Should Performance Enhancing Drugs be made legal to use in sports?

[beetle]

9 hours ago, MultiB48 said:

lifting one's performance takes a lot more effort

And that is how it should be in sports.

[MK55]

Absolutely not. What about the side effects? If not consumed in a regulated manner they could cause serious health damage. 

[PBN]

lol at legalizing steroids in sports.  forget about performance enhancing, many would be hooked on it which would be detrimental for their health as well.  Plus, there would be no limit  to drug abuse. 

 

And sports is supposed to be a role model for kids and the need for proper diet, exercise, and heath. 

[Cricketics]

9 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

 

professional sports is not just some time pass it is a fulltime job, you have to understand it as well as any technical job,kid should be made to understand the difference between hobbies and professional athletes, as they say done by trained professionals ....

And if you want to be called a "professional" then you have to earn it the right way and not go to a degree where you are wanting sterioids to do things crazier than other people. These are cheap tactics.

 

What is the difference between human and  robots then? 

[Silva]

Good god. Imagine how many poor uneducated people will be pumping their kids with steroids if they ever become legal. Not to mention the amount of unsafe scams as well. Terrible idea.

[Forever Indian]

So, what next? Chess players should start using brain performance enhancing drugs even if it has sideeffects of making one insane in long term.

[Cricketics]

Just now, MultiB48 said:

cheap?will you ban inside edges for 4 or poor shots that get wicktes

What has that got to do with drugs? That is part of the game, just like bowler getting a wicket under his name and not a fielder, even though fielder would have taken a great catch. 

 

 

[Cricketics]

1 minute ago, MultiB48 said:

that was your line of argument that it doesnt add to  the skill of the player.

But you are not getting it. Using PEDs allows players to take extra advantage in the game and behave like robots.

 

Humans are not robots. If you really want humans to play games like robots, then we all should stop playing sports and only leave it to robots. 

[maniac]

17 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

all humans arent same so they cant play ,maybe one day everyone can play it wouldn't that be better

Someone taking steroids as a recovery process from surgery etc. is way different from a healthy person taking steroids to enhance is performance? no one wants steroids to be banned as a medical supplement.

 

[Cricketics]

23 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

all humans arent same so they cant play ,maybe one day everyone can play it wouldn't that be better

If person can play he shouldn't need PED to perform better. PED stands for performance Enhancing. Enhancing the performance is what is wrong here and not that every one can play sports etc. 

[maniac]

Sp by the same logic should opiates and other narcotic pain killers be made legal for recreational purposes?

[Cricketics]

3 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

would you not love to play professionally if it were possible?

No, I think I will feel that I am cheating the opponent and cheating the game if I do that. 

 

Tendulkar earned it by doing the hardwork and making debut at a youg age and playing for such a long time. If someone else does it using PED's, that is bullshyt and absolute cheating. 

[maniac]

6 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

would you not love to play professionally if it were possible?

 

 

why not ?would you take pet ...... performance enhancing training?or just be a complete natural like rp singh 

I don't think just taking steroids would make me a  better batsman than Kohli..leave alone Kohli but even an U-19 batsman from Zimbabwe......but if I and Kohli were at similar skill level than definitely that would give me an unfair advantage

[maniac]

3 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

tendulkar is not the only one who has ever trained and strived ,life is not fair it doesnt give you an equal hand ,i can see a better future for avg ppl like us unlike now

You seriously believe you can out run Bolt or out swim Phelps on steroids?

Edited February 17, 2017 by maniac

[putrevus]

9 hours ago, rkt.india said:

yes, steroids already legal in body building. very top bodybuilder takes them. Look at Arnold who is 69 years old and has taken anabolic steroids all bodybuilding years. Same with other famous bodybuilders.

It is not legal in body building .Who gave you that information. Lance did not take steroids he was blood doping , those things if made legal will get lot of kids killed.

 

Lance or any famous athlete will have lot of money and  a team of experts on how these drugs need to be administered. These will kill you if you do not know what you are doing  and they still might kill even if you do everything right.Just because Arnold or any other famous person did successfully they do not become less dangerous.

 

 

[Forever Indian]

10 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

tendulkar is not the only one who has ever trained and strived ,life is not fair it doesnt give you an equal hand ,i can see a better future for avg ppl like us unlike now

How can it be fair? Only rich kids will be able to afford regular steroid costs, physician fees, etc. at root level. So it will mean going back to the past where only rich and big city kids could play cricket. Cricket is a game of skills and not about who is able to build more muscles.

Edited February 17, 2017 by Forever Indian

[maniac]

2 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

steroids is just a tiny step ......it's not about steroids but improving over what you have ,if simon jones had got that injury in 1850 instead of 2002 would he have ever played again ? life also deals you such accidents in the way you are built ,maybe they can be fixed in the future..

I am not understanding what your argument is...As I have said Steroids,Pain Killers etc etc are absolutely fine if they are part of the rehabilitation process or if they are used to nurse you back to health.

 

The problem is a totally healthy person taking them to gain an unfair advantage.Not only that is unethical,it is not healthy for the individual in the first place.

 

if Armstrong would have taken the drugs when he was battling cancer no one would care,but when he was taking PED's when he was perfectly normal and competing,he was rightfully banned for it.

[Cricketics]

Iol it is funny same people who get mad at pitches in Ranji which are getting too bowler friendy and making Vinay Kumar and trundlers look like legend are now wanting PEDs for sportsmen so they can compete with other bowlers.

 

What a great logic. So that means you want more crazy bowler friendly pitches whoch will make Binny look like Starc. Shabash, great attitude. 

[Cricketics]

6 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

it all depends on preferences ,i love 150k bowlers, there are many who dont care they may well have a partimer get all the wickets,same goes with this argument we are having

I love 150k bowlers too, but I don't like robots bowling at 150k.

 

This is true. If one comes on PEDs to bowl 150k, then he is nothing less than a Robot.

 

Now if you like Robots bowling, then we can replace the bowlers with the bowling machines and provide 160k speed every ball and you can enjoy that. 

 

[Forever Indian]

7 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

thats a problem ,but sports is costly from food, medicine, checkups,surgeries rehab , top coaches etc ,its not really for poor societies 

It should be a case of who has more talent than who has more money to get the best quality steroids and physicians. It is only now that small town boys like Umesh Yadav, Shami, etc are able to come up just because of talent. So you want that to end and have just rich kids play cricket?