Who said anything about proof?The picture proves nothing - The two pics are taken from different angles, while in the first pic his biceps are covered then the second pic he is wearing a sleeveless jersey - His legs are more clearly visible in both pics and there is liitle difference in his legs - Nothing that could be considered earth shattering.
Murphy was not named at the time due to the FA's policy of not naming players who've failed drug tests. He served his ban in secret and did not play for Forest for a two month span between 6 October and 8 December 2018."Firstly, I would like to stress that the taking of recreational drugs is something that I don't condone whatsoever," Murphy said. "I served a suspension at the beginning of last season for making a bad decision while on a night out. This was an isolated incident which happened out of competition when we had no game. I immediately regretted it. I am not proud of what I did but it’s something I have put behind me as I want to concentrate on my football career."
2.10 In the event of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation being determined by a final decision in disciplinary proceedings, including any appeal proceedings, The Association shall make Public Disclosure by publishing on its website the details of the decision, including the Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the name of the Participant who committed the violation, the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method involved (where applicable), and the penalty imposed. Where the final decision is that no Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been committed, the decision may only be Publicly Disclosed, whether in its entirety or in redacted form, with the consent of the Participant. The Association shall use reasonable efforts to obtain such consent. Public Disclosure on The Association’s website of any decision pursuant to this paragraph 2.10 shall be for the longer of either one month or the duration of any suspension imposed on the Participant.
2.11 The mandatory requirement to make Public Disclosure of decisions contained in paragraph 2.10 shall not apply where the Participant who has committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation is a Minor, or in the case of decisions finding Misconduct contrary to any of Regulations 14-17. Any publication by The Association in relation to such cases will be entirely at its discretion.
2.12 Notwithstanding paragraph 2.10, the Regulatory Commission or Appeal Board may order that some or all of the text of any decision it reaches in an anti-doping case may not be published, where there are compelling reasons not to publish. In such cases, only the outcome may be published.
36. In disciplinary proceedings brought pursuant to these Regulations, if it is found that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been committed, a penalty shall be imposed in accordance with Parts Six and Seven of these Regulations. Unless the Participant establishes that there are grounds to eliminate or reduce such penalty in accordance with any applicable provision of Part Eight, the Regulatory Commission or Appeal Board shall have no discretion to reduce those penalties. Subject only to paragraph 2.11 of Schedule 1 to these Anti-Doping Regulations, a mandatory element of each penalty for an Anti-Doping Rule Violation is the Public Disclosure of that penalty.
Wasn't there something a few years ago about klopp wanting to bring mueller wohlfahrt to liverpoolhttps://www.sportbible.com/football/news-reactions-everton-fan-accuses-liverpool-of-being-on-drugs-20200103 (speculation, no proof or anything substantial at all!)
Weirdly the same crossed my mind a couple of weeks ago. Reminds me of Russia in WC 2018, whose players seemed like they could run forever. Whether these accusations are true or not, it is still food for thought I guess.
Classic case of man feels ill so accidentally takes his partners diuretic to treat it.The disciplinary body of the European football association, UEFA, has imposed a suspension of 12 months on Andre Onana for a doping violation. After an "out of competition" check on October 30 last year, the goalkeeper found the substance Furosemide in his urine. The suspension is effective from today and applies to all football activities, both national and international.
On the morning of October 30, Onana was feeling unwell. He wanted to take a pill to ease the discomfort. Unknowingly, however, he took Lasimac, a drug that his wife had previously been prescribed. Onana’s confusion resulted in him mistakenly taking his wife's medicine, ultimately causing this measure to be taken by UEFA against the goalkeeper. Furthermore, the disciplinary body of the football association has stated that Onana had no intention of cheating. However, the European Football Association believes, on the basis of the applicable anti-doping rules, that an athlete has a duty at all times to ensure that no banned substances enter the body.
Onana and Ajax will appeal the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
Managing director Edwin van der Sar: “We explicitly renounce performance-enhancing drugs, we obviously stand for a clean sport. This is a terrible setback, for Andre himself but certainly also for us as a club. Andre is a top goalkeeper, who has proven his worth for Ajax for years and is very popular with the fans. We had hoped for a conditional suspension or for a suspension much shorter than these twelve months, because it was arguably not intended to strengthen his body and thus improve his performance
Surprise! FIFA taking some action on doping!Fifa has opened disciplinary cases against three Russian footballers over suspected violations in 2013, according to reportswww.theguardian.com
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|A||Hypothesis - Could Tom Danielson have been Innocent of Doping in 2015?||The Clinic||27|
|H||Olympics 2020 (2021): Harder to dope in Japan?||The Clinic||245|
|B||Most memorable doped performance? 2010-2020||The Clinic||132|
|2020-2021 new doping methods||The Clinic||11|