Doping in football

Frankie Lee

Common sense suggests that the use of PEDs is widespread in football, how widespread and how it is covered up is the only thing available for debate.

Rugby Union is also guaranteed to have a problem with PEDs considering lax drug testing (extremely rare for high profile fails), the physical nature of the sport and the demanding schedule. There is also a win at all cost mentality in the sport.

The_Kew_Tour

This is not Football related so might bore some.

But for anyone with interest on the topic of PED might find this worth a read (about 10 minutes read). Its more about American Sport but still excellent piece.


http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8904906/daring-ask-ped-question

764dak

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I agree but when I look at how they reached those heights I just don't see it mainly down to drugs. I don't think comparisons with cycling or athletics are accurate either. Cycling seems to be a sport that realies all on physical skills - strength and enduance mainly, same with athletics. In football you can be a big, strong,fast, fit etc as you like, if you can't control a football you are toast. I don't see a Barca/Spainish team that is fitter than everyone else, I don't see a team that is bigger/stronger than everyone else I just see a team that has a group of players that is far better with a football than everyone else.

"A Track Team That Also Plays Soccer"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304520804576347784258478942.html

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

It's hard to take the quoted person (in the OP) seriously as he appears to have a massive bias against Barca, although I don't believe for a second that football is drug free, and I certainly don't think every country doesn't engage with it to some extent. Football is largely a business these days, and to think that there hasn't been any real high-profile "busts" in recent times (with the exception of Mutu - which was cocaine afaik) is quite hard to believer, considering the stakes.

However, I don't believe for a second they tell the players. The modern day footballer is an idiot, and to think not one player has come out and said anything about it raises questions as to whether it does go on or not. Also, I don't think some players, for example, Iniesta, Messi and Casillas, would be happy if it did go on, which is why I believe, most players anyway, would be oblivious to it.

Richard Hillman

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I agree but when I look at how they reached those heights I just don't see it mainly down to drugs. I don't think comparisons with cycling or athletics are accurate either. Cycling seems to be a sport that realies all on physical skills - strength and enduance mainly, same with athletics. In football you can be a big, strong,fast, fit etc as you like, if you can't control a football you are toast. I don't see a Barca/Spainish team that is fitter than everyone else, I don't see a team that is bigger/stronger than everyone else I just see a team that has a group of players that is far better with a football than everyone else.

It would in the last 30 mins of a game. Im sure you played some sort of football yourself even if its a bit of astro with your mates. When you are tiring, it becomes harder to do the basic tasks of earlier in the game because your legs dont feel the same and they are not as respondent as they were earlier.

Israel_Dagg

Seaneh wrote: »

Suplement use in underage rugby, especially senior schools level, is almost universal. When I played under age, which is over 10 years ago, hald the lads I played with took whey and creatine and from talking to coaches the last few years and younger players it's almost standard now. From 15 onwards kids are being encouraged to take whey and creatine to help with muscle mass gain and recovery. When I was in AIT the Bucc's underage players and Connacht academy players who were based in Athlone (studying in AIT) used to use the AIT gym with bucc's coaches several times a week and every single one of them was skulling shakes in the locker rooms after sessions.


Rugby also has an extremely disproportionate amount of players who apparently have asthma, it's well known that certain drugs on the banned list can be exempt for asthmatic treatments, the Irish senior team being a prime example.

To think there isn't doping in rugby at a senior level is extremely naive and to think that under age players aren't using supplements is just silly.

I don't class whey protein and creatine as doping.

On a side note I know of a minor county footballer getting €50 worth of protein a month.

Israel_Dagg

Frankie Lee wrote: »

Common sense suggests that the use of PEDs is widespread in football, how widespread and how it is covered up is the only thing available for debate.

Rugby Union is also guaranteed to have a problem with PEDs considering lax drug testing (extremely rare for high profile fails), the physical nature of the sport and the demanding schedule. There is also a win at all cost mentality in the sport.

The schedule isn't too bad. You often see teams resting players in a week giving them a week off.

Seaneh

Israel_Dagg wrote: »

I don't class whey protein and creatine as doping.

On a side note I know of a minor county footballer getting €50 worth of protein a month.

Neither do I, but you said that suplements weren't used in Junior rugby, and I stated they were, as I'd seen it myself and have been told as much by current and recent under age players and coaches.

Israel_Dagg

Seaneh wrote: »

Neither do I, but you said that suplements weren't used in Junior rugby, and I stated they were, as I'd seen it myself and have been told as much by current and recent under age players and coaches.

I meant illegal supplements, sorry.

Seaneh

Israel_Dagg wrote: »

I meant illegal supplements, sorry.

Ah, I've just never seen PED's called supplements before :P

ha.

Blatter

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

This is not Football related so might bore some.

But for anyone with interest on the topic of PED might find this worth a read (about 10 minutes read). Its more about American Sport but still excellent piece.


http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8904906/daring-ask-ped-question

When you look at the list of irregularities that would bring players under a cloud of suspicion with regards doping, there are **** loads of soccer players that perfectly match a lot of those..

• Skip the Olympics (which has much stricter drug testing) in your prime for any dubious reason and you're on the list.

• Enjoy your best season in years in your late 30s, four or five years after your last "best season," and you're on the list.

• If you're a skinny dude who miraculously managed to add 20 pounds of muscle to your scarecrow frame, you're on the list.

• If you chopped down the recovery time of a debilitating injury to something that just didn't seem possible a year ago, you're on the list.

• If you were really good and really ripped at a really young age, and now your body is breaking down much sooner than it should be breaking down, you're on the list.

• If you're exhibiting a level of superhuman endurance that has little correlation to the endurance of any of your competitors, you're on the list.

Israel_Dagg

Blatter wrote: »

When you look at the list of irregularities that would bring players under a cloud of suspicion with regards doping, there are **** loads of soccer players that perfectly match a lot of those..

Like?

764dak

Israel_Dagg wrote: »

Like?

Barca/Spain players

mitosis

764dak wrote: »

Barca/Spain players

Well, I suppose if you can't beat them accuse them of cheating, eh?

dreamers75

How can a drug make you play better? Imo it could make you run longer as in stamina and endurance but its not going to make your touch, vision, ability better. Dont think it can make you faster either as unlike other sports football is dynamic, athletics and cycling i can see how it can clearly affect an athlete.


if such a drug exists i would like to buy some.

764dak

dreamers75 wrote: »

How can a drug make you play better? Imo it could make you run longer as in stamina and endurance but its not going to make your touch, vision, ability better. Dont think it can make you faster either as unlike other sports football is dynamic, athletics and cycling i can see how it can clearly affect an athlete.


if such a drug exists i would like to buy some.

http://fussballdoping.derwesten-recherche.org/en/2013/01/doping-is-useless-in-football-thats-a-myth/

Why do commentators and folk always make excuses for players for missing penalties, doing rubbish passes, poor shot attempts during late periods of games or extra time? Players' technique, altertness, vision are worse when they are tired.

Funny to see Whey, a by product of cheese mentioned!

Morzadec

IT HAS been a compelling week in Spanish football. Then again, most weeks are.

Lionel Messi scored for the 12th consecutive game in La Liga and brought his tally for the season to 32, while Barcelona’s great rivals Real Madrid added to the commotion by losing at 16th place Granada, the winning goal scored by Cristiano Ronaldo. An own goal, that is.

Now the unending drama switches from domestic to European competition and here again great theatre is guaranteed. Barcelona are about to face AC Milan in the last 16 of the Champions League and Real Madrid are readying themselves for the visit of Manchester United. It’s one great player after another and one thrilling spectacle after another in Spain. It’s no wonder that the other person of the week in their game, Inaki Badiola, didn’t get a particularly warm reception when he said his piece. For Badiola offered a glimpse of the underbelly of the Spanish game and nobody really wanted to take a look. Nobody ever does when the subject matter is doping.

Badiola is a former president of Real Sociedad and whether the establishment likes it or not, his status gives him credibility. In an interview with the AS newspaper last week, Badiola revealed that in the early years of the millennium, in a regime previous to his own, Real Sociedad employed the infamous doping doctor, Eufemiano Fuentes, who is currently on trial in Madrid as part of the famed Operation Puerto. Badiola stated that he discovered annual payments to Fuentes of almost €328,000 and that he sacked two of the club’s doctors when he realised what had been going on. The payments were repeated for a number of years.

Another newspaper, El Pais, has published documents which they claim show that El Real (Sociedad) used the services of Fuentes.

To add to the intrigue, the previous regime that Badiola was talking about (or one of them) was that of former president Jose Luis Astiazaran, who is now president of the body that governs La Liga. Astiazaran has since issued a complete denial of Badiola’s accusations, but Badiola has not backed off one inch.

Badiola said that the use of performance-enhancing drugs appeared widespread at the club. “Real Sociedad acquired medicines for €328,000 [£282,000] that were not listed in the accounts,” said Badiola. He then sacked doctors, Eduardo Escobar and Antxon Gorrotxategi. “They acquired substances which were not authorised,” Badiola said. “In my years, 2008 and 2009, there were no strange medical practices. We did an audit of the previous six years. We have not gone against the players and we do not know if all were subjected to such practices. No names were mentioned. Our investigation was directed against the physicians. I think in football doping may not be as necessary as, for example, in cycling.

“The system is poorly regulated, there is a failure and doping is way ahead, with doctors who can cover it up perfectly. There are urine tests which does not seek EPO, which denotes a neglect and an unwillingness to clean up this sport... What is certain is that, in 2008, our board publicly denounced doctors Eduardo Escobar and Antxon Gorrotxategi because, in the six seasons before us, at least, the directors paid for medicines or products which at that moment were categorised as used in doping. These were acquired with dirty money on the black market.”

Astiazaran said in reply that he had no knowledge or suspicion of illegal practices in his time as president from 2001-2005 and insisted that had he seen anything he would have taken “proper forceful and diligent action”. He accused Badiola of dealing in falsities and reserved the right to sue.

Wherever the truth sits, it is a fact that Fuentes is on trial at the moment and it is another fact that he has admitted to treating not just cyclists but more than 100 other athletes from different sports, including football and tennis. Fuentes has said that he didn’t give his athletes performance-enhancing drugs, but there is a procession of bike riders who will testify that he did, that he was something of an overlord in the doping game, a man who used to refer to 
himself as El Importante.

One of his cycling clients, the self-confessed doper Jesus Manzano, has said in the past that he saw “well-known footballers” visiting Fuentes at his clinic. Who were they? Well, we’re not allowed to find out. The Fuentes trial has been deemed a cycling-only affair. The names of the other clients who visited one of the great godfathers of doping will remain a secret unless the trial judge has a change of mind.

All of this breeds suspicion and intrigue. Why no names of the other athletes on the books of a man that another cycling client, Jorg Jaksche, described as a “doping genius”? Why no insistence on transparency across the board? “Doping 
exists in football,” said Marcel Desailly, the World Cup winner with France in 1998. “That’s so obvious it would be stupid to deny it.” But plenty do. 
Plenty in Spain for starters.

When Badiola revealed his version of Real Sociedad’s past he was met with denial from the very top of the game in Spain. “Thanks be to God, there is no doping,” the president of the Spanish FA, Angel Maria Villar, told El Pais. “Well, very little, so little that the cases given are just an anecdote to an anecdote. In Spain, players take many tests each weekend and nobody is found to be positive. That is the reality. The rest is just talk, talk, talk...”

In dismissing the story, Villar, also vice-president of Uefa and Fifa, sounded like the men of the UCI who once declared as a fact that Lance Armstrong was not doping. “Never, never, never...”

Villar had an ally in Vicente Del Bosque, manager of the national team. Del Bosque said: “I have not seen (doping) before, and I don’t think I will see it. My eyes have never seen it. It is a 
subject that I prefer to ignore.”

Spain as a sporting country is notoriously lax in the battle against dopers. Tyler Hamilton once wrote that in Spain a juiced-up cyclist could go around the country with an EPO syringe taped to his forehead and still never get busted. There is a permissive attitude to doping there, a reluctance to investigate suspicion and come down heavily on the guilty. The comments of Villar and Del Bosque speaks to this psychology of indifference.

It’s just all “talk, talk, talk...” There is “no doping...” Del Bosque has never seen it and he doesn’t think he ever will. Ever? He doesn’t think that a doper will ever penetrate the holy land of Spanish football?

They already have, of course. Quite how Del Bosque has forgotten the case of Athletic Bilbao’s Carlos Gurpegi is hard to fathom, for it was an epic saga that stretched on for four years and bounced around from court to court, commanding headline after headline before the midfielder’s two-year ban for testing positive for the banned substance nandrolone was finally upheld.

“Talk, talk, talk...” There was plenty of it surrounding the case of Everton Giovanella of Celta Vigo and Francisco Borja Aguiretxu also of Celta Vigo and Frank de Boer of Barcelona and Nauret Perez of Las Palmas, all of whom tested positive for banned substances in Spanish football, the very place where Del Bosque has spent much of his footballing life and has gone through it all seemingly without ever noticing these stories. De Boer was initially banned for a year for testing positive for nandrolone. It was a very big deal in 2001. Del Bosque must have missed it. Strange, though, given that De Boer was a Barca player at the time and Del Bosque was managing Real Madrid.

There is also the unexplained case of Luis Del Moral, another of the A-list doping doctors in cycling and his assertion that he has in the past worked with Barcelona and Valencia players. What work? And who with? Del Moral is not likely to talk given that he is banned for life from practising in any sport sanctioned by the World Anti-Doping Agency. Shouldn’t the Spanish authorities want to know?

Badiola is merely a messenger, but you know what they do with messengers. It would have been heartening to hear Villar, the supposed protector of the sport, coming out last week in response to Badiola and saying that he wanted to meet him and get to the bottom of what exactly it is he is alleging and what evidence he has to support it. Instead, with a depressing predictability, he attempted to rubbish him.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/tom-english-spanish-football-clouded-by-doping-claims-1-2777732

Giruilla

dreamers75 wrote: »

How can a drug make you play better? Imo it could make you run longer as in stamina and endurance but its not going to make your touch, vision, ability better. Dont think it can make you faster either as unlike other sports football is dynamic, athletics and cycling i can see how it can clearly affect an athlete.


if such a drug exists i would like to buy some.

At the top level of football even slight advantages in stamina and endurance far far outweigh the benefits of having large superiority in skill and ability.

As someone else the touch and vision of any player greatly decreases with tiredness anyway.

I for one have huge doubts about barcelona.

evil_seed

PEDs will not enhance your skill levels. If you have got high skill levels this will rarely deminish. However if you add PED us to an individual that already has very high skill levels then you increase their power, endurance, and recovery

Bodhisopha

Giruilla wrote: »

At the top level of football even slight advantages in stamina and endurance far far outweigh the benefits of having large superiority in skill and ability.

As someone else the touch and vision of any player greatly decreases with tiredness anyway.

I for one have huge doubts about barcelona.

A slight advantage in stamina far far outweighs the benefits of superiority in skill and ability. Not just superiority, but a large superiority as you put it?

Catch yourself on.

Giruilla

Bodhisopha wrote: »

A slight advantage in stamina far far outweighs the benefits of superiority in skill and ability. Not just superiority, but a large superiority as you put it?

Catch yourself on.

At the top level of football over the course of 90 mins yes. At the top level of football pressing and ball retention have become one of the most important aspects of the game.. both of which require high fitness levels.

You make a great point by repeating what I said by the way.

The_Kew_Tour

dreamers75 wrote: »

How can a drug make you play better? Imo it could make you run longer as in stamina and endurance but its not going to make your touch, vision, ability better. Dont think it can make you faster either as unlike other sports football is dynamic, athletics and cycling i can see how it can clearly affect an athlete.


if such a drug exists i would like to buy some.

But stamina is some important aspect of the game.

The_Kew_Tour

Just seen there that Australia has been at centre of major drugs issue now too.

I say in the next couple of years we will find out stuff that will turn peoples heads.

pbowenroe

Seaneh wrote: »

Suplement use in underage rugby, especially senior schools level, is almost universal. When I played under age, which is over 10 years ago, hald the lads I played with took whey and creatine and from talking to coaches the last few years and younger players it's almost standard now. From 15 onwards kids are being encouraged to take whey and creatine to help with muscle mass gain and recovery. When I was in AIT the Bucc's underage players and Connacht academy players who were based in Athlone (studying in AIT) used to use the AIT gym with bucc's coaches several times a week and every single one of them was skulling shakes in the locker rooms after sessions.


Rugby also has an extremely disproportionate amount of players who apparently have asthma, it's well known that certain drugs on the banned list can be exempt for asthmatic treatments, the Irish senior team being a prime example.

To think there isn't doping in rugby at a senior level is extremely naive and to think that under age players aren't using supplements is just silly.

And what is wrong with whey protein shakes and creatine? It's as if they're taking steroids, the way you're writing about it.

pbowenroe

Seaneh wrote: »

Neither do I, but you said that suplements weren't used in Junior rugby, and I stated they were, as I'd seen it myself and have been told as much by current and recent under age players and coaches.

AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH USING PROTEIN AND CREATINE SUPPLEMENTS

The_Kew_Tour

They're taking more then supplements from what I have heard.

Owen_S

pbowenroe wrote: »

AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH USING PROTEIN AND CREATINE SUPPLEMENTS

The majority people are just not informed. Their 'knowledge' of creatine and whey comes from muscle mags and advertisements, and actually believe some of the BS claims that come in those advertisements (i.e. you will gain 20lbs of muscle in 6 weeks etc.).

Something which is just as bad as the ignorance of basic supplements is the naivety shown towards performance enhancing drugs. Even watching something as simple as 'Bigger Stronger Faster' would greatly improve the understanding of the topic, and eradicate a lot of the idiotic comments on here.

PhlegmyMoses

Am I missing something or has nobody in this thread actually suggested that Creatine and Whey Protein are illegal PEDs?

Frankie Lee

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Am I missing something or has nobody in this thread actually suggested that Creatine and Whey Protein are illegal PEDs?

Nobody has at all, I think someone gave the example of underage players being required/encouraged to take the likes of creatine from younger and younger ages.

The Australian case will be worth watching closely as Rugby Union will almost certainly be involved.

Pro. F

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Am I missing something or has nobody in this thread actually suggested that Creatine and Whey Protein are illegal PEDs?

Nobody has. If only there were performance enhancing drugs to help people follow threads better and then they wouldn't be so confused about Seanah's post.

wadacrack

The physical demands of football are so high and with so much money involved there is bound to be doping imo. To what extent nobodys knows. FIFA will do all they can to keep this under wraps.

AdamD

• If you're exhibiting a level of superhuman endurance that has little correlation to the endurance of any of your competitors, you're on the list.


Xavi fits into this quite well IIRC, there was an article a while back showing how he runs 1km more than most of the top CMs per game yet still plays 60/70 games per year.

The_Kew_Tour

I wonder has anyone done research on players running distance throughout a game now compared to last 10 years for players still playing throughout that time.

Would make for interesting reading.

Richard Hillman

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

I wonder has anyone done research on players running distance throughout a game now compared to last 10 years for players still playing throughout that time.

Would make for interesting reading.

I remember hearing on either Sky Sports or,SSN that players in the EPL run around 30% more now than 15 years ago.

The_Kew_Tour

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I remember hearing on either Sky Sports or,SSN that players in the EPL run around 30% more now than 15 years ago.

That does not really surprise me too much little higher then I thought but not that shocked. Sports have moved on in every aspect since then.
I be more interested in players who are in their 28/29/30's now covering more yards then they were in their early 20's.

Brain Stroking

Bodhisopha wrote: »

A slight advantage in stamina far far outweighs the benefits of superiority in skill and ability. Not just superiority, but a large superiority as you put it?

Catch yourself on.

I think you need to catch yourself on. Once a player gets tired his skill levels and output decreases. If he doesnt get tired his skill levels will remain constant and sharp. So, in the last 20 minutes of a game, doping could mean you are both fitter and more skilful than your opponents.

So as i said, catch yourself on

Mars Bar

Brain Stroking wrote: »

I think you need to catch yourself on. Once a player gets tired his skill levels and output decreases. If he doesnt get tired his skill levels will remain constant and sharp. So, in the last 20 minutes of a game, doping could mean you are both fitter and more skilful than your opponents.

So as i said, catch yourself on

Catch yourself on?

Bodhisopha

Brain Stroking wrote: »

I think you need to catch yourself on. Once a player gets tired his skill levels and output decreases. If he doesnt get tired his skill levels will remain constant and sharp. So, in the last 20 minutes of a game, doping could mean you are both fitter and more skilful than your opponents.

So as i said, catch yourself on

Yeah, thanks for the science lesson Professor.

A slight advantage in stamina still doesn't far outweigh the benefits of a large superiority in skill and ability, does it?

Catch yourself on.

elefant

Catch yourself on?

mitosis

Nothing sharp, I hope!

Xavi6

elefant wrote: »

Catch yourself on?

A culchie phrase for "Cop on" I believe.

Mars Bar

Xavi6 wrote: »

A culchie phrase for "Cop on" I believe.

Faux culchie. As a culchie, I've never heard such a phrase.

Brain Stroking

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Yeah, thanks for the science lesson Professor.

A slight advantage in stamina still doesn't far outweigh the benefits of a large superiority in skill and ability, does it?

Catch yourself on.

Have you ever played sport of any kind? "A slight change" in stamina can be the difference. At professional level the difference would be huge. It isnt even tired limbs that i am talking about. It is a tired mind which leads to poor decision making and concentration. A drop in any of those things is enough for a team that is on top of their game to turn a 1-0 deficit into a 2-1 victory.

Your catch-all sentence ie
"A slight advantage in stamina still doesn't far outweigh the benefits of a large superiority in skill and ability, does it?"
absolutely misses the point. At a Junior soccer game in Dublin there may be a relatively big skill difference between the best and worst player on the pitch. At professional level the margin becomes much tighter whereas simply being a team with better concentration is enough to gain an advantage and win.

So, to summarise, doping would have a massive difference in professional football. Any team that dopes has a huge advantage.

stooge

Visited a physio for the Irish athletics team a few years ago and he assured me that most top class premiership players were on PED's of some sort. Find it fairly hard to believe to be honest. Then again, I remember Alex Ferguson commenting on Barcelona after one of the Champions league finals saying that they had an unusually good run without injuries and knocks.

Maybe it was a dig at possible doping or maybe it was just an off the cuff remark. Either way, a lot of well known people were 100% convinced Armstrong wasnt on drugs wheile at the same time lesser known people were trying to convince that he was.....

Brain Stroking

Mars Bar wrote: »

Catch yourself on?

Read who i was replying to and you'll find where the comment originated. Not that it matters but do you read threads from the bottom of the page upwards? Are you google-translating this whole thread into farsi?

Brain Stroking

Xavi6 wrote: »

A culchie phrase for "Cop on" I believe.

Xavi in muddying the waters in the football doping thread. How ironic. Mind your heart mate.

ArmaniJeanss

A huge amount of Xavi's 'running' will be a little 5 metre dash to get a pass, 2 metres running with the ball, another 3 metre sideways run to make position, pass it, move 2 metres to get in position for another pass, repeated 20 times.

Its hardly that surprising that a midfielder in a 'tica-tica' formation would run more than most other footballers but yet be less tired. Its the 50 metre hoofball sprints which actually tire you out more.

PhlegmyMoses

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

A huge amount of Xavi's 'running' will be a little 5 metre dash to get a pass, 2 metres running with the ball, another 3 metre sideways run to make position, pass it, move 2 metres to get in position for another pass, repeated 20 times.

Its hardly that surprising that a midfielder in a 'tica-tica' formation would run more than most other footballers but yet be less tired. Its the 50 metre hoofball sprints which actually tire you out more.

I don't know about that. I mean, I agree that long sprints knacker you, but there's a lot of emphasis on constant movement drills even at the lower end of football and they are often the most tiring.

Bodhisopha

Brain Stroking wrote: »

Have you ever played sport of any kind? "A slight change" in stamina can be the difference. At professional level the difference would be huge. It isnt even tired limbs that i am talking about. It is a tired mind which leads to poor decision making and concentration. A drop in any of those things is enough for a team that is on top of their game to turn a 1-0 deficit into a 2-1 victory.

Your catch-all sentence ie
"A slight advantage in stamina still doesn't far outweigh the benefits of a large superiority in skill and ability, does it?"
absolutely misses the point. At a Junior soccer game in Dublin there may be a relatively big skill difference between the best and worst player on the pitch. At professional level the margin becomes much tighter whereas simply being a team with better concentration is enough to gain an advantage and win.

So, to summarise, doping would have a massive difference in professional football. Any team that dopes has a huge advantage.

Yes, i have played football, not at Champions League level though, i must admit.

I have played enough to know that a team with far more skill and ability are likely to have much more of the ball and football is a ****load more tiring when you don't have the ball, both physically and mentally.

As for the margins becoming tighter at professional level, that's not always the case. We've seen Barca obliterate even top teams over the last few years without having to really dig deep in terms of physical exertion. Stamina didn't win those CL finals against United, skill and ability did. Hypothetically, with or without PEDs, United are still walking off that pitch the more tired team.