Boycott of Nike products ??

therod said:
Anyone going to boycott Nike products on the back of them giving Justin gatlin a new sponsorship deal?

This fella is a two time drug cheat, that at 32 is running faster than ever. It's obvious that he has benefitted from and probably still is benefitting from steroid use. By that I mean it's been recently indicated that prolonged steroid use benefits the user even after they are 'clean'.

It's difficult for any sportswear company to take the moral high ground, with the widespread use of sweatshop labour etc, but this
for me is a new low in a sport I used to be an active participant in. To me it's endorsing drug use and sends out a pretty poor message to the kids :o.

I don't really own any nike kit, a couple of tee shirts and a golf umbrella that is broken..... But I won't be buying anymore.
Click to expand...

Ha no. Why would I? If you boycotted every company with dubious practices you be stuck shopping at the co op....
 
In reality if Nike made a putter that sent in 80% of all putts I would buy it if it had been forged in the fires of Hades itself.
 
I can never understand why " bang to rights" drug cheats aren't/can't be banned for life, surely it would deter the next generation and then most sports would be mainly clean.

As for boycotting Nike ........ I don't think that at my age anyone sees me as a role model and I do more brand harm wearing their gear ...... maybe if Werthers did golf gear ........ .?
 
chrisd said:
I can never understand why " bang to rights" drug cheats aren't/can't be banned for life, surely it would deter the next generation and then most sports would be mainly clean.

As for boycotting Nike ........ I don't think that at my age anyone sees me as a role model and I do more brand harm wearing their gear ...... maybe if Werthers did golf gear ........ .?
Click to expand...

I would agree if its a second ban - let someone atone for a mistake and give someone a second chance - but increase the minimum ban to 4 years then ban for second offence
 
Liverpoolphil said:
I would agree if its a second ban - let someone atone for a mistake and give someone a second chance - but increase the minimum ban to 4 years then ban for second offence
Click to expand...

I would say it depends on the nature of the abuse; a first time lifetime ban for out and out cheats, no ban at all for some indiscretions, e.g. cold and flu remedies.

As to the OP, no I wouldn't boycott Nike; I can't afford to boycott one of the few companies that make shirts in my size. :mad:
 
Blue in Munich said:
I would say it depends on the nature of the abuse; a first time lifetime ban for out and out cheats, no ban at all for some indiscretions, e.g. cold and flu remedies.

As to the OP, no I wouldn't boycott Nike; I can't afford to boycott one of the few companies that make shirts in my size. :mad:
Click to expand...

Yeah that would be the sensible approach

Still cant understand why they cant use common sense at times - the Scottish Skier the perfect example - lost his medal and banned for 2 years for using a Vicks inhaler because it has different ingredients in it compared to Europe - it was proved to not enhance his performance one single bit.
 
Liverpoolphil said:
Agree that they shouldnt be endorsing cheats

And agree with Val in regards influencing buying products.

I think he isnt allowed in the Olympics ( or is that just GB that doesnt allow drug cheats into the Olympics )
Click to expand...

GB don't stop them either, Dwain Chambers was at London 2012.
 
ger147 said:
GB don't stop them either, Dwain Chambers was at London 2012.
Click to expand...
Yep he did, you're right. Wasn't GB Olympics selection policy deemed unfair and their non section of him overturned.

It is a nonsense that the Olympics, and all it supposedly stands for, allows drug cheats to compete.

I'm not being preachy, but Nike are the Devil.....
 
therod said:
Yep valid point. This just feels unambiguous though, unlike some.
Click to expand...

its also quite tricky to boycott huge mega comapnies like nike as they often own other brands as well. Up untill fairly recently they owned Umbro the england kit maker...
 
therod said:
Yep he did, you're right. Wasn't GB Olympics selection policy deemed unfair and their non section of him overturned.

It is a nonsense that the Olympics, and all it supposedly stands for, allows drug cheats to compete.

I'm not being preachy, but Nike are the Devil.....
Click to expand...

Yes - Chambers took them to court and won so they had to pick him when he qualified.
 
Imurg said:
Im with you Nick - I'll quite happily boycott Nike.
Need to change my brand of trainers but apart from that.......
Click to expand...

I was speaking to my wife about this today, she agreed.... But said that she'd just bought 'a really nice pair of Nike airforce one lo'

This is going to be hard :(
 
I have never bought anything Nike since about 1989. The first scandal was around sweatshop workers, then it just rolls on though Armstrong and Gatlin.

Not a company I admire (although their digital / app strategy is very cool) and I would never buy their stuff so not much of a change for me but Gatlin is further evidence of their approach to corporate responsibility. Not good.
 
Val said:
At the end of the day the fact he is allowed to compete again is nothing to do with Nike, maybe it's athletics you should be boycotting.
Click to expand...
They're separate issues.

Athletics chooses to not ban him for ever, issue 1.

Nike choose to endorse his cheating, issue 2.

This thread is about the latter. The former is a seperate thread.

If you're happy to endorse the support of cheating in sport, carry on buying Nike.
 
Val said:
At the end of the day the fact he is allowed to compete again is nothing to do with Nike, maybe it's athletics you should be boycotting.
Click to expand...

I have, no more 400m hurdles for me :whistle:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gringo El Bingo
Nike Golf M9 II Cart Bag
Replies
0
Views
1K
Gringo El Bingo
Gringo El Bingo
Top