Sharapova

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
Myself, Val and a few others have said much the same as Phil on this topic, and it hasn't generated any vitriol aimed at us.

I think that shows just how many people on this forum play the man and not the ball.
 
But assuming that a person knows the drug they are taking is 'borderline' to put it politely, then do you not think that someone who is apparently scrupulous in their business dealings and obsessive on every detail, would take 10 seconds to read an email that may well make what they are knowingly taking illegal?

I'd buy that argument more if they were taking that drug for the first time and the last time they looked it was OK, but am struggling to see that scenario if someone has been taking it for 10 years.

But I think she is saying that she wasn't aware the drug was 'borderline' and it was a monumental balls up by not fully reading the email on 22 Dec. Big businesses even bigger than Sharapova Inc. have a history of making monumental balls up and not overseeing what they should have eg Baring Bros not keeping a watchful eye over Leeson

So in summary until proven otherwise I buy her story that she ballsed up
 
Myself, Val and a few others have said much the same as Phil on this topic, and it hasn't generated any vitriol aimed at us.

I think that shows just how many people on this forum play the man and not the ball.

Well, then, you lot are also wrong and either hopelessly naive and uninformed or just stirring the pot too.
 
But I think she is saying that she wasn't aware the drug was 'borderline' and it was a monumental balls up by not fully reading the email on 22 Dec. Big businesses even bigger than Sharapova Inc. have a history of making monumental balls up and not overseeing what they should have eg Baring Bros not keeping a watchful eye over Leeson

So in summary until proven otherwise I buy her story that she ballsed up

I am sure she ballsed up, but i am equally sure she wasn't taking it for its effect on her magnesium levels.
 
But I think she is saying that she wasn't aware the drug was 'borderline' and it was a monumental balls up by not fully reading the email on 22 Dec. Big businesses even bigger than Sharapova Inc. have a history of making monumental balls up and not overseeing what they should have eg Baring Bros not keeping a watchful eye over Leeson

So in summary until proven otherwise I buy her story that she ballsed up

Every thread on the forum, probably the same as a chat at the golf club bar, has views 100% one way and 100% the other. It's differing views that make the discussions interesting. How you choose to put your argument across is what causes spats etc but it'd be a very sterile forum if everyone agreed with everyone else, and, were extremely polite through the setting out of arguments. I think the balance is pretty much right and the modding is usually even handed.

That aside, you are still wrong! :lol:
 
At this moment in time it is only old Sharapova that knows the answer to that.

Given that she's admitted the offence? Her explanation is no different from telling the policeman you were speeding because you were late for work - you were still speeding!
 
Given that she's admitted the offence? Her explanation is no different from telling the policeman you were speeding because you were late for work - you were still speeding!

We appear to be at cross purposes hear. My view is she is a cheat from 1 Jan and she has accepted her offence and is now waiting her punishment. When i said only she knows the answer to that I thought you meant I was wrong in my opinion that until proven otherwise I accept her version of events that the first she could have known the drug was banned was on 22 Dec when she acknowledged she received an email but she didn't fully read it.
 
But I think she is saying that she wasn't aware the drug was 'borderline' and it was a monumental balls up by not fully reading the email on 22 Dec. Big businesses even bigger than Sharapova Inc. have a history of making monumental balls up and not overseeing what they should have eg Baring Bros not keeping a watchful eye over Leeson

So in summary until proven otherwise I buy her story that she ballsed up

I agree it was a monumental balls up. But I am sorry but I just can not buy that she was not aware of what the drug did. She is/was the highest earning female athlete for the last 10 years through her endorsements, not her winnings. Her image is everything and she would have been fully aware of what a drugs scandal could have done. The medical experts have questioned the medical benefits of taking this drug for the purely medical reason she said she was. I imagine she was not taking a whole concoction of drugs every day so the lost track of what she was taking, so there is no way on earth she had not checked 100 times what was in the offending drug and no way on earth she did not know it provided other 'benefits' in addition to stopping heart disease or whatever she was claiming she was taking it for.

Up to the point it was banned she was 'playing the game' and I actually don't want to castigate her that much for that as such, as I imagine there are plenty of athletes that did read the email and stopped, or are taking similar drugs for alleged medical reasons but are actually for performance enhancing reasons. She was a bit like Armstrong, everyone else was doing much the same. She was just the stupid one that got caught. But again I can not buy that she did not know what she was doing.

So she should have not have said sorry for not reading the email (PR led mea culpa spin) but sorry she was 'playing the game' and taking a drug for performance related properties under medical pretenses. Which finally caught up with her and made her a drugs cheat. She was conniving, stupid and a bit unlucky. IMHO ;)
 
Last edited:
Myself, Val and a few others have said much the same as Phil on this topic, and it hasn't generated any vitriol aimed at us.

I think that shows just how many people on this forum play the man and not the ball.

We have all said similar things but I think Phil is the only one who really defended. I've stuck to my guns maintaining she didnt cheat whilst it wasn't banned and that anyone would take a drug that wasnt banned that could increase their performance.

Well, then, you lot are also wrong and either hopelessly naive and uninformed or just stirring the pot too.

As must you be then, I agreed in most parts with you ;)
 
Lots of folk clinging to the 22nd Dec notification thing as a get out of jail card for her actions

But the guy who ran WADA for 8 years said:

"Anytime there is a change to the list, notice is given on 30 September prior to the change," he said.

"You have October, November, December to get off what you are doing"

"All the tennis players were given notification of it"


The Dec notification was more like a final reminder for her



Here's my summary:

So it goes on a watch list for a year, that's like saying, we think what your taking is dodgy and we're gonna check
Sept notification: we checked, its well dodgy, stop it
Dec notification, last warning, we know you were at it, pack it in, we'll check
Jan 2016: would you pee in this cup please?
March: I'd like to thank my fans for their support
 
Lots of folk clinging to the 22nd Dec notification thing as a get out of jail card for her actions

But the guy who ran WADA for 8 years said:

"Anytime there is a change to the list, notice is given on 30 September prior to the change," he said.

"You have October, November, December to get off what you are doing"

"All the tennis players were given notification of it"


The Dec notification was more like a final reminder for her



Here's my summary:

So it goes on a watch list for a year, that's like saying, we think what your taking is dodgy and we're gonna check
Sept notification: we checked, its well dodgy, stop it
Dec notification, last warning, we know you were at it, pack it in, we'll check
Jan 2016: would you pee in this cup please?
March: I'd like to thank my fans for their support

:D:D:D
 
Lots of folk clinging to the 22nd Dec notification thing as a get out of jail card for her actions

But the guy who ran WADA for 8 years said:

"Anytime there is a change to the list, notice is given on 30 September prior to the change," he said.

"You have October, November, December to get off what you are doing"

"All the tennis players were given notification of it"


The Dec notification was more like a final reminder for her



Here's my summary:

So it goes on a watch list for a year, that's like saying, we think what your taking is dodgy and we're gonna check
Sept notification: we checked, its well dodgy, stop it
Dec notification, last warning, we know you were at it, pack it in, we'll check
Jan 2016: would you pee in this cup please?
March: I'd like to thank my fans for their support

Ethan said early on that her biggest problem was clinging on to the medical condition part. If she had just said something along the lines of, "I've used it for years and it was an over sight on not recognising it being banned and i'll take the consequences" then she may have got a bit more slack from many.
 
Lots of folk clinging to the 22nd Dec notification thing as a get out of jail card for her actions

But the guy who ran WADA for 8 years said:

"Anytime there is a change to the list, notice is given on 30 September prior to the change," he said.

"You have October, November, December to get off what you are doing"

"All the tennis players were given notification of it"


The Dec notification was more like a final reminder for her



Here's my summary:

So it goes on a watch list for a year, that's like saying, we think what your taking is dodgy and we're gonna check
Sept notification: we checked, its well dodgy, stop it
Dec notification, last warning, we know you were at it, pack it in, we'll check
Jan 2016: would you pee in this cup please?
March: I'd like to thank my fans for their support

:thup:
 
Top