Doping in Soccer/Football

[martinvickers]

Ball not Man, Vickar.

Actually, you know what, Septic, you're right this time. Ball not man, indeed.

I was simply slightly...stunned...that Hitch actually tried to make serious ground of what was clearly and obviously a joke, aimed at mocking the assumption that certain players dope simply because they are good, and in my incredulity I've been somewhat rough. So mea culpa.

Point stands, though. Posters need not to let their personal dislikes of other posters give them a humour bypass.

 

[roundabout]

Yes, but the intangible quality of confidence is very at work in football. We see it every now again in cycling. Pinot and Wiggins with their descending comes to mind, but confidence when it comes to football is a completely different animal. It's something that could literally come to a player at any time, or conversely disappear at any time.

Luca Toni is a very good example. Nothing more than an average player for most of his career, and then he strings several good seasons together and became a world class striker. Now his goal scoring exploits have dried up and is seen as nothing more than an average goalscorer again. Can doping explain these events? I doubt it, confidence on the other hand? I think it does.

Isn't Toni like 99 years old now?

 

[roundabout]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...aturdays-derby-against-liverpool-8950451.html

Pervitin and good weather. 2 reasons why Hermann Buhl made it back from Nanga Parbat alive.

 

[Briant_Gumble]

That's just the same old "he's the best so he dopes" fallacy again. Boring.

He may well dope, but he's by no distance the most obvious doper from Man utd. That's giggs, patently.

I am consistent.

I have repeatedly posted in the tennis thread that I believe Rafael Nadal to be the most obvious doper because he's the most physically developed player in a sport where doping is easy to get away with. For the same reason I believe Ronaldo is the most obvious doper in football.

I think it's entirely possible that Federer or Ronaldinho are clean because they are not close to being the no. 1 most physically developed players in their sport (though their stamina is far superior to a normal guy).

 

[Parker]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...aturdays-derby-against-liverpool-8950451.html

The problem with that article is the line "My dad told me that at half-time and with Hungary winning 2-0 the Germans took this drink that they used to give to the pilots...."

It was 2-2 at half-time. All the goals in the first 20 minutes.

Hungary, by all accounts, dominated the second half, but couldn't score. Germany may well have taken something, but Hungary really should have won.

 

[del1962]

Some players in football do break through later than others

I have a friend who went to school with Chris Waddle, he said they used to have to take him off at half time such was the imbalance in football matches, did he play league football to start with, no, he played non league for a club well down the football pyramid, he ended up playing in a world cup semi final.

Did he dope to get there, from his comments about his time at Marseille, I very much doubt it, he just took a bit longer than others to break through, the same could be set about Peter Beardsley, Ian Wright and Stuart Pearce.

 

[sniper]

Some players in football do break through later than others

I have a friend who went to school with Chris Waddle, he said they used to have to take him off at half time such was the imbalance in football matches, did he play league football to start with, no, he played non league for a club well down the football pyramid, he ended up playing in a world cup semi final.

Did he dope to get there, from his comments about his time at Marseille, I very much doubt it, he just took a bit longer than others to break through, the same could be set about Peter Beardsley, Ian Wright and Stuart Pearce.

I agree that there is not much to learn (in terms of doping) from the age at which somebody starts hitting his peak. Some peak earlier than others regardless of doping.
Look at tennis. Nadal peaked early, but is considered the uberdoper in that game.
Federer peaked later. Whether that was related to an improved program, we can only guess.

 

[The Hitch]

Point stands, though. Posters need not to let their personal dislikes of other posters give them a humour bypass.

lol. You don't seriously think you are going to convince anyone that the least funny post in the history of the forum, and one that contained absolutely 0 whit or any humour device and would not get a laugh even if it was read out to a crowd of people on laughing gas, was intended as a joke, and that whatsmore, anyone who didn't find it hillarious must hate you?

There was no joke, there was nothing funny. Like others before you, you got caught in the lie and stop digging.

 

[gooner]

Remember Cristiano's header against Man Utd. In the champions league last year, comparable vertical jump to NBA players.

Most obvious doper, IMO.

Not defending Ronaldo, but his heading ability and spring was obvious from his early few games at United also. Andy Gray on Sky used to highlight it regularly in particular.

Drogba is another one, was playing in the French second division at 26 apparently cleaned up his diet and soon after became one of the best players in the champions league.

Drogba was watched by some big clubs in early days like Arsenal when he was at Le Mans. Wenger has admitted this himself. His potential was known from an earlier age but clubs dithered on it before he went to Guingamp and then Marseille.

Gordon Strachan's biggest mistake when he turned down the chance to sign him for Southampton.

 

[martinvickers]

lol. You don't seriously think you are going to convince anyone that the least funny post in the history of the forum, and one that contained absolutely 0 whit or any humour device and would not get a laugh even if it was read out to a crowd of people on laughing gas, was intended as a joke, and that whatsmore, anyone who didn't find it hillarious must hate you?

There was no joke, there was nothing funny. Like others before you, you got caught in the lie and stop digging.

I'm not looking for your consultancy services on humour. You've made it fairly clear you can't see past your own nastiness towards me. Suffice to say, as a lifelong fan of the Reds that I would, in seriousness randomly accuse one of my clubs heroes of doping is absurd.

As to convincing anyone, I've not the least interest in what convinces you or your ilk, to be blunt.

 

[sittingbison]

time to take a chill pill you two

cheers
bison

 

[The Hitch]

time to take a chill pill you two

cheers
bison

I don't think the discussion has been particularly bad at all and since Martin's post is still there, I do have a question and an observation, that break absolutely no rules.

I would be interested to hear what my "ilk' is.

And in response to this comment I would.like to observe

Suffice to say, as a lifelong fan of the Reds that I would, in seriousness randomly accuse one of my clubs heroes of doping is absurd.

So you admit your personal bias towards athletes plays a big part in whether you consider them to be doping? Otherwise why would you flag up being a fan of his team when trying to explain why you didn't thunk he was a doper.

For me I don't care if the person in question is my enemy, a stranger, or family. Emotion should never intefere with judgment.

 

[martinvickers]

I don't think the discussion has been particularly bad at all and since Martin's post is still there, I do have a question and an observation, that break absolutely no rules.

I would be interested to hear what my "ilk' is.

The answer would require breaking the rules of the forum. In deference to sittingbison, I won't do that.

Suffice to say, it does NOT stretch as wide as to catch, e.g. the likes of Hog and sniper, whom I disgree with most of the time, but whom I can also attempt friendly and civilised discussion. It's a very select ethical grupetto.

And in response to this comment I would.like to observe



So you admit your personal bias towards athletes plays a big part in whether you consider them to be doping? Otherwise why would you flag up being a fan of his team when trying to explain why you didn't thunk he was a doper.

For me I don't care if the person in question is my enemy, a stranger, or family. Emotion should never intefere with judgment.

Again, you have misunderstood, entirely. I 'admit' no such thing. The key word in my Reds response was "randomly".

My 'bias' plays no part - as I would have thought my comments on Stephen Roche and Sean Kelly on this board would have made plain.

My point, as you know rightly, was that having refused to indulge the favourite game of many clinicians, yourself included, of alleging doping on the grounds of nothing but personal hunch, the idea that I would, in seriousness, break that rule for a hero of my own club without a shred of evidence is absurd and self-serving. It was clearly a joke; you chose to believe otherwise because you wanted to, for reasons of personal dislike, and for no other reason.

If evidence were actually to arise in relation to Giggs, Scholes, Cantona, Solksjaer or any of the other heroes of the club, I would pounce on it, regardless of affiliation. Because I, unlike some, actually care about doping and clean sport.

And for examples of that, one need only look at Jaap Stam and Rio Ferdinand.

AS for your final sentence, self-praise is no recommendation.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

The answer would require breaking the rules of the forum. In deference to sittingbison, I won't do that.

Suffice to say, it does NOT stretch as wide as to catch, e.g. the likes of Hog and sniper, whom I disgree with most of the time, but whom I can also attempt friendly and civilised discussion. It's a very select ethical grupetto.



Again, you have misunderstood, entirely. I 'admit' no such thing. The key word in my Reds response was "randomly".

My 'bias' plays no part - as I would have thought my comments on Stephen Roche and Sean Kelly on this board would have made plain.

My point, as you know rightly, was that having refused to indulge the favourite game of many clinicians, yourself included, of alleging doping on the grounds of nothing but personal hunch, the idea that I would, in seriousness, break that rule for a hero of my own club without a shred of evidence is absurd and self-serving. It was clearly a joke; you chose to believe otherwise because you wanted to, for reasons of personal dislike, and for no other reason.

If evidence were actually to arise in relation to Giggs, Scholes, Cantona, Solksjaer or any of the other heroes of the club, I would pounce on it, regardless of affiliation. Because I, unlike some, actually care about doping and clean sport.

And for examples of that, one need only look at Jaap Stam and Rio Ferdinand.

AS for your final sentence, self-praise is no recommendation.

Not for nothing, but didn't you just praise yourself?

 

[EnacheV]

Edit - A tired Messi won't score against a fresh you for 1000 minutes? Perhaps the most delusional thing I've ever heard on the internet. Congrats

see present

4 matches without scoring = obviously his fitness was bad, announcing ..... a 2 month injury.

You can have all the talent in the world, if you can't get from A to B fast enough, not a single time, you are useles (except if you are Beckham that does only freekicks)

The dudes who say football is not so much doping because technique is important have no clue. That was my point.

 

[martinvickers]

Not for nothing, but didn't you just praise yourself?

No. I explained myself. Rather different.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

No. I explained myself. Rather different.

You explained yourself as well as praised yourself. imo. But we will never agree so i said my piece.

 

[The Hitch]

Not for nothing, but didn't you just praise yourself?

Me Zam, I don't understand how the following qualifies as "self praise".

For me I don't care if the person in question is my enemy, a stranger, or family. Emotion should never intefere with judgment.

But if it does, then surely these are also examples

I don't make gods of any journo. Not Walsh. Not Kimmage. I hold the fourth estate in something close to the contempt I hold most of the first three.
.

I couldn't give a sh*t what flag they fly. And because I'm pretty draconian in my views on what should happen proven dopers (I argued on radio a few years back for criminal offences for doping athletes and coaches as a form both of fraud and drug trafficking), i tend to not take proving it as lightly as i might. Probably the lawyer in me.

Or are the last 2 all "jokes" and "explanations"?

 

[martinvickers]

Me Zam, I don't understand how the following qualifies as "self praise".



But if it does, then surely these are also examples






Or are the last 2 all "jokes" and "explanations"?

The difference is that you implied you, unlike others, were able to control your emotions when judging. That's clearly (delusional) self-praise of your own judgment.

I stated that I had draconian views on doping, and because of that sought good evidence before acting, and that I hold the press in general contempt. Neither of which is self-praise, simply explanantion.

"the Lawyer in me" quip might be considered self-deprecating humour.

None of it crowed about my qualities of judgement.

Simples. Now, trot on.

 

[martinvickers]

You explained yourself as well as praised yourself. imo. But we will never agree so i said my piece.

You're right. We won't. But rest assured I'll give your opinion the very measure of consideration it merits.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Wow, is Ronaldo ever pretty...

That's the point of this thread, right?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Wow, is Ronaldo ever pretty...

That's the point of this thread, right?

but will you buy the underpants?

 

[the sceptic]

forgot about Bale. He is the Froome of football. From average left back to the most expensive player in the world in a few years. Very impressive.

Dont worry Martin, I know he is british so the transformation can only be down to: laser-like focus, increased confidence and of course most importantly, hard work.

 

[gooner]

forgot about Bale. He is the Froome of football. From average left back to the most expensive player in the world in a few years. Very impressive.

Dont worry Martin, I know he is british so the transformation can only be down to: laser-like focus, increased confidence and of course most importantly, hard work.

Sorry, this is wrong on all accounts. I remember watching Bale for Southampton against Derby on the opening day of the Championship in 2006 live on Sky and he got a superb free-kick. He was left-back that day but you could see he was a top talent even then. George Burley his manager at Southampton at the time said he was going to be the best left back in the world. Arsenal and United were massively on the case of trying to get him before Spurs signed him. In the case of Ferguson, he seen him more as a left-winger and wanted him as the long-term replacement for Giggs. I don't think anyone expected him to be the most expensive player in the world, but his potential to be a top class player was widely known when he was 16/17. I myself, was hoping Arsenal would clinch the deal to get him back then.

Yes, it may have taken him a while to show his potential at Spurs but you couldn't be more wrong in terms of the Froome comparison by saying he came out of nowhere.

British has nothing got to do with it.

 

[martinvickers]

forgot about Bale. He is the Froome of football. From average left back to the most expensive player in the world in a few years. Very impressive.

Dont worry Martin, I know he is british so the transformation can only be down to: laser-like focus, increased confidence and of course most importantly, hard work.

Again with the British? Did some English kid steal your ice cream as a kid, or something?

I haven't the least notion why I'm expected to be interested in any particular way for an ex-Spurs Welshman.