Andynonomous said:Although Germany won in a laugher today, the possession, and shots on goal were about even.
Brazil really has a terrible defense. I suspect if Brazil weren't missing 2 key players, the match would have been much closer.
I predict that Germany will come down to earth in the final, and the score will be close, regardless of who they play.
Dr Jiri Dvorak found that almost 40% of players at the 2010 World Cup were taking pain medication prior to every game.
Thirty-nine percent of all players took a painkilling agent before every game.
There were huge differences between countries with some teams doling out over three medications per player per game.
Almeisan said:How do you know how an athlete will respond to doping when you want to argue he is on it in the first place?
I have never claimed I can tell how any athlete will respond nor has anyone else and I have no clue where you are getting that from.
Almeisan said:People look at Ronaldo. He got injured. People claim the too much muscle too fast because of steroids theory.
People look at Robben. He wasn't injured for a long time. People claim he is on PEDs.
Almeisan said:At least they try to talk about it. In cycling, it is accepted. And they have less injuries.
The Hitch said:
Go find a dictionary. Look up the word "you". Then turn the pages to p and look for the word "people"![]()
Retweeted by Paul Kimmage
@fussballdoping
Doping control officers after the Brazil vs Netherlands game on Saturday.
Doping controllers attend the third place play-off football match between Brazil and Netherlands during the 2014 FIFA World Cup at the National Stadium in Brasilia on July 12, 2014
Granville57 said:
We are confident that there is no systematic doping in football and no systematic doping culture in football," a Fifa spokesperson told Goal. "There are approximately 30,000 sampling procedures in football every year, more than any other sport.
However, writing in April's British Journal of Sports Medicine, Fifa chief medical officer Jiri Dvorak admitted there is an "urgent need" to change detection strategies in football. The number of doping tests in football between 2005 and 2012 increased roughly by 50 per cent but the number of Adverse Analytical Findings (AAF) remain much the same. Fifa also said that federations and even entire nations could fear total transparency due to potential exposure to a doping culture and harming reputation.
There has not yet been one confirmed case of recombinant EPO doping in football, something Fifa admitted may be due to "imperfect testing" procedures. About eight per cent of doping controls in 2013 were for EPO. Fifa introduced blood and urine procedures for EPO detection at the 2002 World Cup but also stated to Goal that "there was no suspicion that blood doping would play a significant role in football."
Fifa also disclosed in the BJSM that the longer the out-of-competition period the greater the likelihood of eluding doping controls and the temptation on the part of teams and individuals to dope. Out-of-competition blood tests accounted for only 0.61% of all doping procedures carried out in football in 2013.
The latest Wada Testing Figures revealed that only 2.38 per cent of doping controls in 2013 came in the form of blood testing and Wada has set a minimum of 10%.
Governing bodies are responsible for testing in their own jurisdictions, and while a total of 28,002 dope tests were administered in 2013, only 667 blood tests are counted among that number. Wada does not conduct tests and football has only been a signatory of the Wada code since 2006 - the last Olympic sport to sign up.
The Italian Olympic Committee (CONI) did more blood tests on footballers than any organisation in 2013 with 232 in-competition blood tests out of a total of 2896 doping tests conducted in total - just over 8%. Organisations in top football countries like Spain, the Netherlands and Brazil, meanwhile, failed to conduct any.