Laurent Benezech - "Doping in Rugby as bad as cycling" [MOD WARNING POST #1]

CatFromHue · 08-12-2014 03:03AM

how would you test if people were lying?

i've heard lie detector tests can be beaten

Superbus · 08-12-2014 03:05AM

CatFromHue wrote: »

how would you test if people were lying?

i've heard lie detector tests can be beaten

They declare what they're taking, and concurrently there's stringent drug testing.

I mean, it's a silly idea, but it's my silly idea.

Clearlier · 08-12-2014 10:55AM

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

I dont mean the sport itself should turn a blind eye to it. The authorities must do what they can to minimise the problem. But keep it away from our eyes. With current methods it is an unwinnable war and the public flagelations in other sports have done more harm than good. Does anyone believe athletics or cycling are cleaner now than they were 10 or 20 years ago ? Dream on if you do. (Any Jamaican sprinters here that browse boards.ie/rugby will know what I am talking about....)

Yes, both Athletics and cycling are cleaner now than they were 10 and especially 20 years ago. The advances in testing for drugs like EPO have made a significant difference but the biggest difference has been the introduction of the biological passport. Also, testing has become more targeted and samples are stored for several years to be tested some time later when tests for 'new' drugs have been developed. Relationships have been developed with pharmaceutical companies so that tests for new drugs are being developed at a much much earlier stage. There are two big issues to successfully catching dopers and they are the attitude of the bureaucrats (sporting bodies, anti-doping associations and governments) and the cost which is very significant for most sports and in particular for less wealthy countries.

Superbus wrote: »

Not a point specific to rugby, but I've always wondered what would happen if all doping and peds were legal, but lying was illegal. So you can take whatever you want, but you have to declare it. Combined with this there's a testing regime that's as stringent as possible. If someone is found to be on something they didn't declare, they're banned for life. No questions asked.

It would provide an incentive to be clean, because achievements would be totally discredited due to declared doping. And anyone who pushes it too far and lies is thrown out completely.

Probably some gap in my logic there, and would probably be abused, but anyway. Would be interesting, to me at least.

If you're allowing them to take anything then what does it matter if an athlete forgets to declare something?

hans aus dtschl · 08-12-2014 01:04PM

Fwank wizzo wrote: »

Didn't DELETED fail a testosterone test in 2006?
Can't beat good genetics.

Mod: Speculation deleted. Warning for everyone else: DO NOT name players who have not been convicted of a doping offence

With due respect mods, was the redacted player not found guilty and acquitted on appeal? Surely, if Charly Wegelius considers himself to have failed a test (a very analogous example) then redacted is no different?

I'm not debating your decision, merely pointing out that what "Fwank wizzo" wrote wouldn't technically be speculation, but fact?

Zzippy · 08-12-2014 01:27PM

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

With due respect mods, was the redacted player not found guilty and acquitted on appeal? Surely, if Charly Wegelius considers himself to have failed a test (a very analogous example) then redacted is no different?

I'm not debating your decision, merely pointing out that what "Fwank wizzo" wrote wouldn't technically be speculation, but fact?

Posting allegations about a player without any sort of link or evidence cannot be allowed on boards, as it leaves the website open to legal action. If you have a problem with moderation please PM the mods and do not debate a mod action on thread.

hans aus dtschl · 08-12-2014 01:37PM

No, I absolutely didn't question or debate the decision.

And here's the link:

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/matt-oconnor-and-jamie-heaslip-insist-drugs-not-an-issue-in-rugby-30800554.html

hans aus dtschl · 08-12-2014 01:40PM

"Earlier this year the xxx revealed that he had failed a test in 2006, but was later cleared because he has unusually high, naturally occurring testosterone levels in his body to which he partly attributes his remarkable injury record. "

Is this still considered speculation? Apologies if so.

Zzippy · 08-12-2014 02:15PM

No, it's not speculation once it's in the public record. Posting speculation without a link will not be tolerated.

Re the article, a naturally high testosterone level is something that would be evident if a biological passport was in operation, and wouldn't result in a failed test. I'd have a lot more faith in rugby taking doping seriously if they introduced a bio passport, or at least conducted a credible number of tests.

K3v · 09-12-2014 12:54AM

Doping is ingrained every professional sport at all levels in some shape or form. Lets not be naive here.

I managed to play AIL level rugby through my college years 8-10 years ago, and even at that level it was evident. The testing back then compromised of a urine sample taken from 3 random players from each team on the last day of the season. The one memory that sticks with me is of a teammate blessing himself and praying in the dressing room, after being picked, hoping that he would piss a clean sample to pass the test! The sheer ridiculousness of it.

I know its not rugby but you only have to look at how the Soccer world is completely ignoring the doping that is occuring. Franz Beckenbauer admitted to blood doping in the 70's. Look at the Juventus team of Vialli, Ravanelli, Deschamps, Zidane in the mid 90's, the club doctor was found guilty of administering banned substances to the team. Have a look at the link below, it has a brief look at the history of doping in soccer.
http://www.4dfoot.com/2013/02/09/doping-in-football-fifty-years-of-evidence/

Where there is a financial gain to be made, people will cheat & dope.

Brian · 09-12-2014 07:09PM

Oregano_State wrote: »

If some players are taking drugs, it creates and uneven playing field.

I don't disagree with your distaste for doping, and hopefully I don't come across as a steroid apologist, but human genetics already cause significant inequality across player performances, for example in physical proportions or muscle development potential. So while drugs obviously can improve a player's objective performance, the "uneven playing field" already existed in the first place.

Side effects on health are absolutely a great concern.

Eat My Point · 09-12-2014 07:27PM

Brian wrote: »

I don't disagree with your distaste for doping, and hopefully I don't come across as a steroid apologist, but human genetics already cause significant inequality across player performances, for example in physical proportions or muscle development potential. So while drugs obviously can improve a player's objective performance, the "uneven playing field" already existed in the first place.

But the "uneven playing field" due to human genetics is surely crucial to making sports exciting? If guys who wouldn't be athletically the top players in the world are able to dope and make up the difference then it makes the likes of Folau, super athlete that he is, less of a special player as more guys will be close to his level (assuming that he's clean) than should be.

death1234567 · 10-12-2014 10:02AM

Eat My Point wrote: »

If guys who wouldn't be athletically the top players in the world are able to dope and make up the difference then it makes the likes of Folau, super athlete that he is, less of a special player.

He could just dope too and then he'd be a super duper athlete.

Clearlier · 10-12-2014 10:15AM

death1234567 wrote: »

He could just dope too and then he'd be a super duper athlete.

One of the issues with doping is that it's more effective for some than for others. The example often given is cycling and EPO. Very simplistically* it raises the number of red blood cells in your body increasing your ability to carry oxygen. However there is naturally quite a variation in the red blood cell count already in the population and there is a maximum level to which you can get before you die (suspected cause of death of several cyclists). If you imagine that one person has a natural level of 40% and another of 50% and the maximum they can get to is 60% then it's not too hard to imagine that the one with a natural level of 40% has a greater potential benefit than the one with a natural level of 50%.

*Please don't take the time to critique my understanding of physiology, I'm aware that it's lacking but I'm confident that the general point is valid.

CatFromHue · 10-12-2014 11:05AM

Yeah that's the gist of the cycling EPO situation.

Quinlan has an article this morning in the Times on doping.

He's right and like most people on here comments on the real lack of evidence but he doesn't mention the WADA report that showed rugby has a higher rate of failed tests than cycling or athletics.

desertcircus · 10-12-2014 07:46PM

As I said earlier in the thread, a higher rate of failed tests in rugby than in cycling or athletics could be down to a fistful of reasons. If you compared the figures for 2003, both David Millar and Lance Armstrong would be contributing to the lower positive testing rate in cycling.

SaveOurLyric · 10-12-2014 09:01PM

Its all right lads. Quinny has been in the dressing room and checked it out for us. No drugs there. Move along. Nothing to see here.

(Wada talking through their hats or 78 positive tests in rugby last year just a few rogues).

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/alan-quinlan-if-there-was-a-systematic-doping-culture-in-rugby-i-d-have-known-about-it-1.2031781

its_phil · 10-12-2014 09:51PM

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

Its all right lads. Quinny has been in the dressing room and checked it out for us. No drugs there. Move along. Nothing to see here.

(Wada talking through their hats or 78 positive tests in rugby last year just a few rogues).

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/alan-quinlan-if-there-was-a-systematic-doping-culture-in-rugby-i-d-have-known-about-it-1.2031781

Yeah it actually is just a few rogues at the top level of the game. He's only reporting what he saw in his long time as a professioanl and called for more evidence on Kimmage's part other than "they are bigger so they must be on drugs".

Beaner1 · 10-12-2014 10:45PM

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

Its all right lads. Quinny has been in the dressing room and checked it out for us. No drugs there. Move along. Nothing to see here.

(Wada talking through their hats or 78 positive tests in rugby last year just a few rogues).

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/alan-quinlan-if-there-was-a-systematic-doping-culture-in-rugby-i-d-have-known-about-it-1.2031781

THey test a huge amount of amateur players, myself included. You'd get plenty of characters that would be half into he game half into weightlifting. How many pro players have been banned in the past few years?

CatFromHue · 11-12-2014 12:10AM

desertcircus wrote: »

As I said earlier in the thread, a higher rate of failed tests in rugby than in cycling or athletics could be down to a fistful of reasons. If you compared the figures for 2003, both David Millar and Lance Armstrong would be contributing to the lower positive testing rate in cycling.

Yup that's true but equally you can't ignore them either.

desertcircus · 11-12-2014 09:45AM

CatFromHue wrote: »

Yup that's true but equally you can't ignore them either.

True. But the bans in place almost exclusively involve players at lower levels, which seems to suggest that Kimmage is a little wide of the mark. It's a problem, yes, but not the one he claims.

Clearlier · 11-12-2014 09:47AM

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

Its all right lads. Quinny has been in the dressing room and checked it out for us. No drugs there. Move along. Nothing to see here.

(Wada talking through their hats or 78 positive tests in rugby last year just a few rogues).

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/alan-quinlan-if-there-was-a-systematic-doping-culture-in-rugby-i-d-have-known-about-it-1.2031781

To be fair to him all that he's saying is that he never saw any evidence of systematic doping at a team level akin to Armstrong's team in cycling. He doesn't say that there isn't any drugs in the sport and he does mention hearing rumours about certain players in the past.

Yeah_Right · 11-12-2014 01:18PM

Firstly, do I think there are rugby players using PEDs? Yes. Is it widespread at the elite level? No.

I think it would be more of an issue at the lower levels of the game where players are trying to get an advantage to make the next step. This seems to be supported by that link showing rugby players that were banned over in the UK.

There seem to have been very few high profile players caught. The 2 that spring to mind are Chilliboi and the English prop (Stevens?). Some people on here seem to take this to mean that there is a widespread conspiracy/cover up. Kind of like a city in the US saying there aren't many young, black men being killed by cops in our city so therefore the police must be covering it up.

I do remember hearing of some Kiwi and Aussie players being caught over the years but no one very high profile. There were always rumours around the rugby scene in NZ about certain players (at all different levels) but they were just rumours.

To the people that say the size of players is clear evidence that they are using PEDs - from the age of 20-22 while at university, I went from 95kg to 110kg (I'm 1.83cm) just by diet and training. No supplements and no doping. I was only playing amateur club rugby (U21s and Senior Reserves) so it is possible. If I had been in a professional environment I probably could have done it faster.

its_phil · 11-12-2014 01:42PM

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Firstly, do I think there are rugby players using PEDs? Yes. Is it widespread at the elite level? No.

I think it would be more of an issue at the lower levels of the game where players are trying to get an advantage to make the next step. This seems to be supported by that link showing rugby players that were banned over in the UK.

There seem to have been very few high profile players caught. The 2 that spring to mind are Chilliboi and the English prop (Stevens?). Some people on here seem to take this to mean that there is a widespread conspiracy/cover up. Kind of like a city in the US saying there aren't many young, black men being killed by cops in our city so therefore the police must be covering it up.

I do remember hearing of some Kiwi and Aussie players being caught over the years but no one very high profile. There were always rumours around the rugby scene in NZ about certain players (at all different levels) but they were just rumours.

To the people that say the size of players is clear evidence that they are using PEDs - from the age of 20-22 while at university, I went from 95kg to 110kg (I'm 1.83cm) just by diet and training. No supplements and no doping. I was only playing amateur club rugby (U21s and Senior Reserves) so it is possible. If I had been in a professional environment I probably could have done it faster.

Stevens took cocaine IIRC

CatFromHue · 11-12-2014 01:45PM

I don't think there's a conspiracy I just think the testing levels and techniques aren't of the standard required.

Yeah_Right · 11-12-2014 01:50PM

its_phil wrote: »

Stevens took cocaine IIRC

I just looked it up. You are right. Have heard stories from a few Aussie mates about charlie being very prevalent in rugby/league/AFL circles in Australia.

Mods : don't worry I'm not going to name any names.

Larbre34 · 11-12-2014 02:10PM

CatFromHue wrote: »

I don't think there's a conspiracy I just think the testing levels and techniques aren't of the standard required.

Jamie Heaslip would disagree with you. He has alluded that his girlfriend might get jealous of the amount of time he spends with doping testers.

CatFromHue · 11-12-2014 02:14PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

Jamie Heaslip would disagree with you. He has alluded that his girlfriend might get jealous of the amount of time he spends with doping testers.

I'd be comparing to what the cyclist and athletics are doing, not the footballers.

Zzippy · 11-12-2014 03:14PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

Jamie Heaslip would disagree with you. He has alluded that his girlfriend might get jealous of the amount of time he spends with doping testers.

It's hard to reconcile that statement with the number of tests actually carried out on Irish rugby players (posted earlier in the thread). Unless Jamie really really finds it hard to pee in front of another man...

Larbre34 · 11-12-2014 05:18PM

Zzippy wrote: »

It's hard to reconcile that statement with the number of tests actually carried out on Irish rugby players (posted earlier in the thread). Unless Jamie really really finds it hard to pee in front of another man...

Maybe they target him because he has the injury profile of a Terminator T-2000.

Neil3030 · 11-12-2014 05:24PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

Maybe they target him because he has the injury profile of a Terminator T-2000.

Well then there's your problem. The IRFU really need to crack down on mimetic polyalloy usage.

Laurent Benezech - "Doping in Rugby as bad as cycling" [MOD WARNING POST #1]

Comments