Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Vijay cleared of doping

Comments

  • #2
    sofireland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,246 ✭✭✭sofireland


    Way I read it is the pga tour effectively didnt make a decision but waited to see what the wada said. Disgraceful.

    With all that happened at the masters and this, that squeaky clean image isnt quite so clean.

    Anyone who follows denis pugh on twitter should have a look at what he is saying. On the phone so cant quote it.


  • #3
    AGC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,648 ✭✭✭AGC


    https://mobile.twitter.com/Dpugh54?p=s


  • #4
    John Divney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 998 ✭✭✭John Divney


    Wada wrote to the Tour to confirm it no longer considers the use of the spray to be prohibited unless a positive test occurs.

    So this is legal to use in all sports, unless you test positive?

    What's a positive test, trace amount?

    Is it a banned substance or not? He said he was downing the stuff like smarties.


  • #5
    PARlance
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,510 ✭✭✭✭PARlance


    John Divney wrote: »
    So this is legal to use in all sports, unless you test positive?

    What's a positive test, trace amount?

    Is it a banned substance or not? He said he was downing the stuff like smarties.

    Clear as mud....

    Vijay lawyered up big time I'd say!
    Would be interesting to see if he is still using it, I'd suspect not.


  • #6
    Russman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,939 ✭✭✭Russman


    Ya, the logic, if I read it correctly is that its ok to take as long as you don't test positive for it ? Seems very strange.

    On one hand if its not banned then Vijay is in the clear (and rightly so if that's the case), but on the other, it seems to be banned only if you test positive for it........this seems to be a bit of a fudge. Admitting taking it doesn't appear to be enough...??


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    John Divney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 998 ✭✭✭John Divney


    Ok, so I did a bit of reading and it seems Deer antler spray is complete snake oil, thus not being an actual way to get the drug into the system, has to be injected.

    So he could swallow a herd and still not register positive.


  • #8
    blue note
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,620 ✭✭✭blue note


    Russman wrote: »
    Ya, the logic, if I read it correctly is that its ok to take as long as you don't test positive for it ? Seems very strange.

    I don't think the logic is strange. I assume they have unacceptable levels of chemicals. If you're found to have greater than those levels in your body then you should be banned. if not, what's the problem?


  • #9
    downthemiddle
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,298 ✭✭✭downthemiddle


    AGC wrote: »
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Dpugh54?p=s
    Interesting comment from Peter Alliss. You would be inclined to think that he doesn't like Vijay :eek:


  • #10
    Russman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,939 ✭✭✭Russman


    blue note wrote: »
    I don't think the logic is strange. I assume they have unacceptable levels of chemicals. If you're found to have greater than those levels in your body then you should be banned. if not, what's the problem?

    Once you allow a certain level of chemicals/drugs its giving an advantage to those who don't naturally produce as much as other people.
    Its a bit like the old 50% hematocrit rule in cycling where 50% was allowed. If a rider naturally produced, say, 42%, he could dope up with EPO until he was at 50%, whereas someone who naturally produced, say, 48% couldn't dope as much, so the first rider "gained" more by doping.

    Now I've no idea if the chemical in the deer antler spray is naturally produced by humans or not, but personally I think that a substance is either banned or its not, I don't think "banned over a certain level" is either fair or right.


Advertisement