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 all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
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

Sharapova Acute angina!

2

Comments

  • Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Shrap wrote: »
    He didn't. He was only repeating some "phnar, making babies, phnar" texts he got in after he uttered his first Pat "Did you really just say that?" Kenny gem. I was listening, and just sighed.

    He said something approximating "So she'll get a two year ban and can go off and have a baby, or even two, and then come back". Because maybe the career was holding her back from popping out a few sprogs...? :rolleyes:
    Then he got a series of "Phnar, I'll help her out" texts from all the fellas who were hanging in there waiting for Pat to mess up and say acute vagina. That's all that happened, no need to lose your sh1t over it Wibbs ;)

    Oh no! Another Maude! :)

    Creepy old Pat is supposed to say what he likes without anyone remarking on it!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭Jimoslimos


    kneemos wrote: »
    What about Williams?The muscles on that guy.
    Serena doesn't fail drug tests....she just avoids them instead.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Any tennis player who comes out and supports her...I think "et tu"...but that could be my natural cynicism...


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Shrap wrote: »
    That's all that happened, no need to lose your sh1t over it Wibbs ;)
    No mislaying of excreta here, my general take was "meh", but you may want to look elsewhere….
    Candie wrote: »
    You don't have to be humourless to think it's a bit much insulting Dawn French, calling a transexual 'it' or making awkward 'jokes' about a much, much younger woman in the news.

    You just have to have some sense of what's appropriate, something Pat the Plank lacks on occasion.

    But yeah, dem feministers.
    Oh no! Another Maude! :)

    Creepy old Pat is supposed to say what he likes without anyone remarking on it!
    No need to give airtime to that. I thought that day was gone, obviously not.

    As for humour, it's not exactly funny, is it?
    Maude Flanders! A name I've always coveted.

    I'm just going to head off to Jesus camp, so I can learn to be more judgemental.
    bluewolf wrote: »
    You're not allowed dislike things unless it's on the lads' pre approved list, yknow?

    Missing poo all over the shop.
    bnt wrote: »
    One report I saw implies that sponsors are now super-sensitive about anything that could possibly affect their brand, having been burned standing by the likes of Lance Armstrong.
    Whatever about some low level cubicle cog dweller making up advertising copy distant from the source, the companies involved must have been beyond blind not to spot Armstrong was hoovering up the drugs. They all were at the time. They still are, but back then it was beyond obvious. When guys were going up French Alps at the same speed they used to do on the flat and claiming "special training" it was beyond clear it was BS of the highest quality. When middle of the road guys were suddenly winning grand tours it was as good as a positive drugs test*. There were enough whistleblowers and finger pointers and yet nope, let's ignore that the money is coming in. With the Yanks, there was the whole "Go USA!!!" guff they're fond of going on too, which was also masking the cheating. Too many people and too much cash didn't want to know.





    *with cycling, look at the pre EPO days, where drugs were most certainly around, but they wouldn't turn a donkey into a racehorse. All Tour de France winners placed pretty high up from their first tour. In the case of multiple Tour winners they all placed within the top ten in their early days. Greg Lemond joked he was bummed because he didn't win his first tour(came third ). EPO comes out and that goes out the window. Oh and that still holds today. Check out the "drug/doping/cheat free" winners of the last "post drugs" few years and look at their first forays into the Tour De France. And loo at their doctors and supporters and team members. As far as BS goes, the SKY's the limit… As it were. So to speak.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Any tennis player who comes out and supports her...I think "et tu"...but that could be my natural cynicism...
    I'd reckon myself tennis is low enough on the drug stuff. There's a huge amount of skill involved that no drug is likely to improve. So I'd bet a clean player could still compete and win and there are likely a fair number of them. With the lower skilled strength and endurance sports the drugs and other "help" can make a huge difference.

    Now one argument goes that if they're all on drugs and such then the rising tide lifts all boats, but that doesn't appear to be the case medically/scientifically. Individuals seem to respond differently to such regimes. You could have very genetically gifted and talented people where the extra boost gives little and other more mid range talents can get a huge boost in results. it would also depend on the cash behind different people. If they have access to better doctors/pushers they get better results.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Wibbs wrote: »
    No mislaying of excreta here, my general take was "meh", but you may want to look elsewhere….

    Ah stop, it wasn't 'meh'! It was labelling anyone who thought it was out of line as a humourless old biddy. Even though it's perfectly reasonable to find it out of line because.....it was out of line!
    Wibbs wrote: »
    Humourless oul biddies being humourless shock. Though apparently it's empowering to flick the bean to some posh totty bloke taking off his shirt on the latest BBC costume drama.

    And there are people who can object to Pats lack of nous without belonging to the latter camp. Just like there are plenty who can object to the latter without thinking the former is indicative of a lack of humour.

    Calling people who don't agree with your assessment of the situation Maude Flanders types is a little hyperbolic.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Wibbs wrote: »
    I'd reckon myself tennis is low enough on the drug stuff. There's a huge amount of skill involved that no drug is likely to improve. So I'd bet a clean player could still compete and win and there are likely a fair number of them. With the lower skilled strength and endurance sports the drugs and other "help" can make a huge difference.

    I dunno, I appreciate that it has more to do with balls and surfaces, but in recent years there has been a big move away from serve and volley types and towards the big muscular types who just overpower opponents from the baseline, like Nadal or the Williams. Not accusing either of taking drugs, but can certainly see why drugs would be more relevant now when so much is about stamina, training, gym work etc. It might be similar to why the batsmen in baseball used drugs, they wanted to train longer at busting those balls out over the car park.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,688 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Gatling wrote: »
    Seems alot of Russian athletes are known to be using this medicine very long term.

    Think this may not be so accidental

    Plus they say it is usually used for 4-6 weeks at a time, not for 10 years as Sharapova has admitted to. Also the drug is made in Latvia and is banned in the US where she has lived throughout her tennis career. Its not looking good for her.

    AH response: hubba hubba


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    Shrap wrote: »
    He didn't. He was only repeating some "phnar, making babies, phnar" texts he got in after he uttered his first Pat "Did you really just say that?" Kenny gem. I was listening, and just sighed.

    He said something approximating "So she'll get a two year ban and can go off and have a baby, or even two, and then come back". Because maybe the career was holding her back from popping out a few sprogs...? :rolleyes:
    Then he got a series of "Phnar, I'll help her out" texts from all the fellas who were hanging in there waiting for Pat to mess up and say acute vagina. That's all that happened, no need to lose your sh1t over it Wibbs ;)

    Ok if thats the case why are people getting het up about the helping her make babies thing, isn't the saying she should use her time of too have a kid or two the actual offensive thing :confused:

    edit: what I mean is if that what Plank said initially its classically sexist but not creepy, what the people texted in is low brow but is fairly typical across genders for attractive public figures


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,180 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    I think the real drugs story here is - I would probably pay money to see video on Ye Tube of You or somesuch of Pat Kenny completely out of his bin on cocaine. Oh dear, we'll need to go to commercials... :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭colossus-x


    I don't get the comment from Williams. Why does she think Sharapova was courageous? She had no choice and she was given the option of announcing it herself rather than being outed by the body that caught her. Did she mean the press announcement was courageous or what?

    Can't say I feel sorry for her, she's a multi-millionaire ; she can take all the drugs she wants now and she's still young.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    colossus-x wrote: »
    I don't get the comment from Williams. Why does she think Sharapova was courageous?

    Posting pictures of yourself breastfeeding on Facebook is seen by many as 'courageous' these days

    Words don't mean shit these days


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,376 ✭✭✭Shemale


    I think you are all being incredibly harsh on her, she had every single symptom that her medicine cures.

    I love they way she mentions her professionalism yet gets a letters telling her what drugs are banned and she doesn't look at them, if I don't see it, it isn't banned.

    Why is she going on about not wanting to retire, she is 28 and in four years time she will only be 32, plenty of time for tennis....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,180 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    colossus-x wrote: »
    I don't get the comment from Williams. Why does she think Sharapova was courageous?...

    Because she's an idiot. Like most pro athletes it doesn't matter what they think, they need to just shut up and hit the damn ball! :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,376 ✭✭✭Shemale


    Posting pictures of yourself breastfeeding on Facebook is seen by many as 'courageous' these days

    Words don't mean shit these days

    She should get a bravery award, so bloody ruddy brave. :eek:


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Candie wrote: »
    Ah stop, it wasn't 'meh'! It was labelling anyone who thought it was out of line as a humourless old biddy.
    I hate to break it to you, but that take is running at my level of "meh". Anything else you're getting is more about projection. "Humourless old tut tutting biddy" = meh. To be disregarded and filed in the "here we go again" file.
    Calling people who don't agree with your assessment of the situation Maude Flanders types is a little hyperbolic.
    Again with the irony. I extended the benefit of the doubt previously, but now, not so sure.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,309 Mod ✭✭✭✭mzungu


    https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/other-sports/five-questions-maria-sharapova-has-to-answer-1.2565156

    Some good points raised in this article in the IT:
    1) How was Sharapova unaware that meldonium was banned?
    It beggars belief that an elite sportswoman, who employs a legion of advisers, physios and support staff, remained entirely unaware of the new list, which is published in October every year. If they had scanned the list and, as she claims, she was taking the substance for legitimate medical reasons, it would have given them three months to apply for a Therapeutic Use Exemption that would have allowed her to carry on taking it

    2) Did she ever put meldonium down on her sample collection form?
    When they give a sample, athletes are encouraged to write down any medication they are taking, whether or not it is on the prohibited list. Did Sharapova include meldonium on that form over the 10 years she was taking it? It is not mandatory to do so. But if she did not, then why on earth not?

    3) Why did she start taking the drug, for how long and how often did she take it?
    In her bravura press conference, Sharapova said several of her electrocardiography (EKG) tests were irregular and she was magnesium deficient, which prompted her doctor to prescribe the drug in 2006. But on Tuesday, the manufacturers said a typical course only lasts for four to six weeks. It is now incumbent on Sharapova or her team to explain whether she was taking meldonium for that entire period. If not, when was she taking it for and for how long? Nor is the drug licensed for sale in the US (or, indeed, the UK). So where was it prescribed and where did she get it?

    4)Was she aware of the performance benefits?
    Sharapova said in passing that the drug was not performance-enhancing for her. And yet Wada only added it to the list after concluding definitively that it has performance-enhancing properties. Explaining why, UK Anti-Doping’s head of science and medicine, Nick Wojek, said: “If you increase the blood flow to your heart there could be an increase in heart function and physical work capacity. If you’re increasing the blood flow to the heart and muscles, it brings into play endurance and potentially increasing your aerobic capacity.” Again, it seems unlikely that Sharapova could take the drug for 10 years, on and off, and not be aware of its potential performance-enhancing effects

    5) Did she ever apply for a TUE?
    A Therapeutic Use Exemption allows athletes taking a banned substance if they have a legitimate medical reason to do so. Given the way it has been exploited as a grey area by some, the entire TUE process has also come under scrutiny. But under the rules as they stand there are four conditions that allow an athlete to apply for a TUE after a positive test: if there was an emergency treatment or treatment for an emergency condition, an exceptional circumstance that would mean the athlete didn’t have the opportunity to submit a TUE application, if it was a low-level athlete (not applicable here) and, finally, a catch-all “fairness” provision that would allow Wada or the ITF to grant a retroactive TUE if they believed it was fair to do so. Has Sharapova applied for a TUE? If she has, was her application therefore refused?
    Guardian services

    Would be good to get answers to these. Anyways, she will serve out her ban, and then pop back onto the tour in a years time. Maybe even a slot on Oprah's couch to boot. Every body loves a good old fashioned comeback, it's all rock n roll at the end of the day.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    mzungu wrote: »
    Some good points raised in this article in the IT:
    Very much so.
    Would be good to get answers to these.
    We can but hope. Not. Likely a retrospective medical need may be likely. Armstrong's "requirement" for steroids for arse sores springs to mind.
    Anyways, she will serve out her ban, and then pop back onto the tour in a years time. Maybe even a slot on Oprah's couch to boot. Every body loves a good old fashioned comeback, it's all rock n roll at the end of the day.
    +1 So long as she keeps winning and her charms look good in ads and if she can muster the tears, crocodile or not, to fend off the naysayers then she's golden.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Funny thing we had the russian state sponsored accusations not so long ago and now we have this along with possibly several hundred other Russian athletes using this substance it's hard to believe it was a simple mistake


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,390 ✭✭✭Bowlardo


    Anyone sponsored by nike ends up in disgrace
    Tiger, sugarpova, lance Armstrong, Michael Johnson, Flo Jo, there is loads more but can't think of them . They better not **** up rory


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,390 ✭✭✭Bowlardo


    Anyone sponsored by nike ends up in disgrace
    Tiger, sugarpova, lance Armstrong, Michael Johnson, Flo Jo, there is loads more but can't think of them . They better not **** up rory


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,309 Mod ✭✭✭✭mzungu


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Very much so.

    We can but hope. Not. Likely a retrospective medical need may be likely. Armstrong's "requirement" for steroids for arse sores springs to mind.

    Agree. Usually when an excuse for testing positive for a banned substance sounds like a load of codswallop...there's a fair chance it is.
    +1 So long as she keeps winning and her charms look good in ads and if she can muster the tears, crocodile or not, to fend off the naysayers then she's golden.

    Exactly. Sure look at Hingis, she tested positive for coke...then retires immediately. After a few years out of the limelight she pops back onto the doubles tour wins a few slams and all in rosy again.

    Agassi admitted crystal meth too IIRC, but there was not much performance enhancing there. In fact, it explains some of his horrendous performances in the 90s!

    Bottom line...Just Say No kids....and if you do say yes, then all will be forgiven anyway :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭colossus-x


    Anyone sponsored by nike ends up in disgrace
    Tiger, sugarpova, lance Armstrong, Michael Johnson, Flo Jo, there is loads more but can't think of them . They better not **** up rory


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,688 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Gatling wrote: »
    Funny thing we had the russian state sponsored accusations not so long ago and now we have this along with possibly several hundred other Russian athletes using this substance it's hard to believe it was a simple mistake

    Not only that we had the BBC/Buzzfeed investigation of gambling irregularities only a few days before the Australian Open began in January this year. In that scandal it was said that there was eight tennis players competing at the tournament who had previously taken bribes to throw sets. It's been said that match fixing has taken place even at the highest levels. Novac Djockivic then came out and said he had been offered a bribe back in 2008 and refused it point blank. There wasn't exactly an avalanche of other tennis players coming out talking about the bribes they refused like Djockivic did but it makes sense that if gambling syndicates were trying to get to the world no.1 then they were also trying to get to every other player they could, no ranking was too high for them to try set up a fixed match. iirc a lot s suspicion fell on Lleyton Hewitt in the Aussie media as he was a tennis player who at 22 looked like he had the world at his feet but then suddenly his career tapered off.

    All is not well in the game of tennis it seems.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,309 Mod ✭✭✭✭mzungu


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    Not only that we had the BBC/Buzzfeed investigation of gambling irregularities only a few days before the Australian Open began in January this year. In that scandal it was said that there was eight tennis players competing at the tournament who had previously taken bribes to throw sets. It's been said that match fixing has taken place even at the highest levels. Novac Djockivic then came out and said he had been offered a bribe back in 2008 and refused it point blank. There wasn't exactly an avalanche of other tennis players coming out talking about the bribes they refused like Djockivic did but it makes sense that if gambling syndicates were trying to get to the world no.1 then they were also trying to get to every other player they could, no ranking was too high for them to try set up a fixed match. iirc a lot s suspicion fell on Lleyton Hewitt in the Aussie media as he was a tennis player who at 22 looked like he had the world at his feet but then suddenly his career tapered off.

    All is not well in the game of tennis it seems.

    Hewitt is a strange one indeed. It seemed as if he would dominate the men's game at first. This article here sums it up nicely :
    But the words of Sampras after the 2001 US Open final carried greater prophetic weight. Sampras had not lost as much as he had suddenly become obsolete over three sets.

    "The kid is so quick it's unbelievable. I wish I had some of those legs for this old guy.

    "I lost to a great champion. You're going to see this Lleyton Hewitt guy for the next 10 years like you saw me."

    Soon after Hewitt would become the youngest world No 1, at 20 years and nine months, and if Sampras sounded unusually hyperbolic - and he did not sound as in awe after the more seminal defeat to Federer at Wimbledon that year - it was only because most of tennis felt that way.

    That it did not turn out that way has much to do with Hewitt running himself into the ground.

    His knees and hips betrayed him first, requiring major surgeries, and then hand, wrist and back problems hurt him.

    In February this year he had screws inserted in his left big toe, which left him relearning how to walk. He says he has played the last two years on painkillers; his manager says the last five have not been pain-free.

    And so, instead of creating his own golden age, he gently fell in between two, a little less golden for it.

    http://www.thenational.ae/sport/tennis/lleyton-hewitt-the-one-they-left-behind

    For the record, I reckon Hewitt was not involved in match fixing. Just a case of early burn out and injury stifling a hugely promising career.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,688 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Ah thats fair enough on Hewitt, it looks like he had a lot of injuries he never got his speed back after recovering from. I guess many people remember thinking he was taking the mantle over from Sampras and then when it didn't happen questions got asked. Plus never underestimate the Aussie media to create a good rumour.

    Still though if the allegation of 8 players out of 40 (I think?) at the Aussie Open previously drawing the attention of the betting companies for irregular betting patterns is true then there is something seriously wrong in tennis. And I mean not only are certain players corrupt but that also there are Blazers at the top of the sport who see it as their duty to cover up any scandal and minimise it.

    A recent example of this was the head of Irish Tennis who was on RTE on the same day Djockivic told the media that he was offered bribes. She gave an interview on the 6.1 news and categorically stated that absolutely no Irish tennis player has ever fixed matches. It struck me that her instinct was to protect Irish tennis rather than to ask the question that if people are out to bribe the top 50 players then an Irish player who earns €300 a match would be a lot easier to influence. I'm not at all claiming Irish players are up to something but it just struck me the head of Tennis Ireland immediately went into defensive mode rather than keeping an open mind. If that is the kind of attitude that pervades across the administrators of the sport then they will have created a fertile ground for both doping and gambling scams. We all know Andre Agassi admitted to taking crystal meth but got away with a ban because he wrote a letter of apology. The powers that be seemed more interested in protecting one of their biggest draws on the Tour than making sure everyone was playing on a level playing field.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,382 ✭✭✭topmanamillion


    Don't buy any of her excuses. The press conference was clearly an effort to get out in front of it when she knew she was caught.
    She may well have better answers to give but a lot of her excuses just don't add up.
    She has an entire team of experts behind her who's job it is to keep an eye on things like this and they missed it, how many of these people does she plan to fire and are there any in particular she holds responsible?
    Apparently meldonium can only be taken for 6 weeks at a time and is a short term treatment. She reckons she was on it for 10 years?
    Had she declared it as a prescription medication as she is obliged to do?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    Ok if thats the case why are people getting het up about the helping her make babies thing, isn't the saying she should use her time of too have a kid or two the actual offensive thing :confused:

    edit: what I mean is if that what Plank said initially its classically sexist but not creepy, what the people texted in is low brow but is fairly typical across genders for attractive public figures

    Eh...cos that's the part of the report that stands out? I mean, a top athlete getting caught out for performance enhancing drugs really ISN'T that interesting on an Irish level, as it's so typical at this stage. The Plank making one of his classically sexist remarks is far more interesting on an Irish level.

    Either way, it's all very inconsequential and yes, I totally agree with you - the using her time to "relax and have a kid or two" was the offensive part, especially on international women's day! Ha, what a knob - morto for him :o


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    Feel a bit bad for her.she always came across as a hard worker and pretty down to earth.I'm really surprised she's been caught taking performance enhancing drugs.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    A recent example of this was the head of Irish Tennis who was on RTE on the same day Djockivic told the media that he was offered bribes. She gave an interview on the 6.1 news and categorically stated that absolutely no Irish tennis player has ever fixed matches. It struck me that her instinct was to protect Irish tennis rather than to ask the question that if people are out to bribe the top 50 players then an Irish player who earns €300 a match would be a lot easier to influence.
    That's the standard operating procedure M. I can't recall any rep from any sports suggest there was a problem with cheating, not until one or more of them were caught. IMH many if not most of such insiders know it's going on and hope that only isolated cases get snared and they can go onto claim that they run a "clean" sport. In the cycling it got farcical, where whole teams were on aspirin to thin their doped up thick blood(some even died FFS) and whole teams were caught out by tests and other findings and still the reps were claiming the sport was clean. Their egos were massaged by so much cash and kudos that you had Armstrong claiming with a straight face that he was the most tested athlete on the planet and even had the sheer brass neck to sue anybody who claimed he was cheating. Then again he was/is a sociopath, all about himself. Quite the few top sports types can be, particularly the men. The need to win at all costs to themselves and others is what often makes for champions. So when the current cycling crowd claim to be clean I tend heavily towards "yeah right". Sure you have bodybuilder types claim with a straight face that they're clean. That's before we get to Hollywood and men over a certain age with the physiques of Zeus…
    smurgen wrote: »
    Feel a bit bad for her.she always came across as a hard worker and pretty down to earth.I'm really surprised she's been caught taking performance enhancing drugs.
    Yes she does come across as very sound and you don't hear a bad word about her, but she's also a very intelligent and practical individual, knows what her value is and also knows that others are drinking more than Robinsons and in order to compete, likely made the choice to take what was until very recently a drug not on the banned list. I'd bet the farm that if one was to retest last years samples of everyone else on the circuit a few would come up positive for the drug. They just had better advisors so they came off it in time.

    Shrap wrote: »
    Eh...cos that's the part of the report that stands out? I mean, a top athlete getting caught out for performance enhancing drugs really ISN'T that interesting on an Irish level, as it's so typical at this stage. The Plank making one of his classically sexist remarks is far more interesting on an Irish level.
    Still banging that drum? Sheesh.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,309 Mod ✭✭✭✭mzungu


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    Still though if the allegation of 8 players out of 40 (I think?) at the Aussie Open previously drawing the attention of the betting companies for irregular betting patterns is true then there is something seriously wrong in tennis. And I mean not only are certain players corrupt but that also there are Blazers at the top of the sport who see it as their duty to cover up any scandal and minimise it.

    A recent example of this was the head of Irish Tennis who was on RTE on the same day Djockivic told the media that he was offered bribes. She gave an interview on the 6.1 news and categorically stated that absolutely no Irish tennis player has ever fixed matches. It struck me that her instinct was to protect Irish tennis rather than to ask the question that if people are out to bribe the top 50 players then an Irish player who earns €300 a match would be a lot easier to influence. I'm not at all claiming Irish players are up to something but it just struck me the head of Tennis Ireland immediately went into defensive mode rather than keeping an open mind. If that is the kind of attitude that pervades across the administrators of the sport then they will have created a fertile ground for both doping and gambling scams. We all know Andre Agassi admitted to taking crystal meth but got away with a ban because he wrote a letter of apology. The powers that be seemed more interested in protecting one of their biggest draws on the Tour than making sure everyone was playing on a level playing field.

    The inference in the betting scandal was that the big players on the tour have too much to loose, but the journeymen on the challenger tour slogging it out (where most Irish players play) may be more susceptible. Even umpires are now under investigation. This article gives a really good account of some of the goings on: http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/feb/09/tennis-betting-scandal-transparency-corruption
    She has an entire team of experts behind her who's job it is to keep an eye on things like this and they missed it, how many of these people does she plan to fire and are there any in particular she holds responsible?

    Her team (and presumably her) were warned five times that it was going to be banned.
    Apparently meldonium can only be taken for 6 weeks at a time and is a short term treatment. She reckons she was on it for 10 years?
    She never clarified any of that.
    Had she declared it as a prescription medication as she is obliged to do?
    Once it is not on the banned list you don't need to declare it, however you are advised that it is best practice (and in the players best interest) to do so. Sharapova thought otherwise it seems.

    She could have applied to have Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) that allows athletes taking a banned substance if they have a legitimate medical reason to do so. This is from the IT: https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/oth...swer-1.2565156
    5) Did she ever apply for a TUE?
    A Therapeutic Use Exemption allows athletes taking a banned substance if they have a legitimate medical reason to do so. Given the way it has been exploited as a grey area by some, the entire TUE process has also come under scrutiny. But under the rules as they stand there are four conditions that allow an athlete to apply for a TUE after a positive test: if there was an emergency treatment or treatment for an emergency condition, an exceptional circumstance that would mean the athlete didn’t have the opportunity to submit a TUE application, if it was a low-level athlete (not applicable here) and, finally, a catch-all “fairness” provision that would allow Wada or the ITF to grant a retroactive TUE if they believed it was fair to do so. Has Sharapova applied for a TUE? If she has, was her application therefore refused?
    Guardian services

    All very dodgy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Still banging that drum? Sheesh.

    Two posts on the subject? Without having any class of mini-meltdown?! Sorry Wibbs, but anyone can go back and read your own outrage at the outrage for themselves. Have to admit, the side story and your comments have been way more entertaining than the actual story ;) So thanks for the chuckles, for what it's worth...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,168 ✭✭✭chicorytip


    Angina??? I'm luvvina!!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,688 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Wibbs wrote: »
    That's the standard operating procedure M. I can't recall any rep from any sports suggest there was a problem with cheating, not until one or more of them were caught. IMH many if not most of such insiders know it's going on and hope that only isolated cases get snared and they can go onto claim that they run a "clean" sport. In the cycling it got farcical, where whole teams were on aspirin to thin their doped up thick blood(some even died FFS) and whole teams were caught out by tests and other findings and still the reps were claiming the sport was clean. Their egos were massaged by so much cash and kudos that you had Armstrong claiming with a straight face that he was the most tested athlete on the planet and even had the sheer brass neck to sue anybody who claimed he was cheating. Then again he was/is a sociopath, all about himself. Quite the few top sports types can be, particularly the men. The need to win at all costs to themselves and others is what often makes for champions. So when the current cycling crowd claim to be clean I tend heavily towards "yeah right". Sure you have bodybuilder types claim with a straight face that they're clean. That's before we get to Hollywood and men over a certain age with the physiques of Zeus… .

    Thats the problem in a nutshell, you'll always have athletes who cheat. But when the people administering the sport give them tacit approval by taking a 'see no evil' approach then the problem just mushrooms until it becomes systemic like it did in cycling.

    Athletics seems to be infested now too to the point that theres talk of re-setting some world records, iirc Flo-Jo's 10.49 world record in the 1988 Olympics still stands nearly 30 years on and people are scratching their heads as to why no female sprinter has yet managed to break it. If Flo Jo was cheating it makes a total mockery of the event as competitors are aiming for her benchmark and when they don't break it her time is still displayed on the corner of your TV screen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,522 ✭✭✭paleoperson


    As someone clueless looking in...

    What if they had drug searches and surveillance on athletes during big events? For example during Wimbledon, the athletes would be monitored at all times.

    If it saves the sport surely it would be worth it..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,484 ✭✭✭Chain Smoker


    Not sure why this is getting so much discussion, it's extremely common place for pro athletes on that level to have a team of doctors obsessively looking for any kind of excuse to administer a prescription that'll boost performance. She's failed a test for something that was only recently banned, I'm sure several others had the sense to quit on time. Sure she's likely still on things that will be banned at some point or another.

    The fact she wasn't in the know enough to get off it on time at least implies a level of obliviousness to it all for herself at least, you'd imagine someone fixated on finding any possible competitive advantage would be pretty in the know that they're on things which may be put on a banned list at any given time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,313 ✭✭✭darlett


    The anger over 'making babies', yet the diagnosis of acute angina doesnt get any hissing n booing?? Comments about what so and so would like to do to (family man) Beckham are above board though right?

    But Pat is operating in a public forum I head you say. Ah yes...
    Well I mean this is only on the internet and stuff. So like if Pat made a comment on twitter it would be ok? Right so when does someone lose the right to quip? And if you do, can you get it back? Hes not still with the national broadcaster (or maybe he has ties not sure?). Is it about the license fee?

    Seems sometimes people are more offended by who said what rather than what who said.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,651 ✭✭✭greedygoblin


    As someone clueless looking in...

    What if they had drug searches and surveillance on athletes during big events? For example during Wimbledon, the athletes would be monitored at all times.

    If it saves the sport surely it would be worth it..

    I suppose it just comes down to logistics in that case. In bigger tournaments where you might have a couple hundred competitors, it just isn't practical to keep tabs on all of them 24 hours a day. There's also the obvious privacy issues.

    Most sporting organisations nowadays are signed up to WADA's anti-doping code. One of the stipulations of this is that athletes must nominate one hour a day, 365 days a year, no matter where they are in the world to be available for an on-the-spot drugs test. Again, it's just not practical to test every single athlete every day of the year, although drug-testing and these spot-checks are ramped up immediately prior to, during and after major tournaments when the competitors are possibly more likely to juice up.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 373 ✭✭ibstar


    As someone clueless looking in...

    What if they had drug searches and surveillance on athletes during big events? For example during Wimbledon, the athletes would be monitored at all times.

    If it saves the sport surely it would be worth it..

    Steroids aren't necessarily injected exactly prior to the event.

    Most if not all are injected over time as far back as months to build your body up with hormone that will ether store and used when needed by the body,or build resistance to various other hormones or chemicals that your body produces, or cause the production of completely separate hormone in larger quantities within your body.

    As said in previous posts, every athlete is on some kind of steroid at all times. Without them, their bodies would literally burn out with the amount of training they go trough to stay in the game.

    You'd probably never see a player from your local down the road football club recover from a serious injury as fast as top athletes, due t the availability of access they have to substances that we "mortals" don't have.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 373 ✭✭ibstar


    colossus-x wrote: »
    Anyone sponsored by nike ends up in disgrace
    Tiger, sugarpova, lance Armstrong, Michael Johnson, Flo Jo, there is loads more but can't think of them . They better not **** up rory

    they do say 3rd time lucky :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Paul Kimmage on off the ball summed this up. Really, are we shocked?

    Cycling, Athletics, Tennis. Soccer is next, it's too big business yet, but it will come out.

    Rugby denials are a joke.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    As someone clueless looking in...

    What if they had drug searches and surveillance on athletes during big events? For example during Wimbledon, the athletes would be monitored at all times.

    If it saves the sport surely it would be worth it..

    Some drugs are taken weeks before so wouldn't show up. So s Djockavic or a Bolt or whomever needs to be tested all the time.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    K-9 wrote: »
    Soccer is next, it's too big business

    Should have happend during the Armstrong investigation wasn't there a situation where blood apparently from players in the Spanish leagues were found in the Doctor's lab involved in the blood doping scandal when the anti doping agency wanted to test the blood to identify who the bloods belonged to ,a Spanish judge ordered the bloods be destroyed .

    Been rumours about various teams for years


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,789 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Why are people being so outraged that Sharapova was on this drug for the last 10 years. It was only banned approximately 18 days before she got tested for it.

    So, she took an illegal drug for 18 days. She took a legal medicine for the previous ten years.

    It doesn't matter if she had a medical condition or not to warrant taking the medicine, that's not the point. The medicine wasn't prohibited for the past 10 years. And that which isn't prohibited is allowed.

    If she was taking a medicine to improve her performance, so what. It was legal at the time. It was only from banned for 18 days before she was tested.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24,465 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Acute my toe, I replace my blood with Tigers.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,688 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    K-9 wrote: »
    Paul Kimmage on off the ball summed this up. Really, are we shocked?

    Cycling, Athletics, Tennis. Soccer is next, it's too big business yet, but it will come out.

    Rugby denials are a joke.

    iirc Paul Kimmage wrote an article about doping in Rugby about 18 months back. In it he didn't make any specific allegations of doping, if anything the article was just fishing or putting the cat amongst the pidgeons to see what would happen. The reaction he got from the Rugby world spoke volumes, there was a lot of anger towards him over it. Again, why the anger? Surely if these people love their sport they should be out to keep it clean. But no, the default position always seems to be denial.

    I think rugby has been professional since 1995 or so, has there actually ever been anyone caught doping in it yet? None I can remember, we had that fake blood incident a few years back but thats about the only scandal I can recall with rugby. As said before it is human nature that some athletics will try to cheat. It would be pretty astonishing if in 20 odd years of professional rugby that not one of the thousands of players over those two decades has ever taken banned substances.

    Sports administrators like the Tennis Federation or the IRB or who ever should really be realising that in the imperfect world we live in you're always going to have 5% 0r 10% of athletes who cheat. Their default position should be that 'if we're not catching this 5% annually then we're not keeping our game clean and free of doping'. If they don't do that and there is no chance of players getting caught then the practice becomes systemic like it did in cycling and suddenly fans don't know what to think and get turned off the sport completely. I know that happened with me and the snooker match fixing, I used to love snooker but after that scandal (which went right to the top of the sport, world no.1 John Higgins involved) I just couldn't trust the sport any longer and kind of fell out of love with it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,522 ✭✭✭paleoperson


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    Why are people being so outraged that Sharapova was on this drug for the last 10 years. It was only banned approximately 18 days before she got tested for it.

    So, she took an illegal drug for 18 days. She took a legal medicine for the previous ten years.

    It doesn't matter if she had a medical condition or not to warrant taking the medicine, that's not the point. The medicine wasn't prohibited for the past 10 years. And that which isn't prohibited is allowed.

    If she was taking a medicine to improve her performance, so what. It was legal at the time. It was only from banned for 18 days before she was tested.

    Yes, I agree 100%, that's exactly what I thought.

    Even if she was causing long term damage to herself to give her an advantage on the tennis court, that's her own business as long as there is no rule against the particular drug. You could say the same thing for drinking red bull, caffeine or even pushing yourself extremely hard. Getting out of bed on a cold morning with very little sleep is damaging but we all do it..... unless it's on the list athletes can use whatever they want for performance. Perhaps there should be general awareness of what legal substances athletes are using to enhance performance, but they're not generally forced to disclose what they eat/drink/their methods.

    Thing is I think Sharapova is trying to spin it that it really was for health reasons. I used to like Sharapova, but for me if anything's a murky ethical route to take here it's saying that "it was for health reasons not performance" which seems like a ludicrous lie.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,789 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Yes, I agree 100%, that's exactly what I thought.

    Even if she was causing long term damage to herself to give her an advantage on the tennis court, that's her own business as long as there is no rule against the particular drug. You could say the same thing for drinking red bull, caffeine or even pushing yourself extremely hard. Getting out of bed on a cold morning with very little sleep is damaging but we all do it..... unless it's on the list athletes can use whatever they want for performance. Perhaps there should be general awareness of what legal substances athletes are using to enhance performance, but they're not generally forced to disclose what they eat/drink/their methods.

    Thing is I think Sharapova is trying to spin it that it really was for health reasons. I used to like Sharapova, but for me if anything's a murky ethical route to take here it's saying that "it was for health reasons not performance" which seems like a ludicrous lie.

    I never liked Sharapova. Her grunting was enough to put me off her. That said, the way people are going on about it, you'd think she murdered 1000 kids.

    She took a drug that 19 days earlier was legal but wasn't on the day she was tested. Big deal. Give her a ban and move on.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,382 ✭✭✭topmanamillion


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    iirc Paul Kimmage wrote an article about doping in Rugby about 18 months back. In it he didn't make any specific allegations of doping, if anything the article was just fishing or putting the cat amongst the pidgeons to see what would happen. The reaction he got from the Rugby world spoke volumes, there was a lot of anger towards him over it. Again, why the anger? Surely if these people love their sport they should be out to keep it clean. But no, the default position always seems to be denial.

    I think rugby has been professional since 1995 or so, has there actually ever been anyone caught doping in it yet? None I can remember, we had that fake blood incident a few years back but thats about the only scandal I can recall with rugby. As said before it is human nature that some athletics will try to cheat. It would be pretty astonishing if in 20 odd years of professional rugby that not one of the thousands of players over those two decades has ever taken banned substances.

    Sports administrators like the Tennis Federation or the IRB or who ever should really be realising that in the imperfect world we live in you're always going to have 5% 0r 10% of athletes who cheat. Their default position should be that 'if we're not catching this 5% annually then we're not keeping our game clean and free of doping'. If they don't do that and there is no chance of players getting caught then the practice becomes systemic like it did in cycling and suddenly fans don't know what to think and get turned off the sport completely. I know that happened with me and the snooker match fixing, I used to love snooker but after that scandal (which went right to the top of the sport, world no.1 John Higgins involved) I just couldn't trust the sport any longer and kind of fell out of love with it.
    Spot on.
    As far as Rugby goes the desire among players to put on bulk is huge.
    A lot of them, particularly at schools level, are taking countless amounts of "shakes" and vitamins which they are sourcing in bulk online or through other retailers. They simply don't have a clue what they are taking as even medical professionals would struggle to figure out what's in them.
    It reaches right across the sporting spectrum from GAA to rugby to soccer.
    As you rightly say the only way to root out cheaters is through transpirity and rigid regular drug test but major Irish sporting organisations are extremely hesitant to pick at that particular scab.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,162 ✭✭✭strelok


    Spot on.
    As far as Rugby goes the desire among players to put on bulk is huge.
    A lot of them, particularly at schools level, are taking countless amounts of "shakes" and vitamins which they are sourcing in bulk online or through other retailers. They simply don't have a clue what they are taking as even medical professionals would struggle to figure out what's in them.
    It reaches right across the sporting spectrum from GAA to rugby to soccer.
    As you rightly say the only way to root out cheaters is through transpirity and rigid regular drug test but major Irish sporting organisations are extremely hesitant to pick at that particular scab.


    this is your brain on whey!


  • Advertisement
Advertisement