

I don't think any performance enhancing drugs out there could help the Scottish players at the moment. They are doing things on the pitch that coaches get angry at U-12's for doing. I don't think they've invented a performance enhancing drug that can change large men playing like 7 year old children (Strokosch and Blair excluded) into full-time professionals... why, oh why do they keep playing the interception instead of tackling their man, estúpidos!

Scotland don't need performancing enhancing drugs, they need a coach who will give them the hairdryer treatment when they play like mince. NOT PICK THEM FOR THE FIRST TEAM REGARDLESS!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

There should be no stigma, didnt even realise it had happened to Sheean. It shoudl however be a lesson for all the teams to make sure these things are held by the players.

My main reaction is thank god it was an admin error, a drugs case based on PED would have been the final nail in our coffin and one we probably wouldnt have recovered from.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 25, 2008

Neil, Its on the banned list except where it is administered for Asthma via an inhaler but you need an exemption certificate. Mcleod's certificate states a different brand and didnt get it updated when he switched back (apparently it was on his old cert and he should hold 2 - one for each inhaler)

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 27, 2008

The use of banned substances is well documented and all professional sports people know what they can and cannot use and what they have to do to use certain medication. There really cannot be any excuse for this and professional people must abide by rules and regs.
However, unlike athletics or football etc. where there are massive gains to be had, both financial and status, I truly believe that within rugby this sort of behaviour rarely exists and this is just a case of silliness and naivety.
Anyway, anyone in that team with common sense would'nt bother to take drugs as it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever as they are performing woefully.
Its a bit like trying to bribe the English cricket team to lose - what's the point ? save your money and get the result naturally!!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 27, 2008

"For that reason, it's difficult to see how Sheahan was guilty and McLeod innocent of the same offence."

This is from today's Hootsman: "Contrast the Llanelli forward's case, then, with another case of recent years, that of Munster hooker Frankie Sheahan who tested positive for massive amounts of Salbutamol and was banned for two years in 2003. Unlike Terbutaline, there is an upper limit of 1000ng/Ml for Salbutamol and Sheahan was reported to be 20 times over that limit."

Playing Devil's Advocate, this is also from todays Hootsman: "While only eight to 10 per cent of the general population suffers from asthma, the UCI has had 80 per cent of its elite riders classified as asthmatic. In the Tour de France, 40 per cent of the peloton have exemptions for asthmatic drugs"

With that in mind it would be interesting to find out just what percentage professional rugby players are classified as asthmatic?

add comment | complain about this comment