Brits don't dope?

[Catwhoorg]

I don't think doping is a crime in the UK, so it's not strange that the police stay away from it.

Doping per se isn't. (and I do think it should be).

Certain products are controlled substances though eg. most steroids are class C controlled drugs. So possession and especially supply are police matters.

 

[JimmyFingers]

There are two points - the first is national discourses of doping. The second is whether the claims that Britain is 'more anti-doping/has less of dope problem than elsewhere' actually stands up to scrutiny.

Lets be honest - xenophobia and defensive paranoia go hand in hand with national sport.

Criticise an Australian and you end up being accused of being anti-Australian, talk about Spain and you are anti-Spanish etc etc

Commentators, media, posters and athletes all play the game of wrapping themselves in the flag.

Armstrong of course blaming 'the French', invoking the Iraq war as a reason for the hostility to him, is one of the most notable examples.

Doping is always something that 'the other' does.

In football, diving is blamed on 'foreigners' - this assumes that footballers from Franny Lee to Michael Owen to Wayne Rooney never dived in their lives. Franny Lee always makes me laugh because he was the king of the divers in the 1970s when there were very few non-UK players playing in England.

I've seen a couple of people claim that it was Europe that corrupted Armstrong, and others claim 'I was innocent until I went to Europe and saw that everyone was doping'. Yet, we've plenty of stories of doping on the US and UK domestic scene.

The question is whether these claims - that it is the others who are the bad guys and Brits just don't dope is actually true.

The UK did for a very short while have quite a strong head of anti-doping in Michele Verroken who was removed very quickly when it looked like anti-doping in the UK might have some teeth.

There are plenty of UK sports beyond cycling and athletics that we can point to as having doping problems (perhaps someone can explain why a whole generation of footballers seem to be prematurely balding, where as perhaps 20 years ago a bald footballer was a rarity - Attilio Lombardo stands out because he was such a rarity).

The UK has had no Festina, Puerto, UPS, BALCO etc, it doesn't have a CONI, to prominent anti-dopers speaking out in public about the weaknesses of dope testing in the UK.

The UK doesn't seem to have a media that is particularly willing to ask critical questions when it comes to doping (sex scandals yes - doping no). If Wiggins is caught shagging Froome's other half then the media will be all over it, if Wiggins is shooting up with Froome EPO supply then they have no interest.

'I'd be torn to shreds if I were convicted of doping' If doping means you get torn to shreds in the UK then why are dopers like Miller, Ohuruogu etc given a free pass? Can someone give me an example of a convicted UK doper who has been torn to shreds in the media? I mean if this is what is likely to happen then it must surely have already happened to serve as a warning to those thinking about doping.

The police don't seem to have very much interest in the issue at all.

Simpson is portrayed as being 'a long time ago', Millar 'reformed', Yates has still confessed to nothing.

Ironically, corrupt politicians is the one area where the discourse is normally reversed, pretty much everyone thinks their own politicians are the most corrupt.

Solid post. To the bolded, very true. At the end of the day sport sells, and successful sport sells successfully (excuse the poor pun). The narrative is sportsmen are heroes, national treasures that represent us and their daring, skill and mental fortitude is to be feted and praised.

But of course they're not heroes in a traditional sense. They are not selfish, altruistic idealists doing what they do for the good of the people, the law, justice or the memory of Krypton. They are [professionals, it is a career and ultimately they do what they do because they are paid to do so. And while winning is great, it also means they get paid more, either through bonuses or bigger contracts or more sponsorship. Amazing to see McIlroy's (British) game disappear in the wake of a £10 million contract. All that money and a superstar tennis-playing girlfriend and suddenly the hunger wanes.

Tom Simpson is getting a lot of mentions here. Anecdotally the reason he was pushing it so hard that tour, the reason he kept riding despite having diarrhea all over his bike, why he was taking so much amphetamine and why he charged up the Ventoux and continued to ride himself all the way to the pearly gates is because he desperately needed a successful tour to get invites to the better paid one day races and track meets. He rode himself into the dirt for money. Yes he had some loftier ambitions, the desire to create a British enclave in Gent and train young British riders in road racing, and he was clearly a driven and intensely competitive man, but he was also part of cycling's elite and moved in top social circles with Anquetil and the like.

Say what you like about om, but he clearly a huge talent and his death was a tragedy. I guess overall my point is money corrupts, and these day sport is money.

As for the Brits and doping,you simply can't make generalisations. Each sportsperson makes a choice how they are going to achieve their ends, either honestly by dint of hard work or nefariouslyby dint of cheating, either by bending the rules during the sport, bribing officials and doping. You point out there's never been a big scandal, or a whiff of something organised and methodical. You then question why the police and media don't go hard after dopers. I would suggest the two go hand in hand. If there had been or if a systematic doping ring was to be uncovered, and the media and police believed there was something rotten at the heart of our sport, they would go after it, like in France, the US or Italy (just random examples). In the absence of that both the media and police would question the need to go hard after dopers, since there's nothing to suggest more than a few individuals are at it.

Perhaps the old adage applies: there's no smoke without fire. But really there is very little smoke there, which is why it gets left alone. That in itself is a danger, as lack of scrutiny will embolden chancers, but while many here think Sky are making it obvious, beyond Leinders there's little of any substance. Certainly nothing like the huge mass of evidence that eventually drowned Lance.

Perhaps there's one more thing, another old saying: it's not the winning, but the taking part that counts. The underdog gets feted, we like a plucky loser. I'm pretty sure Tim Henman never doped.

 

[gooner]

I guess most footballers dont even know they are doping. They are told to take x,y and z and do. I bet if they ask they are told it is vitamins.

That's what happened Richard Sadlier at Millwall.

 

[Benotti69]

That's what happened Richard Sadlier at Millwall.

Exactamundo. Why would it have changed? When I see the body shapes of guys like Ronaldo it appears to have worsened.

 

[ToreBear]

Jeez, where would I start...let's put it this way; second only to catholic clergy's prediliction for small boys, the "brown envelope" culture is the key long running moral saga in Irish public life, more so even than the overhang of violence. The Brown envelope being the 'kickback' where money passes all over the place for things to get done. An accusation in regards one such kickback completely derailed a key presidential canididate (Sean Gallagher) in the last election.

Ireland has always had a public culture that 'apes' the puritanism of its bigger neighbour; hence why I call it the most protestant catholic country in europe. But it is only aping. 'cute hoorism' is a far more prevelant part of public life than in GB, and Pat, for example will be far, far more shameless than say Cookson would be in his place.

Hmm, this was likely a contributor to the Irish banking problems as well I assume. Is there any pressure to change this culture from law enforcement/public/media?

I don't know enough of your history to comment much, except to say Norway's long distrust of the european Union may be funded by oil, but it's based, I suspect, on a long held desire to be free of the control of others...see also Iceland.

Oh, and Molde never won a league till Solskjaer turned up!

Hey, I had to check wikipedia for that! You are right! Molde never won it before he came. The club has started slowly this season, but they look to be back to their winning ways soon.

As for the EU. Yep independence is a big part of it. I wasn't born for the first no vote, but I think it had a lot to do with fishing and agriculture. Same for 94. I can't remember the oil being such a big issue since the EU would not have any way of influencing that area. The common fisheries policy was a big deal, as it is for Iceland now. Currently our seas have plenty of fish, while those in the EU area are in ecological trouble. So I have my doubts whether the Icelanders will join the EU.

If Norway keeps to the previous schedule of 22 years between votes, the next EU vote would be in 2016. Though right now I think 2036 is more likely.

 

[ToreBear]

Doping per se isn't. (and I do think it should be).

Certain products are controlled substances though eg. most steroids are class C controlled drugs. So possession and especially supply are police matters.

Thanks for the info!

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

The working class do dope because they have no sense of embarrassment?

The Royal Family don't appear to worry too much about embarrassing themselves. Tony Blair seems pretty brazen as do most city banker ****ers. I don't see Fred Goodwin being struck down by fear of embarrassment either.

I don't see embarrassment stopping the likes of Rebecca Brookes, Boris Johnson etc.

If anything in the UK there is a strong streak of what in the Islamic world is known as Ketman when it comes to honesty. Of which the whole discourse of 'Brits don't dope' is part of.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

I think the OP has posed the wrong question if trying to further the sum of human knowledge. The strongest conclusion that can be drawn is that "Some do. Some don't." I don't think anyone would dispute this.

The key question is "Which Brits dope?"

 

[wansteadimp]

Or the question should be "Why aren't Brits more skeptical about their athletes."

My view lack of A list profile busts - really only Christie, the coverage & reaction (or lack of) at the time struck me as bizarre.

Rio's bust was for missing a test, the press really didn't go big on why he avoided the test, rather they focused on him.

The other positives/and or missed tests have been athletes who would only raise a "meh" for the majority of the general public.

I also think that the UK libel rules play a big part. A number of high profile athletics commentators (Steve Cram for example) who has been outspoken when people do get caught has been a notable cheer leader for Bolt and how wonderful he is for Athletics - there has to be some sort of questioning about how all the top sprinters are beating Johnson's times when we know he was fully fueled. I suspect the commentators know but can't say.

 

[del1962]

Or the question should be "Why aren't Brits more skeptical about their athletes."

My view lack of A list profile busts - really only Christie, the coverage & reaction (or lack of) at the time struck me as bizarre.

Rio's bust was for missing a test, the press really didn't go big on why he avoided the test, rather they focused on him.

The other positives/and or missed tests have been athletes who would only raise a "meh" for the majority of the general public.

I also think that the UK libel rules play a big part. A number of high profile athletics commentators (Steve Cram for example) who has been outspoken when people do get caught has been a notable cheer leader for Bolt and how wonderful he is for Athletics - there has to be some sort of questioning about how all the top sprinters are beating Johnson's times when we know he was fully fueled. I suspect the commentators know but can't say.

What evidence is there that Johnson was fuelled? I am not saying he was or was not, but I have not heard of any evidence against him.

 

[wansteadimp]

What evidence is there that Johnson was fuelled? I am not saying he was or was not, but I have not heard of any evidence against him.

I meant Ben not Michael.

If you want evidence for that then the Dubin Inquiry is the place to start.

 

[del1962]

I meant Ben not Michael.

If you want evidence for that then the Dubin Inquiry is the place to start.

Oops to many sprinters called Johnson, I think Bolt is on his own is beleivable, an athlete of his height who can sprint, I would also expect some marginal gains because of track technology (they seem to produce faster tracks for sprinters, which are bad for 5/10k runners in terms of stress on the legs), it is very difficult to call people out without evidence though.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

...it is very difficult to call people out without evidence though.

Folk here don't seem to find it so hard.

I know what you mean, though.

 

[mikehammer67]

most of the running community seem pretty convinced MJ was fuelled to the eyeballs

don'tknow about cram

he was a huge fan of obvious doper el guerrouj

now hes callin out makhloufi

maybe he can see the picture now with hindsight

 

[the sceptic]

Oops to many sprinters called Johnson, I think Bolt is on his own is beleivable, an athlete of his height who can sprint, I would also expect some marginal gains because of track technology (they seem to produce faster tracks for sprinters, which are bad for 5/10k runners in terms of stress on the legs), it is very difficult to call people out without evidence though.

Maybe Brailsford is working as a sprinting coach on his past time. If you believe Bolt is clean then you really need a reality check, that is almost as delusional as thinking Froome is clean.

 

[mikehammer67]

MJs 4 by 400 crews have been disqualified from a bunch of titles

he's one of the last standing

and of course he's the fastest of them all

 

[martinvickers]

The working class do dope because they have no sense of embarrassment?

Please don't invent strawmen.

The point is simple, and commonsense. The 'athletes' who tend to play football in Britain, broadly, have mediocre education (Lampard's an exception i think), mediocre non football prospects, and the opportunity for vast, vast wealth if they make it.

This combination simply doesn't exist to the same extent in any other sport, except possibly, to a limited extent, rugby league.

When the possible gain is so much greater, and options so much poorer, the risk to one's 'honour' seems rather more palatable. Especially when the public esteem for footballers ain't that high to start with.

With very singular exceptions, no-one's makingmillions from rowing, and most rowers have perfectly fine career prosepcts, being largely university educated - A 2013 Gold medal winner retired this very day, at only 27, to become a lawyer.

Bannister famously fitted his 4 minute mile inside his medical studies; Roger Black, erstwhile competitor v Michael Johnson, was a qualified doctor.

Few people dope because they 'want' to. They dope because they tell themselves they need to. Some or probably even right in that suspicion. Cycling on the continent was a working class sport, for many their only route to fortune.

When you have more palatable alternatives than shooting up, it's just commonsense that you will be more likely to avail of them.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Please don't invent strawmen.

The point is simple, and commonsense. The 'athletes' who tend to play football in Britain, broadly, have mediocre education (Lampard's an exception i think), mediocre non football prospects, and the opportunity for vast, vast wealth if they make it.

This combination simply doesn't exist to the same extent in any other sport, except possibly, to a limited extent, rugby league.

IMHO, the wage scale changes depending on the amount of interest/viewers/money in the sport. Dominate your sport niche with many more wins while not testing positive and the gains are disproportionate.

A cycling example, I think it was in Dave Zabriski's affadavit that the guy was riding in the elite peloton and making as much as a barista on USPS. Meanwhile, guys winning elite races like a Contador, or maybe a Cavendish are understood to make at least 10's of times more.

Here's some imperfect track and field data: http://trackandfieldathletesassociation.org/site/how-much-money-do-track-and-field-athletes-make/

 

[hektoren]

If you can eat Marmite, there's no need to dope.

 

[ebandit]

only the few

reading these pages i am reminded how few british athletes have been popped for doping

surprising given the numbers participating at the highest levels

a reflection that indeed brits do not dope or indication that british athletes have access to the best programmes to avoid detection?

the british athlete that i have always been suspicious of is paula radcliffe
..............marathon times much better than others truly seen...'too good to be true'

Mark L

 

[Frosty]

reading these pages i am reminded how few british athletes have been popped for doping

surprising given the numbers participating at the highest levels

a reflection that indeed brits do not dope or indication that british athletes have access to the best programmes to avoid detection?

the british athlete that i have always been suspicious of is paula radcliffe
..............marathon times much better than others truly seen...'too good to be true'

Mark L

Yeah, her times really stand out as does her beating of the East Africans. Maybe the relatively few number of women competing in the marathon is a factor? Some sportspeople might lie about drug taking but doing the below and then being a user would be a different matter i would have thought.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/sports_talk/1483730.stm

 

[Benotti69]

Please don't invent strawmen.

The point is simple, and commonsense. The 'athletes' who tend to play football in Britain, broadly, have mediocre education (Lampard's an exception i think), mediocre non football prospects, and the opportunity for vast, vast wealth if they make it.

This combination simply doesn't exist to the same extent in any other sport, except possibly, to a limited extent, rugby league.

When the possible gain is so much greater, and options so much poorer, the risk to one's 'honour' seems rather more palatable. Especially when the public esteem for footballers ain't that high to start with.

With very singular exceptions, no-one's makingmillions from rowing, and most rowers have perfectly fine career prosepcts, being largely university educated - A 2013 Gold medal winner retired this very day, at only 27, to become a lawyer.

Bannister famously fitted his 4 minute mile inside his medical studies; Roger Black, erstwhile competitor v Michael Johnson, was a qualified doctor.

Few people dope because they 'want' to. They dope because they tell themselves they need to. Some or probably even right in that suspicion. Cycling on the continent was a working class sport, for many their only route to fortune.

When you have more palatable alternatives than shooting up, it's just commonsense that you will be more likely to avail of them.

Plenty of young people get sporting scholarships due to their sporting potential and not the intellectual ability or education grades.

 

[mikehammer67]

reading these pages i am reminded how few british athletes have been popped for doping

surprising given the numbers participating at the highest levels

a reflection that indeed brits do not dope or indication that british athletes have access to the best programmes to avoid detection?

the british athlete that i have always been suspicious of is paula radcliffe
..............marathon times much better than others truly seen...'too good to be true'

Mark L

most suspicious kelly holmes easily,womens 1500m is major dope territory

not too many brits get popped

 

[wansteadimp]

most suspicious kelly holmes easily,womens 1500m is major dope territory

not too many brits get popped

Yep, particularly how she went from being top 10 in the World, possible but unlikely medalist to double Olympic Champion.

New doc after she fell out with Maria Mutola?

 

[mikehammer67]

the 1500 fields and alltime list are majorly doped

1,2,3,4 from 2005 world championship 1500m final all later busted for peds

no-one has a clue who the clean wr holder is
http://www.alltime-athletics.com/w_1500ok.htm