rugbyunion
Latest News:

Logging in or posting queries? Look at the "How to..." button on the panel on the left.

BBC Rugby | Aviva Premiership TV | European Champions Cup | MatchDayLive Score Updates | Ultimate Rugby App

It's a DW, DW, DW world - where do DWs come from? <<<-->

*** BUY MATCH TICKETS | Join Wasps FC Amateurs ***


Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2
James Slipper
Old Geezer (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 09:35
I hope that Slipper deals well with his personal issues and gets back to playing rugby. He is a great prop.

I did have a thought. I genuinely wonder how the taking of a Class A drug compares in gravity with the taking of a supplement. Slipper got a two month ban. The English prop who was punished for taking cocaine got a ban which I think from memory was a year.

If allegations against Ashley are substantiated does the Slipper case provide an insight into what we might expect?

I don't know how the Authorities view Class A against Supplement.

I share the views of others that I cannot work out the delays in the resolution of the Ashley situation.

 
Re: James Slipper
backdoc (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 09:58
i think it was 2 years for Matt Stevens.

 
Re: James Slipper
Trev's Big Tackle (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 10:02
Quote:
backdoc
i think it was 2 years for Matt Stevens.

I think the punishment levels were altered since Matt Stevens ban, which was for recreational drugs not supplements or performance enhancing. So the precedent set there is irrelevant to any new failed tests.

 
Re: James Slipper
Raggs (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 10:23
An amateur (I think), just got hit with a 4 year ban for using cocaine. It doesn't seem fair that someone who at the very least isn't getting paid much, and mostly playing for fun, get's done for 4 years, whereas a paid professional picks up a couple of months.

 
Re: James Slipper
Nomad_Wasp (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 11:17
A couple of months seems absurdly lenient, even for something that isn't performance enhancing.

 
Re: James Slipper
Barnetsarrie12 (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 12:59
I agree with Nomad a lot. While i do hope James Slipper sorts out whatever issues he has, the guy has been found guilty of taking cocaine twice now, he has tested positive twice and to only be banned for 2 months for having a positive cocaine test is setting a very bad precedent in that country imo

 
Re: James Slipper
24 May, 2018 13:24
Quote:
Barnetsarrie12
I agree with Nomad a lot. While i do hope James Slipper sorts out whatever issues he has, the guy has been found guilty of taking cocaine twice now, he has tested positive twice and to only be banned for 2 months for having a positive cocaine test is setting a very bad precedent in that country imo

I think the two years Matt Stevens got was ridiculous, especially as it's dubious that taking cocaine is performance enhancing.

However twice failing and getting a two month ban sets a very bad precedent. It gives the impression that ARU and/or Australia's doping control aren't taking drug testing seriously.

Give Slipper the help and support he needs, but he should be on a twelve month ban.



If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score? - Vince Lombardi

 
Re: James Slipper
Hangover (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 13:54
Anything performance enhancing, properly throw the book at them.

But is coke on the Wada type list (masking or something) or is it still considered a recreational drug that is naughty ?

Even if recreational 2 months seems lax (especially for an international), 2 years seems overly harsh.

 
Re: James Slipper
Barnetsarrie12 (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 14:28
Quote:
DrHankPym(superhero)
Quote:
Barnetsarrie12
I agree with Nomad a lot. While i do hope James Slipper sorts out whatever issues he has, the guy has been found guilty of taking cocaine twice now, he has tested positive twice and to only be banned for 2 months for having a positive cocaine test is setting a very bad precedent in that country imo

I think the two years Matt Stevens got was ridiculous, especially as it's dubious that taking cocaine is performance enhancing.

However twice failing and getting a two month ban sets a very bad precedent. It gives the impression that ARU and/or Australia's doping control aren't taking drug testing seriously.

Give Slipper the help and support he needs, but he should be on a twelve month ban.

Totally agree mate, the ban on Stevens was excessive at the time and yes cocaine is not performance enhancing or has been shown to be and I don't even think he took the drug as a performance enhancer but like you rightly said and this is where the issue lies with me, he has failed a drugs test twice and whatever mitigating family circumstances he might have, I would be more amendable if he had only failed the test once, he failed it twice and to only get 2 months for that is beyond ridiculous in my opinion. Yes he should be supported and I am not saying throw the book at him but he should not be playing any rugby this year, he should have been banned for at least 6 months which will also give him enough time away from the spotlight to sort whatever issues he has out

 
Re: James Slipper
MarleyWasp (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 15:18
If you're trying to hide the symptoms of depression you are more susceptible to addictions, especially to cocaine as it offers a temporary escape in the short term, whilst exacerbating depression in the long run. It's quite likely Slipper's life has been spiraling out of control for a while.

A big part of recovering from depression is building up a routine and having goals. In his case it may well be to play Rugby again. To remove the ability to play Rugby for six months would only make his recovery harder. The likelihood is he may well not play again this year, but if he has the option of playing in the National Rugby Championship, or going on the November tour, it will help speed up his recovery.

That I suspect is the Wallabies' thinking behind the length.

 
Re: James Slipper
Gaz (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 15:25
If cocaine is not performance enhancing, or it doesn't mask other performance enhancing drugs why bother testing for it. Police the things that affect the game, not the choices of the individual that only have personal implications.

If someone abuses drugs and messes up their life then they won't have a very long career in any line of work. They should get support if they want it.

 
Re: James Slipper
westwaleswasp (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 15:38
My job can sack me for such things, don't see why rugby should be any different. It is a criminal offence and if you got seen doing it and clubs did nothing it would bring the game into disrepute. If non criminal behaviour can get you sacked, as in the case of the Ulster Rugby pair, then criminal behaviour certainly can certainly get a ban. Regardless of performance enhancement, class A can't be waved away by the sport as a lifestyle personal choice whilst it remains a serious offence. If it were legalised then it could.

 
Re: James Slipper
Gaz (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 15:47
Which is my point, why bother? If I do something that affects my effectiveness at work I'd expect a response. I drink a little alcohol in moderation sometimes with work colleagues socially, I've seen first hand the damage alcohol addiction can do, I'd rather provide support than punishment. If you sacked an alcoholic without first doing everything to help that would be wrong. Slipper should get offered support, not punishment. I think that would reflect better on rugby.

 
Re: James Slipper
24 May, 2018 16:04
I think in some instance cocaine can be used as a masking agent, possibly within cycling sports.

Generally it has no benefit for the vast majority of sports, so giving out two year bans seems lopsided.

Also there seems to be a disparity between out of competition and in competition tests. Eggchasers podcast last week or maybe week before mentioned that off season test recreational drug failure warrants a smaller penalty than in season failure.

You'd think it would be the same ban regardless of when the player is doing this?



If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score? - Vince Lombardi

 
Re: James Slipper
Trev's Big Tackle (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 16:16
I suppose it could be argued that if you're off your head on drugs you could be a danger to others in a game / training / gym situation. But I doubt there's any evidence any of the banned players having done that.

 
Re: James Slipper
Old Geezer (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 16:37
Gaz, drawing a comparison with alcohol is wong. The simple thing is that alcohol consumption is not in itself illegal but taking Class A is.

 
Re: James Slipper
Barnetsarrie12 (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 17:10
No one is saying that Slipper should not get support. Of course he should get all of the support he needs from the ARU to help him with his depression and any other issue he might have but, there has to be a repercussion for taking illegal drugs and for me 2 months is way to lenient for a guy who was caught taken illegal/banned substances twice.


We all want him to get all the support he needs but, he committed an offense and should have been punished more severely and he did it twice, not just once, twice. I am sorry I do not think 2 months is good enough, no one is saying ban him for 2 years, I am not even saying ban him for a year but, to me he should have been banned for the rest of the year, taking cocaine is not only banned in rugby, it is a criminal offense so 2 months is just bizarre to me

 
Re: James Slipper
Gaz (IP Logged)
24 May, 2018 18:01
Quote:
Old Geezer
Gaz, drawing a comparison with alcohol is wong. The simple thing is that alcohol consumption is not in itself illegal but taking Class A is.

As you say, only in its legality.

 
Re: James Slipper
westwaleswasp (IP Logged)
25 May, 2018 07:09
If alcohol was a new product it would almost certainly be illegal, although I don't know anyone personally who has died from it (unlike coke overdose, where I do), it has all the hallmarks of a prohibited substance. However it is legal for historic reasons and cocaine is not.
If clubs are testing samples I imagine it is with mass spectrometry in some sort of GC-MS system. That being the case you won't test for specific drugs in the way a clinistix can test urine for sugar say, you test the sample and will see peaks corresponding to known drugs. So you don't test for cocaine per se.

 
Re: James Slipper
Old Geezer (IP Logged)
25 May, 2018 08:58
Westwaleswasp, I agree with your comment as to why alcohol is not illegal and I tend to agree that if it were a new substance it might well be viewed in the same way as weed. I do have first hand experience of a death from alcohol and the destruction caused by addiction short of death. It is potentially evil (breakdown in families, drink driving deaths, our streets on a Friday night, domestic violence etc.) and so, for that matter, is gambling.

I suspect that that the two main reasons why those two things are not illegal is that too many people do them and they are thought "socially acceptable" and the Government raises too much money from them in tax.

Governments made an assault on smoking which did not even have the same social consequences as drinking and gambling and which raised huge amounts in tax because there was a recognition of the damage it caused to people and I don't see why the same view should not be taken of alcohol and gambling.

BTW, I like a drink and I smoke!!!

Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?