Ferdinand ban upheld

Pepe LeFrits

Rio Ferdinand's eight-month ban for failing to attend a drugs test remains the same after his appeal hearing.
An independent three-man panel ruled that Ferdinand should remain suspended until 20 September - missing Euro 2004.

"Rio is naturally very disappointed. We believe the suspension was unduly harsh and unprecedented," said Manchester United lawyer Maurice Watkins.

The England defender was originally banned and fined £50,000 in December - a punishment United said was "savage".


However, the Football Association wanted the panel to increase the suspension to 12 months.

The panel decided not to alter the ban, and was content that Ferdinand had not missed the test to avoid detection for a banned substance.

"In reaching its conclusion, the appeal board has discounted the possibility that Mr Ferdinand's reasons for not taking the test were drugs related," said appeals panel spokesman Nick Barron.

The panel, headed by independent QC Ian Mill and also with FA chairman Geoff Thompson and FA councillor Roger Burden retired to consider its verdict at 1515 GMT, with the verdict announced just before 1800 GMT.

While there is no room for further appeal through the FA, if Ferdinand still wishes to fight the outcome of the second hearing, he could take his case to the Sports Arbitrational Panel in Switzerland.

United were top of the Premiership and with the league's best defensive record when Ferdinand started his suspension.

But they have slipped to third in the Premiership and are now 12 points behind leaders Arsenal.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/m/man_utd/3514462.stm

Big Ears

A fair result i beleive

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

eirebhoy

I'd say every one of the heads in the FA feel the ban is harsh but didn't want to reduce it as they'd have every player appealing their bans. Now that I think of it, 8 months is a bloody disgrace.

gandalf

Tough on the lad missing the European Championships like that.

As I said before 8 Months was way too harse but this was driven by FIFA and not the FA.

Well at least he won't have United fans giving him grief over being crap next season as they have seen their defence without him

Gandalf.

kmart6

Thats just plan stupid

NightStrike

Really harsh I think. Wonder will he bother bringing it to the European court? Its stupid to think that players who actually took drugs have gotten off with lighter sentences than this

kaimera

Originally posted by NightStrike
Really harsh I think. Wonder will he bother bringing it to the European court? Its stupid to think that players who actually took drugs have gotten off with lighter sentences than this

where's the proof he didn't take drugs?

the hair test he took isn't conclusive.

ZENER

That means he'll be out until September and it will more than likely take him a month or two to find his feet again, looks like a bad start to the season ahead for Man U unless a new player is bought in the summer.

where's the proof he didn't take drugs?

the hair test he took isn't conclusive.

He wasn't banned for taking drugs so it does'nt matter. The hair test works if the sample is taken within 90 days of the drugs being taken.

Tinky

donhughberto

I am glad he will miss Euro 04, thats the only reason he started his ban in Jan to play in it and he is the one who has cost all us man u fans the season we are having.

Think about it, who misses a drug's test, if it was me it would be top of mind for the entire training session and after it even if i wasn't on anything. I think he used time to get it out of his system and is guilty as hell.

Before people start i am a Utd Fan but 8 months is too little when you consider athletes get 2 years for drug abuse but i also think other FA's have players who were def doing drugs and got sentences reduced to 5 months, that would't help Utd as he would only just be back for Euro 04, so fair play!

Seaneh

They were under too much preasure from FIFA, who were in turn under preasure from the IOC because they still havent signed up to the new doping policy for the olympics.

The Muppet

I,m sorry for Rio that he will miss a major tournament but a reduction in the ban now would have little or no effect on Utds Season . I still think he was treated very harshly but I dont see him appealing to europe as they would be likely to lengthen it.

I hate the double standards Rudetski gets off when found with drugs in his system yet rio gets 8 months even after proving there was no Drugs in his.

Hyzepher

I actually agree with the idea that missing a drugs test should incur a penalty EQUAL or LONGER than a penalty for actually caught taking the drugs. Otherwise people would just not turn up to the test or refuse to take the test at all - knowing that they will receive a lighter ban and still have some doubt whether or not they take drugs.

The 8 month ban for Rio is fair - it sends out the right message and players will think twice about taking drugs or missing tests in the future

Hyzepher

Imposter

I agree there should be serious penalties for missing a drugs test but didn't another premiership player get a far shorter ban for missing a test (a man city player iirc)?

Ferdinand should turn around to the FA and retire from international football. FIFA have made a scapegoat of him and the FA let it happen.

leeroybrown

In my mind the real problem with this situation is that the drug testing system in Soccer is a mess. There appears to be absolutely no accomodation worked out between the various governing bodies and the clubs so that the system runs in any way smoothly.

Ferdinand is unfortunate to have missed the test just after FIFA decided to lay down the law more strongly. He's unlucky to have recieved an 8 month ban that will keep him out of Euro2004. He's also lucky that the FA thought an 8 month ban was enough of a punishment.

Personally, I think he's slightly hard done by to come off with such a long ban when the system is a mess. Unfortunately, they did have to set a precedent (and keep FIFA happy - they may not have wanted him to be in Euro 2004).

cournioni

Originally posted by smiaras
He should have taken nandrolone and he'd have gotten a smaller sentence

Exactly what I was going to say.

cournioni

Originally posted by Imposter
I agree there should be serious penalties for missing a drugs test but didn't another premiership player get a far shorter ban for missing a test (a man city player iirc)?

He got fined £5000 and didn't get banned.

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

Mossy Monk

he broke the rules and is being punished. whats wrong with that?

Hyzepher

Originally posted by PORNAPSTER
He got fined £5000 and didn't get banned.

I think it would be truer to say that he got off lightly rather than Rio getting an unjust penalty.

Originally posted by smiaras
So by that logic they should just turn up and fail, thus getting a lighter sentence?

OK - well maybe not longer but at least as heavy otherwise it just wont work.

Hyzepher

vorbis

as an arsenal fan, that ban is a joke. Players in Italy a la Davids and Couto tested positive and got far shorter sentences. 8 months is ridiculous imo.

uberwolf

All other sports impose much longer bans for similar offences. In that context 8 months is not a joke. It relatively speaking a light ban. Compared to previuos soccer cases it seems harsh, maybe, but all the sports are trying to fall in line with each other.

cournioni

Originally posted by Mossy Monk
he broke the rules and is being punished. whats wrong with that?

Rob some sweets out of a sweet shop and get the death penalty. Whats wrong with that?

uberwolf

Originally posted by PORNAPSTER
Rob some sweets out of a sweet shop and get the death penalty. Whats wrong with that?

nothing.

cournioni

Originally posted by uberwolf
All other sports impose much longer bans for similar offences. In that context 8 months is not a joke. It relatively speaking a light ban. Compared to previuos soccer cases it seems harsh, maybe, but all the sports are trying to fall in line with each other.

Yeah, so Ruzetski gets off with failing a drugs test. Thats certainly falling in line with each other alright. :rolleyes:

leeroybrown

I agree that players who take drugs (performance enhancing or otherwise) should recieve long bans, but this needs to be done in a consistent manner in tandem with a proper set of guidelines and agreed testing procedures.

The problem in this situation is that Ferdinand is being singled out for a high profile precedent setting exercise with no proper groundwork or consistency.

uberwolf

Originally posted by leeroybrown


The problem in this situation is that Ferdinand is being singled out for a high profile precedent setting exercise with no proper groundwork or consistency.

you'll get no argument from me on the consistency front, but they need to bring things in line and thats what Rio has learned. The Rudeski case hinged on the fact that in all likliehood the very people trying to ban him and given him the drugs. Slightly different in fairness.

Big Ears

Originally posted by The Muppet
.
I hate the double standards Rudetski gets off when found with drugs in his system yet rio gets 8 months even after proving there was no Drugs in his.

A hair folicle test covers most recreational but only some peformance ebhancing drugs , so he didnt prove he didnt take drugs . (although that has nothing to do with the verdict as missing a test was the charge )

Also if u look back at some of the old threads when rio got his ban origionaly u will see why the man city player got such a small fine and no ban . (i cant be bother explaining myself)

Thanx 4 The Fish

Originally posted by PORNAPSTER
Yeah, so Ruzetski gets off with failing a drugs test. Thats certainly falling in line with each other alright. :rolleyes:

The drugs that Rusedski took were given to him by the governing body of his association as a supplement. There is a slight difference there.

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

PHB

I don't mind the fact that its an 8 month sentance, I think it should be 2-3 years for missing or failing a drugs test.

However that said, if its a 2 year sentance, I want to see every single player who does it get the two year sentance, and this just isn't happening.
It was a token ban which worked out great for FIFA as MAn United are such a high profile sport.
It worked out even better for them now that Man United have ****ed up their season due to his absence, hammering home more the point that drugs are bad.

If they want to stomp out drugs in sports, kudos, but they should do it evenly and fairly across FIFA world

uberwolf

I think the point is though that the bans had to start increasing at some point, just happened to be Rio because of the profile of the man and club. The next player will probably get a larger ban again until soccer is inline with other sports.

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

The Muppet

Originally posted by PHB
I don't mind the fact that its an 8 month sentance, I think it should be 2-3 years for missing or failing a drugs test.

However that said, if its a 2 year sentance, I want to see every single player who does it get the two year sentance, and this just isn't happening.
It was a token ban which worked out great for FIFA as MAn United are such a high profile sport.
It worked out even better for them now that Man United have ****ed up their season due to his absence, hammering home more the point that drugs are bad.

If they want to stomp out drugs in sports, kudos, but they should do it evenly and fairly across FIFA world

Exactly, It will be very interesting to see what punishment is handed out the next time an Italian or Spanish player is found guily of drug taking. If its any less than 8 months it will make a mockery of drug testing in soccer , If my memory serves me right hasn,t a sentence for a positive test been reduced lately for some foreign player, I think someone (possible smiras) mentioned it here lately

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

The Muppet

Originally posted by smiaras
Kallon's was:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/africa/3476359.stm

"Fifa president Sepp Blatter said his organisation intended to take another look at Kallon's ban after fellow Serie A player, Libyan Al Saadi Gaddafi, received a much shorter ban for the same offence"

Seems he didn't take a look at theirs when he was mouthing off about Ferdinand

Blatters reasoning in this case just hightlights his hypocracy. As has already been stated a Man City player was only fined £5000 for this offence so using the same reasoning Ferdinands ban should also have been reduced.

eirebhoy

Originally posted by donhughberto
I am glad he will miss Euro 04, thats the only reason he started his ban in Jan to play in it and he is the one who has cost all us man u fans the season we are having.

Think about it, who misses a drug's test, if it was me it would be top of mind for the entire training session and after it even if i wasn't on anything. I think he used time to get it out of his system and is guilty as hell.

Before people start i am a Utd Fan but 8 months is too little when you consider athletes get 2 years for drug abuse but i also think other FA's have players who were def doing drugs and got sentences reduced to 5 months, that would't help Utd as he would only just be back for Euro 04, so fair play!

Your a United fan? He had a choice, to start his ban in January or wait til the appeal was dealt with, he decided to start it in January when Fergie had a choice to buy another defender. If he only started it now he would be out til November.

donhughberto

Originally posted by eirebhoy
Your a United fan? He had a choice, to start his ban in January or wait til the appeal was dealt with, he decided to start it in January when Fergie had a choice to buy another defender. If he only started it now he would be out til November.

I don't think he gives a f**k about utd just his england euro 2004 campaign so i am glad he has to miss England as well as utd, some punishment for FA as well as Utd as they wo't win it!

Big Ears

Originally posted by The Muppet
Blatters reasoning in this case just hightlights his hypocracy. As has already been stated a Man City player was only fined £5000 for this offence so using the same reasoning Ferdinands ban should also have been reduced.

muppet since u didnt take my advise on reading why the man city player got a £5000 fine il have to post a link for u

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=131444&perpage=20&pagenumber=3

mr_angry

I agree with Ferdinand's banning for 8 months. I also agree that its very unfair compared to other bans handed out though. I would rather see these bans increased, rather than Rio's ban decreased.

Regarding the appeal though - what new evidence was brought to light in between this and the original hearing? None, as far as I can see. What result did they expect?

laoisfan

my understanding is that Rio was banned for "missing" the test NOT for taking banned substances!!

now, from what i read in all the newspapers (i have not read them all but you know what i mean) Rio and his legal-eagles appealed the lenght of the ban on the basis that he had proof that he had never taken drugs i.e. hair samples

maybe i am missing something here but does not sound a wee bit stupid?

how could they hope to get tha ban reduced? he was never accussed of taking banned substances......mearly being stupid and an idiot for missing a drugs test.

--laoisfan

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

Ronaldo7

I think that is really harsh on Ferdinand. However, it is setting an example. But if this happens to any other footballer in the future and we know it will. They better get the same ****ing treatment or else that is just pure gayness.

The Muppet

Originally posted by Big Ears
muppet since u didnt take my advise on reading why the man city player got a £5000 fine il have to post a link for u

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=131444&perpage=20&pagenumber=3

The Man City player got fined for missing the drug test Ferdinand got 8 months for the exact same offence, no laws were changed between both offences . Mr Blattter decided to have a crackdown as soon as he heard of the ferdinand case put appears to have no problems with other sentences being reduced. As smirias says if a player in Italy got his Ban reduced because of precedent in another case why does the same not apply to the premiership.

uberwolf

there may be more on this elsewhere but this is from todays Independent click me

Dustaz

After last nights interview i think its clear that rio is either very very very very very (and i mean sub-normal) Stupid or guilty as sin.



I agree with PHB that drug bans (both for failing and missing tests) should be long AND consistant. Ive been sayign for ages there is a drug problem in the FA and they really need to sort it out.

Villain

Originally posted by mr_angry
I agree with Ferdinand's banning for 8 months. I also agree that its very unfair compared to other bans handed out though. I would rather see these bans increased, rather than Rio's ban decreased.

Regarding the appeal though - what new evidence was brought to light in between this and the original hearing? None, as far as I can see. What result did they expect?

What he said!!


Ban was correct, previous cases were not, sadly thats what justice systems are all about , as the saying go's.

"Well if thats the law, the laws an ass"

PHB

Does anyone else think that Fergie is pissed at Ferdinand?
I know I would be, It'll be interesting to see what happens in the summer

Villain

Originally posted by PHB
Does anyone else think that Fergie is pissed at Ferdinand?
I know I would be, It'll be interesting to see what happens in the summer

Well I think the club have to take some of the slack, I mean I'm sure some of the officials at the training ground knew he was meant to take the test!!

BaZmO*

Did anybody see the interview last night?

It was like seeing a child being interviewed and a very young and very stupid child at that!

I originally thought that he had in fact taken recreational drugs and missed the test on purpose as he waited for the drugs to leave his system. But having listened to him last night state that he was told twice within an hour that he had to take the test and by his own admission, he forgot to take it!! Like c'mon FFS Rio, you're a grown man and this is a serious issue, take responsibility for your actions. Fair enough it was an honest mistake, but could you imagine driving around without insurance and then getting stopped by the Police and then trying to tell them that you "forgot" to get it! I know what they'd tell you!!

I understand that his argument for being treated unfairly was that he was not given a like for like sentence with other players that had either missed a test or were found positive but I'm sorry Rio, that’s how the law works it’s an arbitrary system. The sentence lengths are there as a guideline and every sentence differs due to the individual circumstances. You only have to look at the difference sentences handing out in courts for the likes of murder, not everybody gets a life sentence. What Rio needs to understand is that with playing for Manchester Utd. and England, “a great honour” in his own words, comes with greater responsibilities and greater scruntiy and he needs to grow and take responsibility for his actions.
And besides, I don’t think there ever was a need for Rio to take a Dope Test, judging by his interview last night it is quite clear that Mr. Ferdinand “is” a Dope!!!


B.

Mighty_Mouse

Are you not ment to comment on an article instead of just plonking the whole thing in as a thread
Rio missed his drug test. Bad timing cos the authorities coming down hard on drugs. But he deserved. I dont believe for a minute someone misses a DRUG TEST after being told twice about it.

Also wasnt the first call he made to the club urologist afterwards.

ps.

If he missed the test he's as good as guilty and should be tried accordingly. * months for taking drugs is not bad