Doping in football

Korat

Korat wrote: »

I wonder if they retest old samples like they do in athletics. The best cheating technology is years ahead of the testers ability to detect it but as you see in athletics eventually the testing catches up. If there's a viable sample still in storage it can be tested and the drugs cheat caught and punished years later.

Im guessing they do? Not sure though

Good few in here have extensive knowledge on the subject so they might know

J. Marston

Cool, he'll continue to make cock-ups and 'Pool fans will continue to blame Skrtel.

J. Marston

J. Marston wrote: »

Cool, he'll continue to make cock-ups and 'Pool fans will continue to blame Skrtel.

Nobody blamed Skrtel for spiking Sakho. Don't be silly

Harry Palmr

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

He missed the final. Liverpool lost. It's all good.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Flint Fredstone

Harry Palmr wrote: »

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

You'll hurt your eyes with all that rolling.

Harry Palmr

Your posting hurts mine already.

Andre 3000

Korat wrote: »

I wonder if they retest old samples like they do in athletics. The best cheating technology is years ahead of the testers ability to detect it but as you see in athletics eventually the testing catches up. If there's a viable sample still in storage it can be tested and the drugs cheat caught and punished years later.

I know that in Cycling they do and have done this with a good few years. Jan Ullrich, former Tour winner and finished second to Lance numerous years admitted that he doped after he retired and it was only a few years ago that a sample from a decade ago was retested and was found to have EPO in it. The likes of Chris Froome have openly said that some of their samples have been frozen to be tested again in years.

I think the problem lies in that the chemists are so far ahead of the testers they're developing compounds so precise that they're completely undetectable. Memo Heredia is a fascinating guy who has given interviews on how he ensures 100% undetectability in his products/substances.

Flint Fredstone

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Your posting hurts mine already.

Back at you kiddo.

5starpool

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

Back at you kiddo.

Kiddo :pac:

What age are you, 70? If so then fair comment I guess.

Flint Fredstone

5starpool wrote: »

Kiddo :pac:

What age are you, 70? If so then fair comment I guess.

It's a term of endearment

Flint Fredstone

A lot of people seem to be of the opinion that if the substance is not specifically named on the list then it's all good. That's a fairly simplistic way of looking at things in an age where synthetic drugs can be formulated and distributed pretty quickly. Should new drugs be fair game to use until somebody cops them and adds them to the list?

Once upon a time I used to be able to walk around the corner from my local and buy a bag of Wildcat or Amplified. It was stronger than a lot of the amphetamine and cocaine it was supposed to imitate but it was perfectly legal because it hadn't been on the banned list of drugs in this country.
It was an oversight that was rectified with a blanket ban on such products including any new formula/derivative that comes on the market.
Is there any reason why something similar can't be done in football/sport instead of the situation where there has to be specific mention of a substance?

Sounds like you need a new dealer!

Richard Hillman

The Bloodbags are to be released.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jun/14/operation-puerto-blood-bags-must-be-released-judge-madrid

an interest line I took from this was

This follows a successful appeal by the International Cycling Union, Italian Olympic Committee, Spanish Cycling Federation and World Anti-Doping Agency against a 2013 decision to destroy the blood bags.

Notice the way that UEFA, FIFA and La Liga are absent. I can understand La Liga wanting this to disappear but again, as we have already confirmed, UEFA and FIFA have no interest in outing the cheats.

Andre 3000

Richard Hillman wrote: »

The Bloodbags are to be released.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jun/14/operation-puerto-blood-bags-must-be-released-judge-madrid

an interest line I took from this was


Notice the way that UEFA, FIFA and La Liga are absent. I can understand La Liga wanting this to disappear but again, as we have already confirmed, UEFA and FIFA have no interest in outing the cheats.

The thing is, tennis or football players have no reason to use blood bags. EPO testing was little to non existent back in those years, and even now it's not tested for enough. So blood bags wouldn't be needed. In fact someone on Twitter has apparently got a list of the 36 athletes linked to the 211 bags, 23 cyclists, 12 athletes and one unknown. Even though it's highly probable Fuentes was up to dodgy dealings with top football teams, I'm certain that it won't come out through the release of the bags. You might have a few more cyclists outed, most who are probably retired or no longer give a sh*t really. This ruling has come far too late tbh.

A_Sober_Paddy

Andre 3000 wrote: »

The thing is, tennis or football players have no reason to use blood bags. EPO testing was little to non existent back in those years, and even now it's not tested for enough. So blood bags wouldn't be needed. In fact someone on Twitter has apparently got a list of the 36 athletes linked to the 211 bags, 23 cyclists, 12 athletes and one unknown. Even though it's highly probable Fuentes was up to dodgy dealings with top football teams, I'm certain that it won't come out through the release of the bags. You might have a few more cyclists outed, most who are probably retired or no longer give a sh*t really. This ruling has come far too late tbh.

maybe a tennis player

martyos121

To finally put an end to things:

https://twitter.com/jamespearceecho/status/751484577386995712

ricero

Delighted sakho always seemed like a genuine honest pro.

Hope he sues the knickers of uefa now

Flint Fredstone

ricero wrote: »

Hope he sues the knickers of uefa now

He tested positive for something. If he got off on a technicality I'd say he will be more than happy to put it all behind him and not drag it out any more.

martyos121

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

He tested positive for something. If he got off on a technicality I'd say he will be more than happy to put it all behind him and not drag it out any more.

A wrongful technicality that cost him his place in a Europa League final and the French national team for the Euros, who are close to winning the thing.

He has every right to take action if he wants to, as you said though, whether he will or not remains to be seen, but he certainly has grounds for a strong case.

Flint Fredstone

martyos121 wrote: »

A wrongful technicality that cost him his place in a Europa League final and the French national team for the Euros, who are close to winning the thing.

He has every right to take action if he wants to, as you said though, whether he will or not remains to be seen, but he certainly has grounds for a strong case.

I don't know the full facts. I'm just saying that if he did get off on a technicality... I'm not sure what you mean be a wrongful technicality. Did UEFA definitely mess up or did his lawyers find a loophole that will now be closed off? In the latter scenario you can be sure he wouldn't rock the boat by suing anybody.

martyos121

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I don't know the full facts. I'm just saying that if he did get off on a technicality... I'm not sure what you mean be a wrongful technicality. Did UEFA definitely mess up or did his lawyers find a loophole that will now be closed off? In the latter scenario you can be sure he wouldn't rock the boat by suing anybody.

We can only wait and see I suppose, I'm not going to say too much because I could make an arse of myself if I'm wrong when I don't know the full extent of it. Based on what I do know, UEFA were wrong to have suspended him in the first place and they should be held accountable for that IMO.

martyos121

martyos121 wrote: »

To finally put an end to things:

https://twitter.com/jamespearceecho/status/751484577386995712

Great news for Liverpool.

A bonus that he didn't play during the summer too.

Tough for him missing the finals though

Kerrigooney

Quite a few very disappointed lads on this thread tonight

Alonso77

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I don't know the full facts. I'm just saying that if he did get off on a technicality... I'm not sure what you mean be a wrongful technicality. Did UEFA definitely mess up or did his lawyers find a loophole that will now be closed off? In the latter scenario you can be sure he wouldn't rock the boat by suing anybody.

that didnt stop you shooting your mouth off about from the off though did it?;)

eagle eye

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Quite a few very disappointed lads on this thread tonight

I think some of you Liverpool and United fans get a little carried away about how much anybody really cares.

I don't support either team but Sakho being cleared or not makes very little difference to my world or my interest in anything to do with soccer. It's not like his absence is going to be a disaster or the fact that he is cleared a great boost for Liverpool fc either.

If he is completely innocent I feel sorry for the lad as he is missing out on something special in France.

Flint Fredstone

Alonso77 wrote: »

that didnt stop you shooting your mouth off about from the off though did it?;)

What are you on about. Nobody knows the full facts, why don't you say that to everyone else?
It's a f*cking discussion forum. I've got opinions like everyone else.

Flint Fredstone

eagle eye wrote: »

I think some of you Liverpool and United fans get a little carried away about how much anybody really cares.

I don't support either team but Sakho being cleared or not makes very little difference to my world or my interest in anything to do with soccer. It's not like his absence is going to be a disaster or the fact that he is cleared a great boost for Liverpool fc either.

If he is completely innocent I feel sorry for the lad as he is missing out on something special in France.

Yeah. I think some people are imagining that other people are disappointed. He's decent but always good for a brainfart. It won't affect my day to day life in the slightest.

Also. Quite a few? I was the only non-Liverpool fan that posted before that. Imagination running wild there...

Alonso77

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

What are you on about. Nobody knows the full facts, why don't you say that to everyone else?
It's a f*cking discussion forum. I've got opinions like everyone else.

Most opinions were more..... how should I say?....measured than yours

martyos121

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

What are you on about. Nobody knows the full facts, why don't you say that to everyone else?
It's a f*cking discussion forum. I've got opinions like everyone else.

Yeah, nobody is buying any of that mate.

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

So it looks like Mamadou Sakho will be facing a ban of some sort. Ignorance to the composition of fat burners doesn't wash with me when others before him have apparently suffered the same. Surely clubs would keep tabs on any supplements or medication their players are taking?
I wonder how many others would have a similar story if they were tested.

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

He missed the final. Liverpool lost. It's all good.

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

One would be naive to think that he was taking fat burners for any other reason than to cover up whatever else he was taking.

Kerrigooney

eagle eye wrote: »

I think some of you Liverpool and United fans get a little carried away about how much anybody really cares.

I don't support either team but Sakho being cleared or not makes very little difference to my world or my interest in anything to do with soccer. It's not like his absence is going to be a disaster or the fact that he is cleared a great boost for Liverpool fc either.

If he is completely innocent I feel sorry for the lad as he is missing out on something special in France.

If you don't care and it makes no difference to you then why bother posting about it at all?

Flint Fredstone

martyos121 wrote: »

Yeah, nobody is buying any of that mate.

What???
What is the purpose of that post?
I've posted stuff?

He's used fat burners. My opinion of that is he has used them as a masking agent. That's been my opinion from the start and it's fairly logical.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

He tested positive for something. If he got off on a technicality I'd say he will be more than happy to put it all behind him and not drag it out any more.

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I don't know the full facts. I'm just saying that if he did get off on a technicality... I'm not sure what you mean be a wrongful technicality. Did UEFA definitely mess up or did his lawyers find a loophole that will now be closed off? In the latter scenario you can be sure he wouldn't rock the boat by suing anybody.

Fred, if I;m ever unlucky enough to be tried for something, I really hope you;re not on the jury!

Flint Fredstone

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Fred, if I;m ever unlucky enough to be tried for something, I really hope you;re not on the jury!

This isn't court. For every me there's another gobsh*te saying it's all perfectly fine because he's not been charged. There has to be 2 sides, I'm on the other one.

Flint Fredstone

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

What???
What is the purpose of that post?
I've posted stuff?

Probably the condescending posts.

Saying you don't know the whole facts on one hand and then calling people naive on the other hand when they might question why he was taking fat burners.

Flint Fredstone

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Probably the condescending posts.

Saying you don't know the whole facts on one hand and then calling people naive on the other hand when they might question why he was taking fat burners.

Like everybody else, I'm giving my opinion with the information I'm aware of.
I think it extremely odd for a professional footballers to be taking fat burners.

Flint Fredstone

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

Like everybody else, I'm giving my opinion with the information I'm aware of.
I think it extremely odd for a professional footballers to be taking fat burners.

But as you said yourself nobody knows the full facts.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

This isn't court. For every me there's another gobsh*te saying it's all perfectly fine because he's not been charged. There has to be 2 sides, I'm on the other one.

It's the logic and assumption used to be the other one I was questioning.

Alonso77

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

He missed the final. Liverpool lost. It's all good.

This post you made following Uefa dropping the ban last month negates anything else you said on the matter - showed your true nature on the issue.

Flint Fredstone

Alonso77 wrote: »

This post you made following Uefa dropping the ban last month negates anything else you said on the matter - showed your true nature on the issue.

I don't care. I support Man United. Liverpool losing a final is all good with me, Sakho missing it is all good with me.
This does not mean I can't have an opinion.

Alonso77

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I don't care. I support Man United. Liverpool losing a final is all good with me, Sakho missing it is all good with me.
This does not mean I can't have an opinion.

look, you've had a 'mare and have been shown up with your own quotes.

live and learn as they say :-)

Flint Fredstone

Alonso77 wrote: »

look, you've had a 'mare and have been shown up with your own quotes.

live and learn as they say :-)

Shown up how? "Hey look, you said these things" in reply to me saying I have opinions. Great showing up there...
That post shows nothing.

Alonso77

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

Shown up how? "Hey look, you said these things" in reply to me saying I have opinions. Great showing up there...
That post shows nothing.

You're struggling here. oh the Humanity!

anyway - Doping in football eh?

MD1990

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

What are you on about. Nobody knows the full facts, why don't you say that to everyone else?
It's a f*cking discussion forum. I've got opinions like everyone else.

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

What???
What is the purpose of that post?
I've posted stuff?

He's used fat burners. My opinion of that is he has used them as a masking agent. That's been my opinion from the start and it's fairly logical.

So despite not having all the facts.
You just assume Sakho is using the fat burner's as a masking agent despite him being cleared of doping & being banned from no reason for taking a legal substance.
You posts are getting more & more agitated too as you dig a deeper hole for yourself. Probably best to call it a day & try and come up with a different anti- Liverpool angle.

Flint Fredstone

MD1990 wrote: »

So despite not having all the facts.
You just assume Sakho is using the fat burner's as a masking agent despite him being cleared of doping & being banned from no reason for taking a legal substance.
You posts are getting more & more agitated too as you dig a deeper hole for yourself. Probably best to call it a day & try and come up with a different anti- Liverpool angle.

Correct. I assume the professional footballer that spends his life training to be in peak physical condition is taking fat burners to mask something. It's not something new, bizarre or off the wall.
Just like you might assume Rio Ferdinand had something to hide by missing a drugs test.
This is my opinion. Not a fact. There's no need to whinge about other stuff that you think I might do. Stick to the topic at hand and leave the wah wah stuff at the door.

MD1990

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

Correct. I assume the professional footballer that spends his life training to be in peak physical condition is taking fat burners to mask something. It's not something new, bizarre or off the wall.
Just like you might assume Rio Ferdinand had something to hide by missing a drugs test.
This is my opinion. Not a fact. There's no need to whinge about other stuff that you think I might do. Stick to the topic at hand and leave the wah wah stuff at the door.

Your assuming & giving your opinion in every post. Ferdinand has nothing to do with it
I assume that many pro footballers take legal supplements like fat burners,creatine,whey protein etc to gain an advantage.
Sakho is innocent. The fat burner he used is legal as its not on the banned list. FACT.

Flint Fredstone

MD1990 wrote: »

Sakho is innocent. The fat burner he used is legal as its not on the banned list. FACT.

I'm still of the opinion he used it to mask something that isn't permitted. He should have no need to use fat burners.

Alonso77

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I'm still of the opinion he used it to mask something that isn't permitted. He should have no need to use fat burners.

FFS! thats quite an accusation, opinion or not.

MD1990

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I'm still of the opinion he used it to mask something that isn't permitted. He should have no need to use fat burners.

He had weight issues last summer. Its why Rodgers did not select him at the start of last season. There is the reason.

Flint Fredstone

MD1990 wrote: »

He had weight issues last summer. Its why Rodgers did not select him at the start of last season. There is the reason.

That's your opinion.

MD1990

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

That's your opinion.

Not an opinion a story reported by Tony Barrett a very reliably LFC journalist
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sakho-was-dropped-over-weight-zrnkvxqnh