Paul Gallen - self confessed drug cheat: did NSW REALLY win State of Origin?

[crowie]

Yep, it's the only footy I watch now too.

I can't even watch it as the whole street knows I'm a Queenslander......

Back on topic....

Ban all drug cheats for life and take away whatever awards they may have won, for the sake of the kids that idolize them. ZERO TOLERANCE!!

[Twisted Tenon]

Ok, staying on topic but changing the focus. When he was done for using a masking drug all he'll broke lose. But to my mind he did nothing wrong. If he was a brick layer who needed to get back to work to earn a quid he could have legally used steroids to recover. To my mind he did not cheat but did everything he could do to get back to work....
Incoming!!!!!.....

TT

[doug3030]

Ok, staying on topic but changing the focus. When he was done for using a masking drug all he'll broke lose. But to my mind he did nothing wrong. If he was a brick layer who needed to get back to work to earn a quid he could have legally used steroids to recover. To my mind he did not cheat but did everything he could do to get back to work....
Incoming!!!!!.....

TT

An interesting perspective, TT. Problem is, if he can take the substance to "get back to work" it leaves the door open for anyone else to use the same substance in an effort to overcome other real or pretend injuries, so that they can "get back to work" too. You either have rules or you have open slather.

Cheers

Doug

[Twisted Tenon]

So Doug, you accept that there is a difference between recovering from an injury to return to work and the Lance Armstrong's of the world. I would have thought an injury like the one Warne suffered should have allowed him dispensation to use steroids. He didn't cheat, he just got back to work quicker. There is a difference. The rules are intractable because it's easier to ban the lot than look at each case on its merits.

Now the Cronulla boys weren't injured, but did they know they were taking banned substances? and was the coach too trusting and thereby culpable by default?

TT

[FenceFurniture]

.... but did they know they were taking banned substances?

.....which goes on to say that the players "unwittingly" took the banned substances.

and I guess that's why they got a ridiculous backdated ban. Talk about a contradiction in terms.

Still, how could you expect intelligent, articulated thoughts and actions to come out of a contact sport world, given that most of the administrators are ex-players who were not working off a great base to start with, and even that has been "contacted" rather too much?

Something like a suspended sentence would have had far more credibility (i.e. if you re-offend, you not only get the new sentence, you get the suspended one as well).

[smidsy]

As much as I go for Queensland and would like to claim we lost because half the NSW team was doped up, the fact is that Queensland played like crap in the first two games and could have been beaten had half the NSW team not shown up.

As for AFL, I was raised in WA (I'm now in Qld) and loved AFL but the game as we know it has been ruined - they tried to remove the thuggery (a good idea) but in doing so took away the physicality and ruined the essence of the game.

As for Etiad stadium. It's common now for the final 8 to be decided on percentage, Melbourne has bad weather one weekend, two teams playing at the MCG suffer the weather and have a low scoring game. Two teams who draw Ettad stadium get the roof closed, perfect conditions and the opoortunity to kick a high score - its an unfair advantage.
But as someone said, its about money - closing the roof gets more spectators in which means more money.
It's soon be as bad as the US where the game is halted to allow commercial breaks to run on tv.

[Twisted Tenon]

As much as I go for Queensland and would like to claim we lost because half the NSW team was doped up, the fact is that Queensland played like crap in the first two games and could have been beaten had half the NSW team not shown up

I have a theory about that smidsey. I think the game was rigged, see the first two games were reffed by Haynes & Cummins. They allowed slow play the balls and a short 10 meters. After we had secured the series, Haynes was dropped for the third game and every thing sped up. Our backs were no match for the QLD backs.

TT

[doug3030]

[QUOTE=Twisted Tenon;1801619]see the first two games were reffed by Haynes & Cummins. They allowed slow play the balls and a short 10 meters. After we had secured the series, Haynes was dropped for the third game and every thing sped up. Our backs were no match for the QLD backs./QUOTE]

That's a part of it TT. Game 1 particularly, and game 2 to a lesser extent were dogged by deliberate attempts by NSW players to injure QLD players, particularly Smith, Slater, Cronk and Thurston.

Now I like a good hard-hitting game of Rugby as much as anyone and Origin is as tough as it gets and rightly so. I would hate to see it turned into a sissy's game but what the referees allowed to happen in those first two games was disgusting.

There is a big difference between going in hard so that you hurt the opposition so that they are wary of you next time as opposed to going in hard to deliberately injure someone to the extent that they cannot continue the game.

It is disappointing that at such an elite level of sport that players themselves caused sportsmanship to be replaced by thuggery and even more disappointing that the referees did not put a stop to it when it became apparent what was going on. It was obvious to me where this was going 15 minutes into the first game.

Cheers

Doug

[Twisted Tenon]

There is a big difference between going in hard so that you hurt the opposition so that they are wary of you next time as opposed to going in hard to deliberately injure someone to the extent that they cannot continue the game.

You say pot I say kettle Doug. Gordon Tallis, Wally Lewis and even Darren Lockyer were guilty of some retrograde behaviour. I can't think of any New South Welshmen who would do that sort of stuff But I bet there were a few. I found this on You Tube, makes your hair stand on end

TT

[FenceFurniture]

Sorry, that's a ridiculous video with all the added explosion sounds and Ray Warren's non-stop "OOH AAH". He would have to be the worst sports commentator ever, in any sport.

"AND HE GETS OUT TO XXX, and OOH ah, nothing happened". He's another reason why I stopped watching NRL.

For a short while I was able to watch the live action on the TV and listen to Roy and HG's call (usually for just the first half, before things got tense as they inevitably did). I think Channel Nine must have woken up and put on a delay which jiggered that fun.

[Twisted Tenon]

That's interesting, I watched that without the sound. It came across differently. Ray Warren doesn't impress me either. I much prefer the ABC commentators and have in the past turned the volume down and listened to them.

TT

[doug3030]

I found this on You Tube, makes your hair stand on end

Well it does if you put any credence in the sound effects edited over the original footage. If you view it with the sound turned off so that you cant hear the artificial crunching noises, it just looks like a good, tough, hard-hitting game of rugby for the most part.

What is interesting though is that there have been very few replies that actually address what I actually started the thread to discuss.

I started the thread hoping to get opinions on the awarding a retrospective ban to a self-confessed drug cheat and whether that is an effective punishment given that he has played several games during what is now his official banned period, including 3 Origin games and whether the NRL should strip his team of their Origin win, as they have done to other teams that have later been found to be in breach of the rules.

I made a big list of things that I don't give a rats asre about the other day and the drug problems in the AFL with Essendon and Hird were right up near the top of the list, but that seems to be all anyone wants to discuss as soon as you mention drugs in sport.

Apart from Crowie saying drug cheats should be banned for life, which I happen to totally agree with, nobody else has really given any input on the original question, but have hijacked the thread off to other places like refereeing, different sports etc. I can understand different sports when it is using an example as a precedent but none of the references to Essendon and AFL seem to fit that criterion, unlike the Warne and Armstrong examples that have been raised.

Does anyone else have an opinion on whether a retrospective ban is any penalty at all unless they nullify the results of any games played during the period of the retrospective ban? I know that it will probably never happen because the NRL is dominated by NSW, but if the boot was on the other foot, I bet they would not have any hesitation in stripping QLD of a title or two.

Now, citing Essendon as a precedent, it has just come out that Essendon was offered a deal that their players could serve a suspension in the off season instead of the sanctions that the club accepted. Why was that? Well I don't know for sure but it might have had something to do with having to admit they were guilty to be eligible, or might it have been that the club knew they were guilty and knew that accepting a bull$hit penalty would not have gone down well with the general public?

Well, now that I know that Essendon was offered a watered down deal too I have to wonder if the sporting administration bodies and ASADA really want to keep sport clean or just want to create an appearance and not rock too many boats. it seems to be an attitude of"you are guilty but we are going to find a way that we con be seen to be punishing you without really hurting you, your teams and the corporate sponsors.

Well congratulations to them if that is the case because they have just ruined the last bastion of truly representative sport.

Cheers

Doug

[Twisted Tenon]

My opinion is that these bans are the best that can be expected because ASADA have botched the process. I believe the Cronulla players have only admitted to illegal drug use because they were offered a soft punishment. From their public statements they clearly don't believe they have broken any laws. The soft punishments indicate to me that ASADA have not handled the matter properly. Some of my posts have alluded to this. Other sports cycling and the Olympics have a superior monitoring system and their bans stick. Wendal Sailor received a 12 month ban for using a recreational drug and the NRL was all over that.

TT

[Twisted Tenon]

Further to my above post this was in today's Herald. It raises some questions around the players culpability and sheds some light on the reasons for the light sentences. In looking at the original question, of course the result should stand. The offence occurred in 2011, Gallen had presumably not used since then.

TT

[Ironwood]

Well, looking at the upside of Paul Gallens suspension, at least the wonker will have some spare time to model for the bronze statue that NSW was going to make and put outside the stadium .



On a more serious note, I think ASADA should have to answer on why it took so long to deal with this issue.
I think the players in question should have been stood down from the start , and the investigation done asap. We wouldnt have this rediculous mess we have now.