Defending Cheats
Sean
Dave Stewart wrote:
> This is not a troll but I have got to say that I find it pretty disgusting
> to see on one hand people arguing for a moderation in language and on the
> other hand the usual suspects defending cheats who used drugs in sport.
>
> I think that if it's good enough to protect our children from bad language
> then it's also good enough to protect them from people who are promoting
> cheating at sport.
>
> I respectfully and politely ask that those people who encourage and support
> cheating at sport with drugs to restrict those arguments to private e-mail.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Dave.
Yeah Dave, moral defender. You go, girl. :-)
I'm not getting into the drug debate as I know very little about the details,
only what the media have said (an unreliable source as any) but I don't think
there is a need to argue in emails. I don't believe anyone is defending drug
cheats, just providing a different perspective to the argument.
If it was a black and white situation (eg athlete taking performance enhancing
drugs to perform better) I'm sure very few people would support this. But
taking performance enhancing drugs to help a medical condition and returning a
higher then usual reading is as grey as it comes, especially when NRL doctors
have said he was underdosing.
I'd like to see this debate continue, as it is on-topic and interesting.
Just my 2 cents.
Dave Stewart
Greg Pankhurst
>If it was a black and white situation (eg athlete taking performance enhancing
>drugs to perform better) I'm sure very few people would support this. But
>taking performance enhancing drugs to help a medical condition and returning a
>higher then usual reading is as grey as it comes, especially when NRL doctors
>have said he was underdosing.
My initial reaction re: Macdougall was that he should have been told "bad
luck about your disorder, but sod off". I've been putting some more thought
into it, considering the position of both diabetics and
asthmatics......they're both in a similar position, in that they both treat
their disorders using what _can_ be used as performance enhancing agents.
As such, I've reached the conclusion I have no problem w/ MacDougall using
steroids to treat his condition and still playing NRL.
Still doesn't explain why he didn't inform the NRL in the first place, Nor
am I sure it fully explains the high ratio he got pinged for in the first
place.
Greg
Matthew O'Neill
Greg Pankhurst wrote:
>
> My initial reaction re: Macdougall was that he should have been told "bad
> luck about your disorder, but sod off". I've been putting some more thought
> into it, considering the position of both diabetics and
> asthmatics......they're both in a similar position, in that they both treat
> their disorders using what _can_ be used as performance enhancing agents.
> As such, I've reached the conclusion I have no problem w/ MacDougall using
> steroids to treat his condition and still playing NRL.
>
> Still doesn't explain why he didn't inform the NRL in the first place, Nor
> am I sure it fully explains the high ratio he got pinged for in the first
> place.
>
> Greg
I admit to being one who wants MacDougall outed for life but will
still defend the likes of Renouf, S.Mortimer and other diabetics
or asthmatics for a couple of simple reasons.
Everyone knew about Renouf and Mortimer. In their medical
problems, you can't simple overdose or you are a goner. My dad is
diabetic and he has to have a certain amount of sugar, he can't
be under or over or he gets very ill. My mum is asthmatic and no
way is that enhancing, it just gives her some oxygen.
Another problem I have with MacDougall and why I respect the AFL
player is because MacDougall tried to hide his problem, never let
anyone know and really pumped on the stuff because it made him a
stronger person the more he had. MacDougall could overdose,
unlike Renouf.
The only reason he made mention was that he got caught red handed
and is trying to not protray himself as a cheat. He's a cheat, if
he had a problem, he should have gone straight to the NRL, like
Alistar Lynch went to the AFL and worked from there.
MacDougall is a cheat, nothing more can be said, condition or
not, he cheated the game, cheated his club and has been able to
con his fans.
The NRL and before that ARL/NSWRL knew all along about Renouf and
he has since become a great role model for the sport in actively
promoting that diabetics can play sport at the elite level.
As I say to Brett & co who want to rubbish Renouf, he is not
allowed to over or under dose what he is having and what he takes
only makes him function to a normal level. Unlike MacDrugall who
took extra then requited to perform above his playing and
strength levels.
MacDrugall will never be the role model to the game that Renouf
has been or even Alistar Lynch in the AFL.
--
Cheers,
Matt
ICQ - 1444514
Greg Pankhurst
<mat...@rleague.com> wrote:
<rant snipped>
That's all great Matt.....I don't disagree with anything you've said. My
point is now that he has served his full sentence & we know about his
disorder, we can't bar him on the the basis of his illness if we are
prepared to admit diabetics & asthmatics.
Greg
Phil Hobbs
<7kbpli$mup$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>...
of course.... you're right...discussing issues in rugby league is
exactly the same as using gutter language in front of children...foul
language is not an opinion david...its just plain bad manners.
try not to be such a prat in future...
thank you.
Phil Hobbs
>
>I admit to being one who wants MacDougall outed for life but will
>still defend the likes of Renouf, S.Mortimer and other diabetics
>or asthmatics for a couple of simple reasons.
>
>Everyone knew about Renouf and Mortimer. In their medical
>problems, you can't simple overdose or you are a goner. My dad is
>diabetic and he has to have a certain amount of sugar, he can't
>be under or over or he gets very ill. My mum is asthmatic and no
>way is that enhancing, it just gives her some oxygen.
just to clear this up for you matt...ventolin inhalers (as used by
mortimer) contain both amphetamines and steroids and do not give
oxygen. they enlarge the cappillaries in and around the lungs, on a
temporary basis, allowing the lungs to take in more oxygen. most
definitely performance enhancing.
Dave Stewart
Greg Pankhurst <G.Pan...@biochem.usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
> As such, I've reached the conclusion I have no problem w/ MacDougall using
> steroids to treat his condition and still playing NRL.
>
The thin end of the wedge...now the argument becomes 'if it's OK for
MacDougall to use steroids every weekend whats wrong with xyz player using
them to overcome a temporary injury...
This is where allowing cheating with drugs takes you.
If this is rugby league...I'm no longer a fan...sorry.
Dave.
David Smyth
<2spa...@2spamme.exposures.co.nz> wrote:
>This is not a troll but I have got to say that I find it pretty disgusting
>to see on one hand people arguing for a moderation in language and on the
>other hand the usual suspects defending cheats who used drugs in sport.
>
If people are concerned about bad language in this (or any other
newsgroup) I suggest they invest in either CyberSitter or NetNanny.
They have the ability to filter out posts containing expletives.
If you have children then bad language in newsgroups should be the
LEAST of your concerns. There are lots of extremely disgusting images
easily accessible on the net ranging from decapitated bodies to
hard-core pornography. These packages (with the cooperation of the
owners of such sites) can be effective in preventing access to this
kind of material as well.
So it's a little silly to complain about bad language in a newsgroup.
And it's naive to believe such complaints are going to be effective in
what is an open (and potentially anonymous) forum such as a newsgroup.
Brett Teague
>If this is rugby league...I'm no longer a fan...sorry.
I'm sure a lot of people aren't.
Regards...One of them :-)
Brett Teague
>I admit to being one who wants MacDougall outed for life but will
>still defend the likes of Renouf, S.Mortimer and other diabetics
>..My mum is asthmatic and no way is that enhancing, it just gives
>her some oxygen.
It's impossible to discuss a subject such as this with someone like
yourself who has absolutely no idea what they're talking about.
> it just gives her some oxygen.
Pffftttt !
Regards...Brett.
Phil Hobbs
>On Fri, 18 Jun 1999 09:34:39 +1200, "Dave Stewart"
><2spa...@2spamme.exposures.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>This is not a troll but I have got to say that I find it pretty
disgusting
>>to see on one hand people arguing for a moderation in language and
on the
>>other hand the usual suspects defending cheats who used drugs in
sport.
>>
>
>If people are concerned about bad language in this (or any other
>newsgroup) I suggest they invest in either CyberSitter or NetNanny.
>They have the ability to filter out posts containing expletives.
should we have to spend $90 to avoid profanity from those who post it?
you do realise that most i.s.providers have clauses in their terms of
usage agreements relating to these things?
this is why we can complain when they do it....rather than spend a
hard earned $90 on preventative software that may or may not work.
>
>If you have children then bad language in newsgroups should be the
>LEAST of your concerns. There are lots of extremely disgusting images
>easily accessible on the net ranging from decapitated bodies to
>hard-core pornography. These packages (with the cooperation of the
>owners of such sites) can be effective in preventing access to this
>kind of material as well.
i am daughter's net-nanny...she doesn't use it without my being in the
room. simple really.
>
>So it's a little silly to complain about bad language in a newsgroup.
>And it's naive to believe such complaints are going to be effective
in
>what is an open (and potentially anonymous) forum such as a
newsgroup.
you're entitled to your opinion...even if it diverges slightly from
common sense.
common sense dictates that this ng is potentially attractive to
kids...and so it should be, or our game is danger of dying a swift
death. we, as adult participants, are obliged to provide them with a
decent place to visit. can you imagine a rugby league website
peppered with gutter language? no ...me either....so why here?
James Smith
>
> we can't bar him on the the basis of his illness if we are
> prepared to admit diabetics & asthmatics.
You can't bar him full stop. It's against the law.
Jim
Hangloose
<Snip>The thin end of the wedge...now the argument becomes 'if it's OK for
MacDougall to use steroids every weekend whats wrong with xyz player using
them to overcome a temporary injury...
This is where allowing cheating with drugs takes you
My Son (13) uses chortisoid steroids daily to keep him alive. He has used
them since birth.
He also plays League and a number of other sports.
So you would ban him from playing due to no fault of his own because he has
to use a banned substance to stay alive??
Not all situations are cut and dry Mr Stewart. There are allways exceptions
to the norm.
Cliff Stephens
Crooner
"Dave Stewart" <2spa...@2spamme.exposures.co.nz> wrote:
> The thin end of the wedge...now the argument becomes 'if it's OK for
> MacDougall to use steroids every weekend whats wrong with xyz player
using
> them to overcome a temporary injury...
The line has to be drawn somewhere as to when using medications is
acceptable. IMHO, steroids use to overcome injury is definitely
unacceptable.
What we've got to remember is that people who suffer ill health are
just as entitled to participate in sport as those who are healthy. It
wasn't all that many years ago that diabetics were discouraged from a
whole range of activities "in their best interests". Given what we
know now medically, it was rather misguided advice. My best friend
lived under the "you should never have children" sentence from when she
was diagnosed with diabetes at age thirteen but times have changed in
the 25 years since.
Why stigmatise people whose health and in some instances lives are
dependent on drugs? They have a big enough uphill battle as it is.
Sure, crack down on the cheats but let's not forget that not everyone
fits into the same mould.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Brett Teague
>The thin end of the wedge...now the argument becomes 'if it's OK for
>MacDougall to use steroids every weekend whats wrong with xyz player using
>them to overcome a temporary injury...
Hangloose wrote:
>My Son (13) uses chortisoid steroids daily to keep him alive. He has used
>them since birth. He also plays League and a number of other sports.
>So you would ban him from playing due to no fault of his own because he has
>to use a banned substance to stay alive??
>Not all situations are cut and dry Mr Stewart. There are allways exceptions
>to the norm.
Well said Mr Stephens.
I hope your son has a long and enjoyable time playing the sports he enjoys.
Our eldest son (11) is on two steroid based asthma sprays twice a day.
He wanted to play League this year but the local comp only had an under
14s and we weren't letting an 11 yo play in under 14s.
But when the opportunity arises he should have just as much right to play
the sports he enjoys as any other person lucky enough not to suffer from
asthma or your sons condition or any other sundry illnesses that some
people have to endure.
Regards...Brett.
Phil Hobbs
>
><Snip>The thin end of the wedge...now the argument becomes 'if it's
OK for
>MacDougall to use steroids every weekend whats wrong with xyz player
using
>them to overcome a temporary injury...
>
>This is where allowing cheating with drugs takes you
>
used
>them since birth.
>He also plays League and a number of other sports.
>
>So you would ban him from playing due to no fault of his own because
he has
>to use a banned substance to stay alive??
>
>Not all situations are cut and dry Mr Stewart. There are allways
exceptions
>to the norm.
he knows that...his problem lies specifically with australians ... you
won't hear him discuss the principles of any other nation cheating,
taking drugs, ball tampering, match fixing...he only cares about
aussies.
Dave Stewart
Crooner <croo...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:7kec1p$sf0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <7kda9t$22q$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>,
> "Dave Stewart" <2spa...@2spamme.exposures.co.nz> wrote:
> > MacDougall to use steroids every weekend whats wrong with xyz player
> using
> > them to overcome a temporary injury...
>
> acceptable. IMHO, steroids use to overcome injury is definitely
> unacceptable.
>
> What we've got to remember is that people who suffer ill health are
> just as entitled to participate in sport as those who are healthy. It
> wasn't all that many years ago that diabetics were discouraged from a
> whole range of activities "in their best interests". Given what we
> know now medically, it was rather misguided advice. My best friend
> lived under the "you should never have children" sentence from when she
> was diagnosed with diabetes at age thirteen but times have changed in
> the 25 years since.
>
> Why stigmatise people whose health and in some instances lives are
> dependent on drugs? They have a big enough uphill battle as it is.
>
> Sure, crack down on the cheats but let's not forget that not everyone
> fits into the same mould.
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
If you are going to allow player X to use banned drugs to overcome a
permanent disability then why do you not allow player Y to use drugs to
overcome a temporary one?
You people have swallowed the line peddled since day one by the drug cheats
and look at what you now have...
For heavens sake support, tolerate and defend drug cheats as much as you
like but please don't try and tell me this is rugby league anymore.
It is closer to professional wrestling and getting closer by the minute...
Dave.
Norman Bwa
I hope the new asthma tablets in the market improve your sons
problems,and
I think they are not steroid based.
League Observer.
Brett Teague wrote:
> <Snip>
> >The thin end of the wedge...now the argument becomes 'if it's OK for
> >MacDougall to use steroids every weekend whats wrong with xyz player using
> >them to overcome a temporary injury...
> >This is where allowing cheating with drugs takes you
>
> Hangloose wrote:
> >My Son (13) uses chortisoid steroids daily to keep him alive. He has used
> >them since birth. He also plays League and a number of other sports.
>
> >So you would ban him from playing due to no fault of his own because he has
> >to use a banned substance to stay alive??
>
> >Not all situations are cut and dry Mr Stewart. There are allways exceptions
> >to the norm.
>
Hangloose
You can't see the difference between life saving necessity and performance
enhanced cheating?.
I think that is because you are an argumentative, one eyed LOSER
Cliff Stephens
Dave Stewart <2spa...@2spamme.exposures.co.nz> wrote in message
<7kelau$kh1$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>...
>
>Crooner <croo...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>news:7kec1p$sf0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>> In article <7kda9t$22q$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>,
>> "Dave Stewart" <2spa...@2spamme.exposures.co.nz> wrote:
>> > The thin end of the wedge...now the argument becomes 'if it's OK for
>> > MacDougall to use steroids every weekend whats wrong with xyz player
>> using
>> > them to overcome a temporary injury...
>>
Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6
upon which you stand, I think we can all use some of that enlightenment
enhancing stuff you must be on. Maybe then I will clearly understand your
paranoia (or is it a fetish of yours) with cheating, appearances of
cheating, conspiratorial relativity theories ad infinitum.
More than likely I won't, but I'd like to give it my best shot (in the arm).
BTW, I haven't seen one of your "Aussies cheated at cricket" posts for a
while.
Regards,
Philby6¿6
Dave Stewart <2spa...@2spamme.exposures.co.nz> wrote in message
news:7kbpli$mup$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz...
> This is not a troll but I have got to say that I find it pretty disgusting
> to see on one hand people arguing for a moderation in language and on the
> other hand the usual suspects defending cheats who used drugs in sport.
>
> I think that if it's good enough to protect our children from bad language
> then it's also good enough to protect them from people who are promoting
> cheating at sport.
>
> I respectfully and politely ask that those people who encourage and
support
> cheating at sport with drugs to restrict those arguments to private
e-mail.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Dave.
>
>
Dave Stewart
Hangloose <hang...@coolmail.com> wrote in message
news:376af...@iridium.webone.com.au...
> You are one sorry ASS pain in the butt Dave Stewart.
>
> You can't see the difference between life saving necessity and performance
> enhanced cheating?.
> I think that is because you are an argumentative, one eyed LOSER
>
> Cliff Stephens
Sorry you feel the need to get all personal like Cliff.
I had no idea that playing rugby league was now a life saving necessity
rather than a sport or pastime, thanks for putting me straight on that
issue.
Here in Auckland the situation with regard to the Sydney cheats is being
watched with a lot of interest by some rugby people that I know who are
pushing for a relaxation of drug laws that will allow injured players to use
banned drugs to recover faster, you have a similar lobby group in Australia.
It's a recurring theme in the whole drug debate as I am sure you will be
aware of.
I have a zero tolerance of convicted drug cheats such as MacDougal and I
have to say that his spin doctors have done a terrific job in getting people
to feel sorry for this loser.
People say he was only guilty of stupidity, thereby committing an identical
crime themselves. The facts remain that MacDougal was dishonest and lied
about his use of drugs to cheat and Newcastle were aware of it and supported
him. They have now managed to not only have the cheat back early but back
playing representative footy full of steroids.
Go ahead...cheer all you like. Just stop calling it football.
I feel sorry for your son and I too wish him well, but I am not going to
allow pity for the odd individual to ruin what I consider to be the best
game in the world because if a soft line of using drugs to enable people to
play comes into rugby league it will eventually ruin the game completely,
for all of us.
And you don't have to be one eyed to see that.
Dave.
Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6
I'm gonna go out on a limb here, but I have some reservations about the use
of any performance enhancing drugs, medication, call it what you will in
either sport, everyday life or work for that matter. They are simply not
on.
As sad, and as hard as it is to admit, Mr Stewart has a point, misguided in
his delivery perhaps, but a point nonetheless.
The sport, the administration, the paying public are not necessarily
becoming tolerant of drug cheats, the information is being moulded to suit
the circumstances to make it sound like it is the right thing be it at the
time or at some point in the future or past.
Everyone seems to have taken the diabetics/asthmatics viewpoint. I have had
very little exposure to either sufferer, however, understand that without
their prescribed medication there quality of life would be vastly inferior
than it is with the medication. They need it to live. Simple.
Just as simple to understand is that without it their respective lives would
be less than satisfactory and so the medication enhances or increases the
performance of their organs, bodily functions, etc. In a very simplistic
way then, they are enhancing their performance through the use of medication
(I don't like the word drugs in this context).
These afflicted people, wanting to live normal lives take this medication
that without it they would not be able to do many things. They should have
a right to do these many things, except where there are rules, laws and the
like which prevents or prohibits the use of such medication, irrespective of
what their personal and individual circumstances are.
It's as simple as that.
A non-asthmatic could readily use a ventolin (or other brand) inhaler and it
too would increase the oxygen transferal capacity of the parts of hte body
that transfer it, is it then OK for them to use these ? No. Why ? Because
it enhances their physcial capabilities - same as the actual asthmatic.
Like I said before, I haven't lived with an asthmatic or diabetic so I do
not really know what they go through, but you cannot in sport, where rules
apply have rules for some based on their physical capabilities and rules for
those whose capabilities are not on par with the average healthy person.
Brand me whatever you like but that is my viewpoint.
As a Knights supporter, I felt deeply wronged by the actions of the Club and
it's respective players through their indiscriminate use of performance
enhancing drugs, and the lack of communciation on the part of one
individual.
They got their punishment (lenient as it may have been) which was what was
available to them at the time. They have served that time. Agree with it
or not, it's done. Do it again now and you will be gone.
In essence what people seem to be saying is that if you have a medical
condition that prevents you from playing a sport, in this case, professional
rugby league, then you should be entitled to take prescribed medication to
put you at the same level as those without a similar affliction.
Consider then the scenario of a rising star, fit and healthy with no
condition, but who with a little "help" could really go places. Take him to
a "friendly" doctor, diagnose him with say a mild form of asthma or other
similar type condition, prescribe him with the necessary medication to
"assist" his condition and voila, there we have it, the legitimate enhanced
athlete.
Far fetched ?? Maybe not, when you consider that money, sponsorship,
advertising, marketing, fame, fortune etc are waiting at the end of that
lad's line.
<<Philby6¿6 climbs down from the soapbox>>
Hangloose
>
>Hangloose <hang...@coolmail.com> wrote in message
>news:376af...@iridium.webone.com.au...
>> You are one sorry ASS pain in the butt Dave Stewart.
>>
>> You can't see the difference between life saving necessity and
performance
>> enhanced cheating?.
>> I think that is because you are an argumentative, one eyed LOSER
>>
>> Cliff Stephens
>
>Sorry you feel the need to get all personal like Cliff.
*Just the hormones getting all fired up*
>
>I had no idea that playing rugby league was now a life saving necessity
>rather than a sport or pastime, thanks for putting me straight on that
>issue.
*This sport is recomended by my sons doctor,to releave some of the pressure
caused by excessive testosterone levels.*
>Here in Auckland the situation with regard to the Sydney cheats is being
watched with a lot of interest by some rugby people that I know who are
pushing for a relaxation of drug laws that will allow injured players to use
banned drugs to recover faster, you have a similar lobby group in Australia.
It's a recurring theme in the whole drug debate as I am sure you will be
aware of.
>
*Of course only In Australia are there Cheats in sport. Every time there is
a penalty it is because some one cheated. And NZ are famous for the amount
of penalties they give away in matches. (light humour)
Time to give the Us and Them syndrome a rest if you are truley interested in
the well being of LEAGUE*
>I have a zero tolerance of convicted drug cheats such as MacDougal and I
have to say that his spin doctors have done a terrific job in getting people
to feel sorry for this loser.
Once again I do not condone what has happened and I do not think he should
be allowed to play Rep footy. Stupidity or cheating, breaking the rules is
breaking the rules, it is not a good role model for our kids to see.
>
>People say he was only guilty of stupidity, thereby committing an identical
crime themselves. The facts remain that MacDougal was dishonest and lied
about his use of drugs to cheat and Newcastle were aware of it and supported
him. They have now managed to not only have the cheat back early but back
playing representative footy full of steroids.
He actually gains by not taking the steroids. By not taking them his body,
as does my sons, produces an excess of testosterone (very dangerous to the
health as this can cause a total colapse of the adrenal glands).
>
Go ahead...cheer all you like. Just stop calling it football.
I cheer for the game and the clean players (the majority) and football it is
most of us anyway.
>I feel sorry for your son and I too wish him well, but I am not going to
>allow pity for the odd individual to ruin what I consider to be the best
>game in the world because if a soft line of using drugs to enable people to
play comes into rugby league it will eventually ruin the game completely,
for all of us.
>
Pity is not what is needed it is commonsence. If people such as this need
these drugs, which I might add are in everyones body naturally,
and they notify the authorities as per the rules, then they should be
allowed to play any sport that they wish.
What are you proposing to stop Stuart,Renouf and the thousands of others
players, kids included, from playing League.
If this is the case the game I have played and loved to watch since I was 4
years old would be dead within years.
>And you don't have to be one eyed to see that.
I must appologize for the personal attack and will try to keep ye old
hormones in check next time.
However I do beleive you should write more like this, than some of the shoot
from the hip rubbish I have read.
Regards
Cliff Stephens
>
>
Hangloose
You must be kidding right?
Do you have any idea as to the number of Junior footballers that play with
some form of required medication??
Obviously not.
If you have your way League will not be played within a matter of years.
Junior football would cease to exist due to a lack of teams.
<snip>I'm gonna go out on a limb here, but I have some reservations about
the useof any performance enhancing drugs, medication, call it what you will
ineither sport, EVERYDAY LIFE or work for that matter. They are simply not
on.
Hail to you oh God. Try thinging before you type.You want these people to
die just so some crap Moral of yours is satisfied.
I can only hope that you never get one of these life threatening problems.
You of course would not take medication to rectify the problem and would
die.
<snip>Just as simple to understand is that without it their respective lives
would be less than satisfactory and so the medication enhances or increases
the performance of their organs, bodily functions, etc
*They are not enhansing the performance of organs etc they are simply
maintaing the normal standards, as determined by the medical profession.*
<snip>a "friendly" doctor, diagnose him with say a mild form of asthma or
other similar type condition, prescribe him with the necessary medication to
"assist" his condition and voila, there we have it, the legitimate enhanced
athlete.
As with all such things taking medicine / drugs that are not required by
your body have serious concequences in later life. A cheat will cheat no
matter what you do. So rather than make laws for the majority like all other
things in life you want to make laws for the minority.
You obviously just wrote this for the hell of it, cause you surely didn't
think it through.
Cliff Stephens
>
Brett Teague
>Brand me whatever you like but that is my viewpoint.
No. You're entitled to you're opinion, and importantly you're
consistant. ( See the irony here. ) You're saying that Renouf
and MacDougall and Mullins etc etc shouldn't be allowed to
play. I disagree with you, but as I said at least you're fair
dinkum about it and don't have one set of rules for some
and one for another.
It is possible to have discussions in here on emotional issues
and yet keep it friendy. It's just not possible with some particular
people in here.
Regards...Brett.
Dave Stewart
Hangloose <hang...@coolmail.com> wrote in message
news:376af...@iridium.webone.com.au...
>
> Dave Stewart <2spa...@2spamme.exposures.co.nz> wrote in message
> <7ket0p$e25$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>...
> >
> >Hangloose <hang...@coolmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:376af...@iridium.webone.com.au...
> >> You are one sorry ASS pain in the butt Dave Stewart.
> >>
> >> You can't see the difference between life saving necessity and
> performance
> >> enhanced cheating?.
> >> I think that is because you are an argumentative, one eyed LOSER
> >>
> >> Cliff Stephens
> >
> >Sorry you feel the need to get all personal like Cliff.
>
> *Just the hormones getting all fired up*
LOL, Try prozac? (hehe)
> >
> >I had no idea that playing rugby league was now a life saving necessity
> >rather than a sport or pastime, thanks for putting me straight on that
> >issue.
>
>
> *This sport is recomended by my sons doctor,to releave some of the
pressure
> caused by excessive testosterone levels.*
>
OK. No offense but does it have to be league? I know other sports have other
bans in place to though (shrug)
> >Here in Auckland the situation with regard to the Sydney cheats is being
> watched with a lot of interest by some rugby people that I know who are
> pushing for a relaxation of drug laws that will allow injured players to
use
> banned drugs to recover faster, you have a similar lobby group in
Australia.
> It's a recurring theme in the whole drug debate as I am sure you will be
> aware of.
> >
> *Of course only In Australia are there Cheats in sport. Every time there
is
> a penalty it is because some one cheated. And NZ are famous for the amount
> of penalties they give away in matches. (light humour)
> Time to give the Us and Them syndrome a rest if you are truley interested
in
> the well being of LEAGUE*
>
It's not an us and them Cliff. Honest. But to be fair (just for this once
please) there is a specific case or cases in Sydney that are being closely
monitered by people in sports all around the place, I know of people in
Auckland promoting legal drug enhanced recoveries are very enthusiastic
about what is being allowed in Sydney. These things aren't allowed in
Auckland so it's not an us versus them thing. It just that in Aus this thing
is happening and it's going to have very far reaching effects.
>
> >I have a zero tolerance of convicted drug cheats such as MacDougal and I
> have to say that his spin doctors have done a terrific job in getting
people
> to feel sorry for this loser.
>
> Once again I do not condone what has happened and I do not think he should
> be allowed to play Rep footy. Stupidity or cheating, breaking the rules is
> breaking the rules, it is not a good role model for our kids to see.
> >
Kia Ora.
> >People say he was only guilty of stupidity, thereby committing an
identical
> crime themselves. The facts remain that MacDougal was dishonest and lied
> about his use of drugs to cheat and Newcastle were aware of it and
supported
> him. They have now managed to not only have the cheat back early but back
> playing representative footy full of steroids.
>
>
> He actually gains by not taking the steroids. By not taking them his body,
> as does my sons, produces an excess of testosterone (very dangerous to the
> health as this can cause a total colapse of the adrenal glands).
> >
> Go ahead...cheer all you like. Just stop calling it football.
>
>
> I cheer for the game and the clean players (the majority) and football it
is
> most of us anyway.
>
> >I feel sorry for your son and I too wish him well, but I am not going to
> >allow pity for the odd individual to ruin what I consider to be the best
> >game in the world because if a soft line of using drugs to enable people
to
> play comes into rugby league it will eventually ruin the game completely,
> for all of us.
> >
>
> Pity is not what is needed it is commonsence. If people such as this need
> these drugs, which I might add are in everyones body naturally,
> and they notify the authorities as per the rules, then they should be
> allowed to play any sport that they wish.
>
Nope. Sorry.
> What are you proposing to stop Stuart,Renouf and the thousands of others
> players, kids included, from playing League.
> If this is the case the game I have played and loved to watch since I was
4
> years old would be dead within years.
Nope. I'm comfortable with the Renouf's and so forth as there have always
been exceptions to the norm and there are avenues for these people to make
proper applications for exemptions.
MacDougall didn't do that. Whooosh - that was his chance sorry. To me he is
a drug bum. It's not enough to say he was stupid because he had the support
of his club in it. I think he was one of those people that make your sons
case even sadder - i.e. Cheats and bums like MacDougall have ruined it for
the others.
>
> >And you don't have to be one eyed to see that.
>
>
> I must appologize for the personal attack and will try to keep ye old
> hormones in check next time.
No worries.
> However I do beleive you should write more like this, than some of the
shoot
> from the hip rubbish I have read.
>
Hey I understand what I mean...lift yer game :-)
Seriously, it's the medium. Try this before reading my posts...put a smile
on your face...if it's not still there at the end of it you've most likely
taken it the wrong way.
> Regards
> Cliff Stephens
>
Peace,
Dave
Pete
>
> Hangloose <hang...@coolmail.com> wrote in message
> news:376af...@iridium.webone.com.au...
> > You are one sorry ASS pain in the butt Dave Stewart.
> >
> > You can't see the difference between life saving necessity and
performance
> > enhanced cheating?.
> > I think that is because you are an argumentative, one eyed LOSER
> >
> > Cliff Stephens
>
> Sorry you feel the need to get all personal like Cliff.
>
> rather than a sport or pastime, thanks for putting me straight on that
> issue.
>
> watched with a lot of interest by some rugby people that I know who are
> pushing for a relaxation of drug laws that will allow injured players to
use
> banned drugs to recover faster, you have a similar lobby group in
Australia.
> It's a recurring theme in the whole drug debate as I am sure you will be
> aware of.
>
> have to say that his spin doctors have done a terrific job in getting
people
> to feel sorry for this loser.
>
identical
> crime themselves. The facts remain that MacDougal was dishonest and lied
> about his use of drugs to cheat and Newcastle were aware of it and
supported
> him. They have now managed to not only have the cheat back early but back
> playing representative footy full of steroids.
>
>
> allow pity for the odd individual to ruin what I consider to be the best
> game in the world because if a soft line of using drugs to enable people
to
> play comes into rugby league it will eventually ruin the game completely,
> for all of us.
>
>
>
So the playing of Rugby League is just a sport? Then why are there now so
many professional footballers around who see the game as their career?
The sport of Rugby League died years ago and its now all business which is
why the future of the game for some is their clubs ability to sell Pay TV
product for Murdoch/Packer enterprises.
Pete
>
Dave Stewart
Pete <Pe...@zipworld.com.au> wrote in message news:7kf4cc$7t2$1@the-
>
> So the playing of Rugby League is just a sport? Then why are there now so
> many professional footballers around who see the game as their career?
>
Because there are fans with money to pay to watch the sport.
>
> The sport of Rugby League died years ago and its now all business which is
> why the future of the game for some is their clubs ability to sell Pay TV
> product for Murdoch/Packer enterprises.
>
Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. It certainly explains why nowadays it is
acceptable to use drugs to play the sport.
>
> Pete
>
>
>
> >
>
>
Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6
> Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6
> You must be kidding right?
No.
> Do you have any idea as to the number of Junior footballers that play with
> some form of required medication??
> Obviously not.
Correct, however, I'd say I'm equally correct in stating that you don't have
those facts and figures either, do you ?
> If you have your way League will not be played within a matter of years.
> Junior football would cease to exist due to a lack of teams.
It's not MY way, it's my opinion, viewpoint, persuasion. realistically
though, you don't think that will EVER happen, do you ?
> <snip>I'm gonna go out on a limb here, but I have some reservations about
> the useof any performance enhancing drugs, medication, call it what you
will
> ineither sport, EVERYDAY LIFE or work for that matter. They are simply
not
> on.
Did I really type that in uppercase ?
> Hail to you oh God. Try thinging before you type.You want these people to
> die just so some crap Moral of yours is satisfied.
> I can only hope that you never get one of these life threatening problems.
> You of course would not take medication to rectify the problem and would
> die.
Please try to differentitate here between life threatening and other less
debilitating conditions, and don't be so darn naive about it - of course I
would take such medication in such circumstances of life threatening
illness, that was NOT my point.
> <snip>Just as simple to understand is that without it their respective
lives
> would be less than satisfactory and so the medication enhances or
increases
> the performance of their organs, bodily functions, etc
>
> *They are not enhansing the performance of organs etc they are simply
> maintaing the normal standards, as determined by the medical profession.*
>
> <snip>a "friendly" doctor, diagnose him with say a mild form of asthma or
> other similar type condition, prescribe him with the necessary medication
to
> "assist" his condition and voila, there we have it, the legitimate
enhanced
> athlete.
>
> As with all such things taking medicine / drugs that are not required by
> your body have serious concequences in later life. A cheat will cheat no
> matter what you do. So rather than make laws for the majority like all
other
> things in life you want to make laws for the minority.
>
> You obviously just wrote this for the hell of it, cause you surely didn't
> think it through.
>
>
> Cliff Stephens
Au contraire Cliff, I've never posted such a lenghty and verbose
contribution EVER, so to say I did not think about this is way off the mark,
I'm usually your one or two line contributor. I did think, I do think and
that is my viewpoint, like it or lump it.
Regards,
Philby6¿6
> >
>
>
Hangloose
less
debilitating conditions, and don't be so darn naive about it - of course
illness, that was NOT my point.
To quote you on this point :"I'm gonna go out on a limb here, but I have
some reservations about the use of any performance enhancing drugs,
medication, call it what you will in either sport, EVERYDAY LIFE or work for
that matter. They are simply not on".
You did say they are simply not on,Didn't you? How then is this naive?
If an asthmatic doesn't take ventilin it is life threatening, If a diabetic
fails to take insulin it is life threatening, Like to name some of these
less debilitating conditions? What reservation could anyone have to allow
these people the right to play sport and take a nessecary medication?.
I don't have figures No. However I have coached kids for the past 20 years
and have seen enough teams to know that the numbers would stager most
people.
You didn't type in upper case no. It was to highlight the fact that you
have reservations about people taking medication in everyday life.
If you thought about this then it scares me to think that there are people
out there with views like that..
I don't mean anything personal when I reply to these things but after re
reading it it can sound like that.
Regards
Cliff
Phil Dancak formerly Philby6ż6 wrote in message ...
>
>Hangloose <hang...@coolmail.com> wrote in message
>news:376b0...@iridium.webone.com.au...
>> Phil Dancak formerly Philby6ż6
>Philby6ż6
>> >
>>
>>
>
Phil Hobbs
>You are one sorry ASS pain in the butt Dave Stewart.
>
>You can't see the difference between life saving necessity and
performance
>enhanced cheating?.
>I think that is because you are an argumentative, one eyed LOSER
in the words of a fool....
hammer-nail-head.
Bruce Stewart
Shut up Phillip :-)
Regards
SiD
Phil Hobbs
yeah orright!!.......an' that's philip. :o)
Bruce Stewart
> >Shut up Phillip :-)
>
> yeah orright!!.......an' that's philip. :o)
as in Feel eep??
Regards
SiD
Dave Stewart
Bruce Stewart <sl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:376C35B7...@ihug.co.nz...
> Phil Hobbs wrote:
>
> > >Shut up Phillip :-)
> >
> > yeah orright!!.......an' that's philip. :o)
>
> as in Feel eep??
>
I thought it was 'fallop' like jandels (thongs) fillip, fallop, fillip,
fallop..
Philip, flop.
<shrugs>
:o)
> Regards
> SiD
>
Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6
when it relates to actual performance as opposed to mdeication which is
supposed to be assisting with life itself.
Philby6¿6
Hangloose <hang...@coolmail.com> wrote in message
news:376b4...@iridium.webone.com.au...
> Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6 wrote in message ...
> >
> >Hangloose <hang...@coolmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:376b0...@iridium.webone.com.au...
> >> Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6
> >Philby6¿6
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
Phil Hobbs
>Phil Hobbs wrote:
>
>> >Shut up Phillip :-)
>>
>> yeah orright!!.......an' that's philip. :o)
>
>as in Feel eep??
what's eep..?
--
Phil
Phil Hobbs
>>
>> > >Shut up Phillip :-)
>> >
>> > yeah orright!!.......an' that's philip. :o)
>>
>> as in Feel eep??
>>
>
fillip,
>fallop..
>
>Philip, flop.
>
><shrugs>
too funny
Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6
Phil Hobbs <fil...@backsmeup.net.au> wrote in message
news:376c...@wsydnap.rpi.net.au...
> >
> >> >Shut up Phillip :-)
> >>
> >> yeah orright!!.......an' that's philip. :o)
> >
> >as in Feel eep??
>
>
>
> --
>
> Phil
>
>
>
RobSm
<fil...@backsmeup.net.au> wrote:
>Bruce Stewart wrote in message <376C35B7...@ihug.co.nz>...
>>Phil Hobbs wrote:
>>
>>> >Shut up Phillip :-)
>>>
>>> yeah orright!!.......an' that's philip. :o)
>>
>>as in Feel eep??
>
>
>what's eep..?
Feel one & find out!
RobSm
Richard Edlin
>
>In article <7kda9t$22q$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>,
> "Dave Stewart" <2spa...@2spamme.exposures.co.nz> wrote:
>> The thin end of the wedge...now the argument becomes 'if it's OK for
>> MacDougall to use steroids every weekend whats wrong with xyz player
>using
>> them to overcome a temporary injury...
>
>The line has to be drawn somewhere as to when using medications is
>acceptable. IMHO, steroids use to overcome injury is definitely
>unacceptable.
Why? If you allow the use of steroids etc as medications then why not as
performance enhancers?
The argument that steroid use is unfair is predicated on the assumption that
they're illegal, or at least not available to all. If steroids were
legalised, is there a problem?
The further argument that they're not safe isn't one necessarily holds water
... if the players choose to use them, then it's their own health they're
jeopardising. I don't believe that any contact sport is actually safe -
that's part of the idea of contact.
The only argument that I see as a reason for not allowing steroids as
performance enhancers is that the ideals of sport posit that the players
compete, not their chemists. Introducing artificial elements into the game
stops it from being a contest between the players themselves - as does the
medication argument.
>What we've got to remember is that people who suffer ill health are
>just as entitled to participate in sport as those who are healthy.
Under the current system, able bodied athletes are less entitled than the ill
ones if the sick can be given an advantage by virtue of their illness.
Richard.
Richard Edlin
said ...
>
><<Philby6¿6 climbs onto the soapbox>>
>
>of any performance enhancing drugs, medication, call it what you will in
>on.
I can see you have an argument in sport but definitely not in either everyday
life or work ... most of what we do in everyday life doesn't have the same
gladitorial element to it that sport does. Surely what you envisage would
simply be a death sentence to those who require the medication?
Richard.
Phil Hobbs
>
shhh.....we need not sink to it's levels. :o)
Phil Hobbs
>
>Feel one & find out!
now just why the hell do you think i wanna know what one is...? :o)
Brett Teague
>Under the current system, able bodied athletes are less entitled than the ill
>ones if the sick can be given an advantage by virtue of their illness.
But the diabetics and asthmatics and those who suffer from other medical
conditions aren't given an advantage. They're simply helped to acquire a
relatively normal state of health.
I'm sure any one of them would gladly swap places and medication with
someone who doesn't suffer one of these conditions. I'm equally sure
that no one would want to swap places with them.
Regards...Brett.
Richard Edlin
said ...
>
>Richard Edlin wrote:
I'm certain of that too ... part of what I'm trying to do is to work out what
positions everyone's actually holding. What about mild asthmatics ... I very
rarely use Ventolin and when I need to use it, it really does help. I could
go to a doctor, describe the symptoms of a mild asthma attack, register
"normal" on peak flow (yes, I know the problems here) and be given access to
an inhaler, all without ever actually having had any symptoms whatsoever.
Would an athlete feigning disease be doing anything wrong if they asked for
medication they didn't need? Is this something that the league has to just
hope doesn't happen?
Richard.
Richard Edlin
Bruce Stewart
> Bruce Stewart wrote in message <376C35B7...@ihug.co.nz>...
> >Phil Hobbs wrote:
> >
> >> >Shut up Phillip :-)
> >>
> >> yeah orright!!.......an' that's philip. :o)
> >
> >as in Feel eep??
>
> what's eep..?
>
The french pronunciation Fee leep
Regards
SiD
Richard Edlin
> I know there are some incompetant doctors around but I don't think there's
> many who couldn't pick up someone faking asthma.
During the middle of an asthma attack, sure ... what about going to the
doctor and complaining of asthma-like symptoms that happen 'once in a
while'?
> Obviously the NRL should have their own idependant doctors evaluate
> each case. That being the case anybody feigning asthma would get
> caught out with the first touch of the stethescope (sp) Not to mention
> the x-rays.
I've never had an x-ray done ... my asthma was never bad enough to
warrant it.
Richard.
Brett Teague
>>I'm sure any one of them would gladly swap places and medication with
>>someone who doesn't suffer one of these conditions. I'm equally sure
>>that no one would want to swap places with them.
Richard Edlin wrote:
>I'm certain of that too ... part of what I'm trying to do is to work out what
>positions everyone's actually holding. What about mild asthmatics ... I very
>rarely use Ventolin and when I need to use it, it really does help. I could
>go to a doctor, describe the symptoms of a mild asthma attack, register
>"normal" on peak flow (yes, I know the problems here) and be given access to
>an inhaler, all without ever actually having had any symptoms whatsoever.
>Would an athlete feigning disease be doing anything wrong if they asked for
>medication they didn't need? Is this something that the league has to just
>hope doesn't happen?
I know there are some incompetant doctors around but I don't think there's
many who couldn't pick up someone faking asthma.
Obviously the NRL should have their own idependant doctors evaluate
each case. That being the case anybody feigning asthma would get
caught out with the first touch of the stethescope (sp) Not to mention
the x-rays.
Regards...Brett.
Phil Hobbs
>
>The french pronunciation Fee leep
missed that....but then...i ain't french. :o)
P.J.Davies
Hangloose wrote:
:You can't see the difference between life saving necessity and performance
:enhanced cheating?
>I had no idea that playing rugby league was now a life saving necessity
>rather than a sport or pastime, thanks for putting me straight on that
>issue.
An asthamatic taking their medication should not be barred from playing
RL if it isn't performance enhancing. Maybe we should ban people who
drink alcohol as this is performance enhancing. Of course if we did this
we'd have to issue alcohol exemptions on the basis of cultural hypocrisy
or we'd have very few players.
>Here in Auckland the situation with regard to the Sydney cheats is being
>watched with a lot of interest by some rugby people that I know who are
>pushing for a relaxation of drug laws that will allow injured players to use
>banned drugs to recover faster, you have a similar lobby group in Australia.
>It's a recurring theme in the whole drug debate as I am sure you will be
>aware of.
I've had similar arguments put to me using the US football perspective.
They're professionals who play a violent game which ensures much
injury and so why should they not use medical science to help them
recover. This is not the case in Rugby League as evidenced by the
recent cases.
>I have a zero tolerance of convicted drug cheats such as MacDougal
>and I have to say that his spin doctors have done a terrific job in
>getting people to feel sorry for this loser. People say he was only guilty
>of stupidity, thereby committing an identical crime themselves. The facts
>remain that MacDougal was dishonest and lied about his use of drugs
>to cheat and Newcastle were aware of it and supported him. They have
>now managed to not only have the cheat back early but back playing
>representative footy full of steroids.
It is a worry but surely MacDougall is being tested and is not above the
allowed limits. I shudder at the words zero tolerance but that's mainly
to do with drugs outside sport.
>Go ahead...cheer all you like. Just stop calling it football.
>I feel sorry for your son and I too wish him well, but I am
>not going to allow pity for the odd individual to ruin what I
>consider to be the best game in the world because if a soft
>line of using drugs to enable people to play comes into rugby
>league it will eventually ruin the game completely, for all of us.
The game has been slowly dying because the people who
run it have made their rule changes while under the influence
of alcohol and have turned it into a bash and barge affair
where steroids becaome useful.
>And you don't have to be one eyed to see that.
I agree that steroids should be banned but what
about those PE drugs which can't be detected?
No sport can ever be free of this problem.
Pete
P.J.Davies
> So the playing of Rugby League is just a sport? Then why are there now so
>many professional footballers around who see the game as their career?
Because in the sixties they decided that RL would have to become more
popular or it would die. Now it seems to rate well on TV and some want
to make it their career.
>The sport of Rugby League died years ago and its now all business which
>is why the future of the game for some is their clubs ability to sell Pay TV
>product for Murdoch/Packer enterprises.
It died when they shafted JJGiltinan before Rupert was born.
Pete
P.J.Davies
>Just as simple to understand is that without it their respective lives would
>be less than satisfactory and so the medication enhances or increases the
>performance of their organs, bodily functions, etc. In a very simplistic
>way then, they are enhancing their performance through the use of medication
True but who would be allowed to play if all medication (including alcohol)
were reason to ban someone?
>(I don't like the word drugs in this context).
This is because you have been brainwashed by ??? to think
that drugs are bad (illegal) and medication is good (legal)
when they are in fact the same thing. Words are used like
this all the time. When the US wanted to ban cannabis they
called it marijuanna so that it would be associated with
mexicans (the enemy) and the media had no trouble
demonising this herb. As a brilliant Texas senator said
during the debate "Mexicans are crazy and it's this here
stuff (mj) that makes em crazy".
Remember alcohol is a drug.
Pete
Dave Stewart
P.J.Davies <peter....@anu.edu.au> wrote in message
news:3770545C...@anu.edu.au...
I agree that the Aussie drug cheats are being watched with a lot of interest
world wide. My main opposition tio this new tolerance is because i am aware
of what moves are being promoted to introduce banned drugs to help rugby
players recover from injyuries faster.
To me this is simply not on. Alarm bells should have rung in everyone head
when the proponants for cheating with drugs said "the injury was a result of
playing the game".
make no mistake, this is the way the cheats will bring in 'quick fixes' to
rugby league.
> >I have a zero tolerance of convicted drug cheats such as MacDougal
> >and I have to say that his spin doctors have done a terrific job in
> >getting people to feel sorry for this loser. People say he was only
guilty
> >of stupidity, thereby committing an identical crime themselves. The facts
> >remain that MacDougal was dishonest and lied about his use of drugs
> >to cheat and Newcastle were aware of it and supported him. They have
> >now managed to not only have the cheat back early but back playing
> >representative footy full of steroids.
>
> It is a worry but surely MacDougall is being tested and is not above the
> allowed limits. I shudder at the words zero tolerance but that's mainly
> to do with drugs outside sport.
>
MacDougall is being used by the interests of the drug companies.
Unfortunately for them they couldn't get anyone more credible than a
cheating drug bum to pioneer quick drug based fixes into league gyms but
they must be laughing at how many seemingly intelligent people (along with
the expected boofheads) have fallen for the argument hook, line and syringe.
Zero tolerance is usually associated with other drugs, notably cocaine,
another substance some seem soft on lately??? but I believe that the stakes
are too high.
Some people will suffer, but the game won't be compromised and that's whats
most important. I think we have compromised the game enough in this regard.
Too much even?
> >Go ahead...cheer all you like. Just stop calling it football.
> >I feel sorry for your son and I too wish him well, but I am
> >not going to allow pity for the odd individual to ruin what I
> >consider to be the best game in the world because if a soft
> >line of using drugs to enable people to play comes into rugby
> >league it will eventually ruin the game completely, for all of us.
>
> The game has been slowly dying because the people who
> run it have made their rule changes while under the influence
> of alcohol and have turned it into a bash and barge affair
> where steroids becaome useful.
>
LOL. Can't argue with that.
> >And you don't have to be one eyed to see that.
>
> I agree that steroids should be banned but what
> about those PE drugs which can't be detected?
> No sport can ever be free of this problem.
>
Fair enough, should we make it worse ot better then?
> Pete
>
Thanks for a sensible contribution.
Dave.
>
>
Richard Edlin
>
> An asthamatic taking their medication should not be barred from playing
> RL if it isn't performance enhancing. Maybe we should ban people who
> drink alcohol as this is performance enhancing.
I don't know ... doesn't alcohol impair performance? ;-)
Still, I suppose the extra blood would probably be useful in the middle
of a game ...
Richard.
Brett Teague
>> I know there are some incompetant doctors around but I don't think there's
>> many who couldn't pick up someone faking asthma.
Richard Edlin wrote:
>During the middle of an asthma attack, sure ... what about going to the
>doctor and complaining of asthma-like symptoms that happen 'once in a
>while'?
No doctor is going to prescribe Asthma medication to a patient presenting
no symptoms of asthma. Let alone the NRL medical consultants granting
a player permission to use banned substances to control a condition of
which a player shows no symptons.
>> Obviously the NRL should have their own idependant doctors evaluate
>> each case. That being the case anybody feigning asthma would get
>> caught out with the first touch of the stethescope (sp) Not to mention
>> the x-rays.
>I've never had an x-ray done ... my asthma was never bad enough to
>warrant it.
I'm sure players such as Mullins who are permitted to use banned substances
to control a bitch of a thing like asthma have done more than gone to a doctor
and said " I've got asthma, give me some Ventolin, Atrovent, Briconal and
Flixotide please."
An x-ray would be one of the first tests done.
You can't fake asthma and get away with it with a doctor Richard.
Regards...Brett.
Richard Edlin
>
> Brett Teague wrote:
> Richard Edlin wrote:
> >I've never had an x-ray done ... my asthma was never bad enough to
> >warrant it.
>
> I'm sure players such as Mullins who are permitted to use banned substances
> to control a bitch of a thing like asthma have done more than gone to a doctor
> and said " I've got asthma, give me some Ventolin, Atrovent, Briconal and
> Flixotide please."
I doubt you could get any of the last three without cause but I'm pretty
sure that Salbutamol (Ventolin)
> An x-ray would be one of the first tests done.
For serious asthma, yes. Because of personal experience, I'm not
convinced about mild asthma, however.
> You can't fake asthma and get away with it with a doctor Richard.
I'm not convinced but I don't think either of us is going to change our
minds :-)
Richard.
Brett Teague
>I'm not convinced but I don't think either of us is going to change our
>minds :-)
Obviously not. And no surprise there either having just read the Big
Hitters post where he has revealed that you're a moron.
I've been interacting with you for several years now and never picked
up on this. What an ASSet the Big Hitter is in this NG.
BTW, can you belch the _second_ verse of "Advance Australia Fair"?
Well.....Can Ya ?
Regards...Brett.
Matthew O'Neill
Brett Teague wrote:
>
> Obviously not. And no surprise there either having just read the Big
> Hitters post where he has revealed that you're a moron.
Who hasn't been called a moron by the tiny kiddy in here?
Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6
Richard Edlin
> BTW, can you belch the _second_ verse of "Advance Australia Fair"?
> Well.....Can Ya ?
No, I get bored and switch to Oprah :-)
Richard.
Richard Edlin
> Matthew O'Neill <mat...@rleague.com> wrote in message
> news:377231A4...@rleague.com...
> > Who hasn't been called a moron by the tiny kiddy in here?
> Me.
Just wait, I know it's hard but he's got so many people to abuse :-)
Richard.
Matthew O'Neill
Phil Dancak formerly Philby6¿6 wrote:
>
> > Who hasn't been called a moron by the tiny kiddy in here?
>
> Me.
What, kidding me right. Did kiddy say you wear womans underwear
them?
--
Cheers,
Matt
ICQ - 1444514
P.J.Davies
P.J.Davies wrote:
:I've had similar arguments put to me using the US football perspective.
:They're professionals who play a violent game which ensures much
:injury and so why should they not use medical science to help them
:recover. This is not the case in Rugby League as evidenced by the
:recent cases.
>I agree that the Aussie drug cheats are being watched with a lot
>of interest world wide.
I thought we were of little significance on the world stage.
>My main opposition tio this new tolerance is because i am aware
>of what moves are being promoted to introduce banned drugs to
>help rugby players recover from injyuries faster.
Well if they're using banned drugs users will be tested and exposed.
I assume they're banned because they're dangerous but don't know
for sure. I can see what you're getting at with the MacDougall case.
Under medical supervision they may or may not be dangerous or
give unfair growth but i don't know so i'll bow to medical science.
>To me this is simply not on. Alarm bells should have rung in everyone head
>when the proponants for cheating with drugs said "the injury was a result of
>playing the game".
This puzzled me. Maybe it's a worker's compensation thing.
>make no mistake, this is the way the cheats will bring
>in 'quick fixes' to rugby league.
An injury in RL is part of the game and therefore progress
is made by injuring an opponent. Here is where the game
business argument comes in. If you were a doctor and
someone came to you because he was too sick to work
you wouldn't say "I can't give you drugs for your 'condition'
because it's not fair on your competitors. They are fitter and
should get the chance to take your place".
>Zero tolerance is usually associated with other drugs, notably cocaine,
>another substance some seem soft on lately??? but I believe that the
>stakes are too high.
Is Cocaine a performance enhancer?
>Some people will suffer, but the game won't be compromised and that's whats
>most important. I think we have compromised the game enough in this regard.
>Too much even?
Where do we draw the line? No red meat? No pills? No dietary supplements?
A professional athlete these days can't eat an unsupervised meal. I suppose
it's the price they pay.
: I agree that steroids should be banned but what
:about those PE drugs which can't be detected?
:No sport can ever be free of this problem.
>Fair enough, should we make it worse ot better then?
Better but how?
I don't know but i think many Aussies are just as
intolerant of drug cheats as you. Not that there's
anything wrong with that.
Pete
P.J.Davies
P.J.Davies wrote:
:An asthamatic taking their medication should not be barred from playing
:RL if it isn't performance enhancing. Maybe we should ban people who
:drink alcohol as this is performance enhancing.
I don't know ... doesn't alcohol impair performance? ;-)
Drinking before the game probably would.
Many banned substances do too. eg. THC
>Still, I suppose the extra blood would probably be useful
>in the middle of a game ...
Prolonged use of alcohol does effect the body. It is a
painkiller and most players have used it. But it is a
cultural exemption not scientific.
Pete