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

Schools rugby players taking banned substances

  • 17-08-2008 09:18PM
    #1
    Transform
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,394 ✭✭✭


    Was watching RTE coverage of the olympics and they had a short discussion on drugs in sports.

    Garry O'Toole wrapped up by saying that there are schools rugby players taking banned substances that would get them thrown out of the olympics.

    Call me naive but is this sensationalist or are 15-18yr olds taking stuff that could get them banned if they were tested?


«1

Comments

  • #2
    suckslikeafox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 553 ✭✭✭suckslikeafox


    Id well believe it


  • #3
    tribulus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,635 ✭✭✭tribulus


    I think it's possible given the exposure of the schools cup and the competition for academy places.

    All I've ever personally heard were the standard rumours about a guy or two that live near me but then I didn't go to a rugby school (basketball ftw).


  • #4
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    Almost definitely.


  • #5
    Gillo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,566 ✭✭✭Gillo


    Wasn't that part of the reason behind the IMB crackdown last year.

    Again I'm not big into rugby so I don't know a lot about it.


  • #6
    Mikel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 863 ✭✭✭Mikel


    He was possibly referring to tainted supplements maybe?


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    JMCD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭JMCD


    When people say banned substances are we talking about things like no explode or something maybe harder?

    The funny thing is if they have to take banned substances to better and further themselves at 15-18 to reach there potentil then they obviously arent good enough to go any further beyond that!

    And the scarey thing is what would they be willing to do when they get to 18-19 and are being left behind by their peers especially given the fact that they are so passionate about it at 15 to 18!


  • #8
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Question though, would your average joe pass a banned substance test for the olympics? I think not in general. I doubt I would and I'm slow to even take painkillers.


  • #9
    Diamondmaker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,882 ✭✭✭Diamondmaker


    When my bro started out kids around him were taking creatine at 14 y/o and onwards.

    10 years on I would not be surprised to see "harder" supplements being used.

    Creatine was a viewed as a pretty evil substance back !


  • #10
    rubadub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,386 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    JMCD wrote: »
    When people say banned substances are we talking about things like no explode or something maybe harder?
    I presume it is anything that is banned, especially when lads like that love using scare tactics. I thought it was an odd discussion. O'Toole was inferring that Bolt must be on drugs, yet thought Phelps was clean, while Eamonn Coghlan was sure Bolt was clean and seemed to have some doubt about Phelps.
    Boston wrote: »
    Question though, would your average joe pass a banned substance test for the olympics? I think not in general.
    Many would fail, if you get banned for OTC cough medicines.


  • #11
    podge57
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,640 ✭✭✭podge57


    you could fail an olympics drugs test on 7 cups of coffee, or a vicks inhaler, as andrew bree did


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Hanley
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 21,981 ✭✭✭✭Hanley


    Gillo wrote: »
    Wasn't that part of the reason behind the IMB crackdown last year.

    Again I'm not big into rugby so I don't know a lot about it.

    They'd wanna be cracking down on bigger things if they're worried about substances that'll fail drug tests!!


  • #13
    Leon11
    Closed Accounts Posts: 578 ✭✭✭Leon11


    Oh ffs here's the schools players take xyz thread again:D

    There is a minority who will take banned substances, by a minority I mean 1 in 50. The vast majority of them will just use creatine, protein and recovery drinks etc. Very few would have the knowledge required to go about sourcing such substances or how to go about using them. The amount of them that use maximuscle products alone reinforces my opinion that the majority have feck all knowledge about such products.


  • #14
    Frankie Lee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,277 ✭✭✭Frankie Lee


    Does anyone know of anyone banned in professional rugby for taking banned substances?
    In a sport that strenght and power is so necessary, the fact of the matter it is highly likely some take steroids.
    If no-one is getting caught it means the testing isn't up to scratch.


  • #15
    damnyanks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭damnyanks


    i remember been given a dcoument back in school about banned substances ( i played rugby in school) 2 cups of coffe put you over the caffeine limit.


  • #16
    The Batman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 67 ✭✭The Batman


    They certainly do,well the major rugby schools do anyway!! I've experienced it first hand and have heard many stories form past and present pupils!!! If one guy has the knowledge or the source then they all do! I follow schools rugby quite a bit and saw a senior prop the other day that had to be taking something because i only saw him in the gym a few weeks back and he was half the size!!


  • #17
    ronbyrne2005
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,494 ✭✭✭ronbyrne2005


    A friend who plays rugby told me that when he was in early teens in early 1990s lads would swig cough bottle before game to get ephedrine buzz for their rugby games. Would not be suprised if 15-18 yr olds were taking anabolics etc as with internet anyone can find out about them in a few minutes and get them thru friends of friends etc.


  • #18
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,007 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    I'm 5 years out of a hardcore rugby school(one of the top 4) and I agree with the one in fifty approach. Most players simply don't care that much. The only school I would be worried about is the one that goes to the point of bringing in ringers. That sort of pressure can lead to substance abuse.


  • #19
    Dragan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,497 ✭✭✭✭Dragan


    The Batman wrote: »
    saw a senior prop the other day that had to be taking something because i only saw him in the gym a few weeks back and he was half the size!!

    It's called being 15 to 18 years old.


  • #20
    podge57
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,640 ✭✭✭podge57


    i would imagine a lot of them think they are taking something major, but theyre to ignorant to realise that its a test booster, or fat burner

    i definately cant see them having the knowledge to be able to use it properly, without damaging themselves

    as someone else said, being in your mid to late teens, you will see dramatic changes with decent weight training and diet, because your test. levels are through the roof


  • #21
    De Deraco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 441 ✭✭De Deraco


    If Cyclone is still an "banned substance" then i'd say there a lot of players on the banned list otherwise its a tiny miniscule % that would actually take anabolics.. Tobe honest its a joke the shook horro this causes there are definatelly more teenagers smoking pot than there is kids on suplements.

    ID say there are more teenagers on class A drugs(cocaine, heroine) than there are on Anabolics in the whole country.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Leon11
    Closed Accounts Posts: 578 ✭✭✭Leon11


    Batman, you're talking crap. I'll accept that it's possible that on a SCT you COULD have 3 or 4 guys that would take banned substances, to suggest that the whole team does is just nonsense though. People will have preconceptions about young rugby lads and I don't think whatever is said here is gonna go towards changing those preconceptions. At the end of the day it's just a bunch of 15-18yr olds caught up in a competition that is unbelievably over hyped. Given that the bigger schools have say 200-300 teenagers to choose from it's likely that you can pull out a core group of 15-20 players who are above average size brought about through hard work in the gym and on the field.


  • #23
    Dragan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,497 ✭✭✭✭Dragan


    If people are using size as an indicator then I was definitely on ASS when I was a kid.

    Actually, I am going to advise that none of you guys head down the country at any point soon.

    We breed them big down there…..we must all be on.:rolleyes:


  • #24
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    Simple fact of the matter is that there are definitely going to be at least two schools rugby players somewhere in the country taking something that is on the banned list. 2 = some.


  • #25
    Roper
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,448 ✭✭✭Roper


    amacachi wrote: »
    Simple fact of the matter is that there are definitely going to be at least two schools rugby players somewhere in the country taking something that is on the banned list. 2 = some.
    Is that what's passing for facts these days?

    None of you who say there are schools players on gear have provided any "facts" at all. In FACT nobody in the neverending cycle of Who's On Gear threads ever provides any facts, or stories that aren't about a mate of a mate who said he heard that someone was using.

    Here's some real FACTS:
    If someone has made big gains, then they're on gear. This particularly applies if they've made bigger gains than you.
    If someone has improved in a season, they're on gear. Once again, this particularly applies if you used to be better/faster than them and now you're not.


  • #26
    Kinetic^
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,224 ✭✭✭✭Kinetic^


    Boston wrote: »
    Question though, would your average joe pass a banned substance test for the olympics? I think not in general. I doubt I would and I'm slow to even take painkillers.

    Spot on tbh. I remember being tested when I was 17 and stuff like Lemsip Max Strength was on the banned list.

    The rate a guy grows from 15-18 is ridiculous tbh, both in height and width. They're still developing.


  • #27
    gabgab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,062 ✭✭✭gabgab


    Roper wrote: »
    Is that what's passing for facts these days?

    None of you who say there are schools players on gear have provided any "facts" at all. In FACT nobody in the neverending cycle of Who's On Gear threads ever provides any facts, or stories that aren't about a mate of a mate who said he heard that someone was using.

    Here's some real FACTS:
    If someone has made big gains, then they're on gear. This particularly applies if they've made bigger gains than you.
    If someone has improved in a season, they're on gear. Once again, this particularly applies if you used to be better/faster than them and now you're not.


    I cant remember where but I read that somewhere else before, its very funny. My mate beat me in a triathlon, it all makes sense now.....


  • #28
    Gillo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,566 ✭✭✭Gillo


    Isn't it really just part of a bigger debate?
    I mean four of five years ago there were very few shop's where you could by supplements, now there's a decent number of dedicated supplement shops.
    (I'm going from my own experience but five years ago the only place I'd have thought of was Workout World on the quay), because they are a lot more readily available more people will take them when they don't necessarily need them.
    Slightly off topic I know.


  • #29
    Kinetic^
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,224 ✭✭✭✭Kinetic^


    Gillo wrote: »
    Isn't it really just part of a bigger debate?
    I mean four of five years ago there were very few shop's where you could by supplements, now there's a decent number of dedicated supplement shops.
    (I'm going from my own experience but five years ago the only place I'd have thought of was Workout World on the quay), because they are a lot more readily available more people will take them when they don't necessarily need them.
    Slightly off topic I know.

    I think you're mixing protein/creatine up with illegal substances tbh.


  • #30
    Gillo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,566 ✭✭✭Gillo


    Kinetic^ wrote: »
    I think you're mixing protein/creatine up with illegal substances tbh.

    A number of shops have been caught selling the illegal substances over the years.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Leon11
    Closed Accounts Posts: 578 ✭✭✭Leon11


    Dragan wrote: »
    If people are using size as an indicator then I was definitely on ASS when I was a kid.

    Not sure if you were referencing my post there but that's usually the basis of most people's judgment when it comes to determining if someone has taken "banned substances" wrong as it is.


Advertisement