Article on BBC sport

[SirLes]

Doping article on BBC sport. Title is to do with the Blood passport in football but actually more wide ranging and honest.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23911979

 

[Briant_Gumble]

Quality article, can I e-mail the journalist to congratulate him?

 

[King Boonen]

I have one big problem with it. He has not done any investigation into the meta-data associated with the tests. For instance, the 30,000 tests total for football, which really is laughable, what we're they for? PEDs or recreational drugs? Blood, urine or both? And what level of player? Elite or amateur? Based on the numbers he presents I feel he should be much more critical of football, arguably the biggest business in the world, for what is laughable testing.

 

[Briant_Gumble]

I have one big problem with it. He has not done any investigation into the meta-data associated with the tests. For instance, the 30,000 tests total for football, which really is laughable, what we're they for? PEDs or recreational drugs? Blood, urine or both? And what level of player? Elite or amateur? Based on the numbers he presents I feel he should be much more critical of football, arguably the biggest business in the world, for what is laughable testing.

He could be more critical but compared to his peers he's doing a good job. It's a bit much to ask a guy to write a piece that would get him sacked.

I read an article in the daily telegraph I think it was that said we are in "the era of the accidental drug cheat". Compared to something as spineless as that this is a good article.

 

[sniper]

Quality article, can I e-mail the journalist to congratulate him?

Come on.
Rather than congratulating hhim Id ask him what fifa paid him for writing that article.

Wrongly imagining itself drug-free is not the same thing, however, as being a sport with a serious doping problem.

and that is just one of many eyebrow raisers

reality is that there is a ****load of evidence for doping in football and this guy doesn't mention any of it.

just another extremely naive bit of so-called journalism

 

[peterst6906]

just another extremely naive bit of so-called journalism

Over the years, lots of journalist's work has been criticised on here.

In the end, anyone can be a journalist and anyone with a keyboard can write a well researched piece if they take the time to do it.

So given that this is an 'extemely naive' piece, why not take the time to research the 'truth' and publish a more in-depth counter piece?

 

[sniper]

Over the years, lots of jounalist's work has been criticised on here.

In the end, anyone can be a journalist and anyone with a keyboard can write a well researched piece if they take the time to do it.

So given that this is an 'extemely naive' piece, why not take the time to research the 'truth' and publish a more in-depth counter piece?

Apparently, the truth is too ugly for these newspapers.
as i said, there is plenty of evidence out there, even things already published about, and this guy doesnt address any of it.
if i,d get paid to write a counterpiece, i,d do it of course.

meanwhile, sportsjournalism is just unbearably bad and i sense no interest among (m)any sportsreporter in getting to the bottom of doping in topsport, with a guy like kimmage being the usual exception.
Not just the fault of the reporters of course. I mean many are simply scared of getting sued, loosing their jobs, being outcasted, etc.
All this is an understandable but sad state of affairs, imo.

 

[blackcat]

I have one big problem with it. He has not done any investigation into the meta-data associated with the tests. For instance, the 30,000 tests total for football, which really is laughable, what we're they for? PEDs or recreational drugs? Blood, urine or both? And what level of player? Elite or amateur? Based on the numbers he presents I feel he should be much more critical of football, arguably the biggest business in the world, for what is laughable testing.

one factor never mentioned, is the natural deterrence that testing efficacy will be a function of. irrespective of PED/recreation, if testing starts to hit more positives, then the sample will rectify, alter, re-evaluate behaviour. The premise of taking PED includes the success in taking the PED. A positive is a failure.

for what is laughable testing
is the testing supposed to work? or is it meta-working cos it aint supposed to work, it is just a PR obfuscation for marketing and the americanised soccer moms?

the testing does not work, and will never work. it is a race-to-bottom and red queen effect cos there is so much on the line. And more than monetary. The propaganda and ubermenschen has gripped sport well before Munich, or USSR, or the GED.