Tom Curry Gooone (4 year doping ban)
Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 8:54 pm
In all seriousness 4 years is incredibly harsh for coke, even in competition. Can't see people seriously using it for performance enhancement on the rugby pitch.
The definitive rugby union forum. Talk to fans from around the world about your favourite team
https://forum.planetrugby.com/
What is the current standard ban ?DragsterDriver wrote:Really harsh.
I'm glad I never got tested.......ZappaMan wrote:4 years for a bit of blow
I don't care. People get less for performance enhancing drugsAnonymous. wrote:What is the current standard ban ?DragsterDriver wrote:Really harsh.
Seems more than harsh. Can he sue ?happyhooker wrote:I don't care. People get less for performance enhancing drugsAnonymous. wrote:What is the current standard ban ?DragsterDriver wrote:Really harsh.
Ben Rumsby
26 JANUARY 2017 • 6:37PM
Two Premiership players tested positive for cocaine last season, the Rugby Football Union has confirmed.
The unnamed pair returned samples showing out-of-competition use of the recreational drug, according to the latest RFU annual anti-doping report.
The players were fined £5,000, ordered to undergo a rehabilitation course and warned they faced the same fate as former England prop Matt Stevens – who was banned for two years in 2009 for taking cocaine – if they transgressed again.
No idea?Anonymous. wrote:What is the current standard ban ?DragsterDriver wrote:Really harsh.
Yeah Hardie. He got 3 months I think. This ban is insane.DragsterDriver wrote:No idea?Anonymous. wrote:What is the current standard ban ?DragsterDriver wrote:Really harsh.
Didn’t the Scottish flanker recently get pulled for it?
That’s really unfair. Poor guy, semipro or whatever and has a few lines on a night out.danthefan wrote:Yeah Hardie. He got 3 months I think. This ban is insane.DragsterDriver wrote:No idea?Anonymous. wrote:What is the current standard ban ?DragsterDriver wrote:Really harsh.
Didn’t the Scottish flanker recently get pulled for it?
TBF it's an idiotic thing to doDragsterDriver wrote:That’s really unfair. Poor guy, semipro or whatever and has a few lines on a night out.danthefan wrote:Yeah Hardie. He got 3 months I think. This ban is insane.DragsterDriver wrote:No idea?Anonymous. wrote:What is the current standard ban ?DragsterDriver wrote:Really harsh.
Didn’t the Scottish flanker recently get pulled for it?
Same!eldanielfire wrote:The title sure as heck got me as to who it was.
Is being considered performance enhancing here (that's an argument in itself), but even so a top end ban like this is an eye opener. On the UKAD site some other athletes get less for steroids.Diego wrote:Same!eldanielfire wrote:The title sure as heck got me as to who it was.
That's so fúcking harsh though. I don't even really understand why they hand out bans for recreationals anyway.
Mindboggling ban.Davedj77 wrote:Is this for real? 4 years for coke? That's freaking insane.
The NFL gives 4 game bans for f**king PEDS! But then they are way too lax on that shit.Wendigo7 wrote:Mindboggling ban.Davedj77 wrote:Is this for real? 4 years for coke? That's freaking insane.
I think Steroids I've seen get a year or 2. Coke isn't and can't be performance enhancing can it?
Wendigo7 wrote:Mindboggling ban.Davedj77 wrote:Is this for real? 4 years for coke? That's freaking insane.
I think Steroids I've seen get a year or 2. Coke isn't and can't be performance enhancing can it?
They barely even test them as well.Davedj77 wrote:The NFL gives 4 game bans for f**king PEDS! But then they are way too lax on that shit.Wendigo7 wrote:Mindboggling ban.Davedj77 wrote:Is this for real? 4 years for coke? That's freaking insane.
I think Steroids I've seen get a year or 2. Coke isn't and can't be performance enhancing can it?