Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 all others are inspired by you to do such things :phehehe: You are good.
Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 Until and unless this drug masks the use of other drugs. I would think immunosuppresant and muscle building steroids are different but there has to be a reason. SL should vacate all their wins and their record expunged. So much for the image of gentle polite SL people.
Guest Gunner Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 Until and unless this drug masks the use of other drugs. I would think immunosuppresant and muscle building steroids are different but there has to be a reason. SL should vacate all their wins and their record expunged. So much for the image of gentle polite SL people. FFS it is not a performance enhancer. The particular steroid happens to be on WADA ban list thats it. Potentially taken in large doses or administered in certain ways it could have the effect of a performance enhancer which is clearly not the case. Should we expunge Gambhir's record too then and all the tests which India won with him in it?? Why don't you guys apply your god given brain cells before talking crap?
jairamesh Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 any final verdict and subsequent disciplinary action if required, after Sample B. If Sample is negative then further investigation is halted.
Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 FFS it is not a performance enhancer. The particular steroid happens to be on WADA ban list thats it. Potentially taken in large doses or administered in certain ways it could have the effect of a performance enhancer which is clearly not the case. Should we expunge Gambhir's record too then and all the tests which India won with him in it?? Why don't you guys apply your god given brain cells before talking crap? Gunner has attitude over here. There is a damn good reason why this drug is banned. I just got off the phone with a pharmacist and he told me this particular steroid is some Gluco%%%% blah blah type one and the reason it is banned is that it gives a feeling of happiness and euphoria to an athelete. This is an unfair advantage so it is banned. Use your own goddamn brain cells before accusing others. Topic is not Gambhir and so stick to Tharanga. He had an unfair advantage which = Banned for one year. He knew what he was doing.
Guest Gunner Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 Gunner has attitude over here. There is a damn good reason why this drug is banned. I just got off the phone with a pharmacist and he told me this particular steroid is some Gluco%%%% blah blah type one and the reason it is banned is that it gives a feeling of happiness and euphoria to an athelete. This is an unfair advantage so it is banned. Use your own goddamn brain cells before accusing others. Topic is not Gambhir and so stick to Tharanga. He had an unfair advantage which = Banned for one year. He knew what he was doing. :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Ok now that is out of the way. From what I have read so far there is absolutely no evidence that he has taken this substance with a view to enhancing performance, there is a good chance that there was a mistake (unless you are on the ICC/WADA doping panel). YOU already jumped to conclusions about expunging record etc So let me reiterate again, be calm, take a deep breathe, drink some water and think before you blabber. Secondly Gambhir's example is very relevant because if this goes against tharanga then Gambhir should most definitely face the dock as well. Can't have different rules for different players. So your rant about this is not about gambhir yada yada is more crap.
ganeshran Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 Why in the world would a batsman take a performance enhancing drug to cheat? Most batsman score less runs for want of better technical skills, not want of more stamina. That being said, a professional athlete should know better than to take some "aira gaira" healer's medicine. If his B-sample tests positive, he should be suspended. Any relaxation would only encourage cheaters to try it
Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Ok now that is out of the way. From what I have read so far there is absolutely no evidence that he has taken this substance with a view to enhancing performance, there is a good chance that there was a mistake (unless you are on the ICC/WADA doping panel). YOU already jumped to conclusions about expunging record etc So let me reiterate again, be calm, take a deep breathe, drink some water and think before you blabber. Secondly Gambhir's example is very relevant because if this goes against tharanga then Gambhir should most definitely face the dock as well. Can't have different rules for different players. So your rant about this is not about gambhir yada yada is more crap. Let me write in plain English This Drug = Euphoria = Unfair Advantage = Hence banned. A happy player is better than tense player so it is altering the body physiology the mental aspect. If you want tos discuss start a new thread, get the facts straight and discuss instead of throwing crap all around. They would not release the results if B was not positive either (most likely). Fact: Tharanga took the drug. Fact: Tharanga is a cheat. Fact: Tharanga should be banned. Fact SL record should be expunged. They alraready had unfair advantage with Murali. How much more advantage do they need. Play by the rules.
Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 Why in the world would a batsman take a performance enhancing drug to cheat? Most batsman score less runs for want of better technical skills, not want of more stamina. That being said, a professional athlete should know better than to take some "aira gaira" healer's medicine. If his B-sample tests positive, he should be suspended. Any relaxation would only encourage cheaters to try it It takes the tension out of the players mind and he is relaxed which constitues an unfair advantage so they banned it.
Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Ok now that is out of the way. From what I have read so far there is absolutely no evidence that he has taken this substance with a view to enhancing performance, there is a good chance that there was a mistake (unless you are on the ICC/WADA doping panel). YOU already jumped to conclusions about expunging record etc So let me reiterate again, be calm, take a deep breathe, drink some water and think before you blabber. Secondly Gambhir's example is very relevant because if this goes against tharanga then Gambhir should most definitely face the dock as well. Can't have different rules for different players. So your rant about this is not about gambhir yada yada is more crap. Why do you think it is on banned list if it was not improving performance. Last I checked it was not a laxative.
Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 ""When administered systemically (into the blood), glucocorticosteroids can produce a feeling of euphoria, potentially giving athletes an unfair advantage," the WADA Web site says." Happy Tharanga apologists. Man is a cheat. He should be banned. CAn you imagine if India lost that game. SL were saying they did India a favor by losing the game. Stop their cheating ways. Murali was enough.
ganeshran Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 It takes the tension out of the players mind and he is relaxed which constitues an unfair advantage so they banned it. Regardless of why they banned it, the punishment is clear - a suspension and that should be the same Asking records to be expunged is too extreme and opens a pandora's box of demands for other matches to be expunged where they are proven to be not clean e.g. fixed matches,
ganeshran Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 ""When administered systemically (into the blood)' date= glucocorticosteroids can produce a feeling of euphoria, potentially giving athletes an unfair advantage," the WADA Web site says." Happy Tharanga apologists. Man is a cheat. He should be banned. CAn you imagine if India lost that game. SL were saying they did India a favor by losing the game. Stop their cheating ways. Murali was enough. Tharanga scored 2 runs off 20 balls in the final. I think its safe to say that he didnt get any euphoric feeling or advantage out of the drug.
Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 Tharanga scored 2 runs off 20 balls in the final. I think its safe to say that he didnt get any euphoric feeling or advantage out of the drug. I think he got the laxative by mistake.
Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 Regardless of why they banned it, the punishment is clear - a suspension and that should be the same Asking records to be expunged is too extreme and opens a pandora's box of demands for other matches to be expunged where they are proven to be not clean e.g. fixed matches, Maybe it is extreme but I will have no heart burn with Sharjah being expunged. Another topic though.
Guest Gunner Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 ""When administered systemically (into the blood)' date= glucocorticosteroids can produce a feeling of euphoria, potentially giving athletes an unfair advantage," the WADA Web site says." Happy Tharanga apologists. Man is a cheat. He should be banned. CAn you imagine if India lost that game. SL were saying they did India a favor by losing the game. Stop their cheating ways. Murali was enough. You seriously have reading disabilities. It clearly says when "administered systematically". DO you know what that means? There is absolutely no current evidence that Tharanga systematically took that drug for performance enhancement. Yet you go running around screaming like a mad man that his record should be expunged etc. Are you insane?
Cricket Tragic Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 If you're planning to take something that is on the list to treat a problem, you have to inform the authorities before you take it.
Guest Gunner Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 If you're planning to take something that is on the list to treat a problem' date=' you have to inform the authorities before you take it.[/quote'] WhichI agree is probably where Tharanga went wrong. Either he was unaware or just plain stupid but until there is evidence that he did it on putpose he should be presumed to be innocent.
Midfielder Posted May 29, 2011 Posted May 29, 2011 WhichI agree is probably where Tharanga went wrong. Either he was unaware or just plain stupid but until there is evidence that he did it on putpose he should be presumed to be innocent. No he is guilty. The drug was in his system so quit apologising for him
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now