Sharapova

[Deleted member 15344]

Your argument was that because she said it, that was proof enough. Lance Armstrong said it too, therefore on that basis that should be proof enough. Except it wasn't, was it.

Sharapova isn't Lance Armstrong - just because one person was a liar doesn't mean another one is.

 

[HankMarvin]

Your opinion is not about the subject it's about me and has no relevance - hence bringing up an issue from a football thread. For a man in his 60's its teenager behaviour

Pot kettle black, grow up.

 

[chrisd]

Your opinion is not about the subject it's about me and has no relevance - hence bringing up an issue from a football thread. For a man in his 60's its teenager behaviour

I'm young at heart!

 

[HankMarvin]

I think the most important thing here is that she is very, very attractive and women's tennis will be less pretty if she gets a ban.Having said that she is as guilty as a puppy sitting next to a big pile of poo on the kitchen floor.

(Like)

 

[Fish]

Liverproofphil strikes again 😂

😂😂😂

 

[Pin-seeker]

Liverproofphil strikes again 😂

The gift that keeps on giving :whoo::rofl:

Impressive post count tho

 

[pokerjoke]

I'm young at heart!

That's come as quite a shock I thought you were in your 70s Chris

 

[chrisd]

That's come as quite a shock I thought you were in your 70s Chris

It did to me too!

 

[Blue in Munich]

Sharapova isn't Lance Armstrong - just because one person was a liar doesn't mean another one is.

So basically the rule you use to prove her innocence (because she said so) goes out of the window when it doesn't suit your argument and then you suggest someone else's behaviour is like that of a teenager? You really couldn't make it up.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

So basically the rule you use to prove her innocence (because she said so) goes out of the window when it doesn't suit your argument and then you suggest someone else's behaviour is like that of a teenager? You really couldn't make it up.

I'm sorry ? That has confused me ?

 

[chrisd]

So basically the rule you use to prove her innocence (because she said so) goes out of the window when it doesn't suit your argument and then you suggest someone else's behaviour is like that of a teenager? You really couldn't make it up.

More succinct than I'd have put it

 

[Deleted member 15344]

More succinct than I'd have put it

I put it simply for

Your post had nothing to do with the subject and more to do with having a dig at me - that to me is childish behaviour. Unless you can highlight to me exactly what Benteke has to do with Sharapova.

 

[bluewolf]

So, Phil.... Just where exactly is your trust threshold? At what point do you not believe exactly what someone is telling you?

Dont want to jump on the anti-Phil bandwagon, but this is genuinely interesting.

 

[HankMarvin]

I'm sorry ? That has confused me ?

Now there is a surprise Seems rather clear to me.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

So, Phil.... Just where exactly is your trust threshold? At what point do you not believe exactly what someone is telling you?

Dont want to jump on the anti-Phil bandwagon, but this is genuinely interesting.

I don't honestly know - instinct maybe , get a feeling perhaps , maybe look at history. I'm not sure if there is a set standard

For example if this was a runner for example then I would struggle to trust because of the recent history in the sport - same as if it was in cycling.

But just doesn't seem right for her and the sport which doesn't seem rife with drugs. Serena Williams and a few others coming out in support of her make me feel my instincts might be right.

 

[chrisd]

I put it simply for

Your post had nothing to do with the subject and more to do with having a dig at me - that to me is childish behaviour. Unless you can highlight to me exactly what Benteke has to do with Sharapova.

Your very touchy Phil, always the victim? but BIM summed it up perfectly in the post you are confused by!

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Paragraph takane form the Guardian artcile...
"The drug was name-checked in the latest investigative documentary on Russian doping reforms by the German Hajo Seppelt on Sunday. The documentary referred to a 2015 study in which 17% of Russian athletes (724 of 4,316) tested were found to have meldonium in their system. A global study found 2.2% of athletes had it in their system."

So Sharapova is Russian (or there abouts)...they must have a real problem with heart conditions with their athletes in that part of the World if that many need to take it.

 

[Val]

Ethan, I think many of your posts on this are bang on the money especially the one where you suggested what she should have said.

I believe she was advised this drug would help her performance but I'm unsure if she has any sort of condition mild or otherwise where this drug may have been useful. One way or another I do believe she used it to seek to gain an advantage when it was legal BUT now has made a fatal error in timing.

Lots to run on this, it appears her sponsors are sceptical on her response given their reactions today

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Lets keep it nice Chaps Please

Thank you

 

[larmen]

...they must have a real problem with heart conditions with their athletes in that part of the World if that many need to take it.

Well, they aren't exactly all vegetarians and fruit juice lovers.