Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
Of course, she's totally innocent and wouldn't dream of doing anything underhand......
Of course, she's totally innocent and wouldn't dream of doing anything underhand......
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
She wouldn't be the first athlete it's happened to - plenty of others have been the victim of genuine mistakes as opposed to looking to gain an advantage.
larmen
Head Pro
she hasn't disputed the results of the A sample and did not request the B sample to be tested therefore accepting guilt.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
? She has only had one failed test
Well it wasn't underhand in the eyes of the law for 10 years whilst she used it, it was no doubt under the radar, but I think she knew it was a PED and you'd think that with 17% of Russian athletes with it in their system, some red flags would have gone up before now, but now they've caught up with it and she's probably addicted to it now after that amount of time, so couldn't stop, and now she's banged to rights.
richart
Major Champion
I think we all know she was prescribed the drug by a Russian doctor to enhance performance. The drug was not banned though, so she was not breaking any drug rules relating to tennis. When it was banned at the beginning of this year everything changes.
Did she carry on taking the drug hoping to not be caught ? Did she take the drug by mistake not realising it was now banned. The previous ten years are not relevant, as the banning can not be back dated.
If she took it knowing it was banned, hoping she would not be caught she is a cheat.
If she took it not realising it was banned, she has made a huge mistake which she admits.
It would be nice if forumers could respect those with different opinions, rather than using it as an excuse to make cheap personal attacks.:rant:
So she has failed, with no opportunity to have a re-test/secondary sample. Therefore by default she's a drugs cheat by default. Is that what you're saying (and if so I agree). Whatever the circumstances, there are a lot of difficult questions to be answered and I can see the PED issue being at the forefront of the enquiry
D
Deleted member 1740
Guest
Most of these top sports people it seems are unable to do anything for themselves and they rely on a team of people running their lives for them. They are mollycoddled.
I know a fella whose nephew is a footballer for a decent club, he told me he literally has people doing everything for him, booking his flights for holidays, booking restaurants etc, I assume she'd be no different. Still no excuse though.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ethan
Money List Winner
It has a shortish half life of about 5 hours, so would be pretty much eliminated from the body in about 25-30 hours, but there may be some metabolites which are detectable for la bit longer.
D
Deleted member 1740
Guest
Thanks Ethan.
So you're saying she knowingly took a PED but that was OK because it was not banned at the time, seriously, just because the authorities haven't caught up with that substance it's acceptable to take it knowingly even though it has known performance enhancing properties, which i'm confident was the reason why so many Russian athletes had it in their systems!
Just because it wasn't banned at the time, if she was aware it had performance enhancing properties, she's a cheat, period me me!
Blue in Munich
Crocked Professional Yeti Impersonator
From this thread, it would appear that;
The athlete involved in this is Russian.
17% of Russian athletes take this drug, as opposed to 2.2% overall
The drug involved is normally only used for 4 - 6 weeks, not 10 years.
There are better drugs available that will treat the condition this drug does more effectively.
None of these better drugs have a performance enhancing side effect.
If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, then it's a duck.
The athlete involved in this is Russian.
17% of Russian athletes take this drug, as opposed to 2.2% overall
The drug involved is normally only used for 4 - 6 weeks, not 10 years.
There are better drugs available that will treat the condition this drug does more effectively.
None of these better drugs have a performance enhancing side effect.
If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, then it's a duck.
That's like refusing to blow in the police station, it's an immediate admission of guilt and you're banned.
palindromicbob
Tour Winner
Is that not like saying people using anchored putting strokes last year were cheaters?
richart
Major Champion
Where do I say that I think it is ok.
I said it was not a banned drug, so she was not breaking tennis drug rules. I said she took it to enhance performance, and not for health problems. Nice try though.
chrisd
Major Champion
Yes, from both sides of the argument
Val
Ryder Cup Winner
Nonsense. If it's not banned then it's fair game.
chrisd
Major Champion
Except on here it's only a duck if you can produce its pedigree certificate
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Exactly - can't be a cheat if using something that isn't banned
