What do you think about this??

[whufc]

I would highly doubt playing sport 'high' on any 'uppers' would increase performance.

While there might be a slight performance benefit during a game i think that would be counteracted by the 'come down' which would decrease a players recovery and ability to complete their rehab, training during the week etc.

[daysofourlives]

Let it go Bombers4eva. Jobe never had a season like it, either before or after 2012. No doubt in my mind what ever he was on enabled him to play above what he was normally capable of. He's a plodder at best and is over rated because of his one performance enhanced season. Take that year out of it and he's no different to a Michael Barlow or a Keiran Jack or a Matthew Stokes. The worst thing is the cheat will profit from it for the rest of his life

[Bombers4EVA]

Let it go Bombers4eva. Jobe never had a season like it, either before or after 2012. No doubt in my mind what ever he was on enabled him to play above what he was normally capable of. He's a plodder at best and is over rated because of his one performance enhanced season. Take that year out of it and he's no different to a Michael Barlow or a Keiran Jack or a Matthew Stokes. The worst thing is the cheat will profit from it for the rest of his life

Hey days...., did I ever say that what Jobe did was right. Hell no. I agree that in respect to the game he had to hand it back in. I'm just saying that through their own personal admissions, they took illicit drugs through their time. They need to look at themselves and think hard to as whether they acted fairly or not. Taking any drugs whether performance or illicit while playing for a professional sport where taking a banned drugs is forbidden. Needs to have the same punishment. Just like Jobe handed in his Brownlow, so I think Cousins (if he hasn't sold it by now) and Swan need to think about handing theirs in. What message does it send to the young kids who look up to these blokes.

[am Bays]

I would highly doubt playing sport 'high' on any 'uppers' would increase performance.

While there might be a slight performance benefit during a game i think that would be counteracted by the 'come down' which would decrease a players recovery and ability to complete their rehab, training during the week etc.

The science suggests otherwise.

Plus why are they on the banned WADA list for PEDs??

http://list.wada-ama.org/list/s6-stimulants/

WADA and ASADA don't care what people take in their own time for recreation use (that's the sport's concern with respect to their public image) they are only concerned with what improves performance.

Re you 2nd point about there only being a slight performance benefit. Athletes take PEDS to only get a slight performance enhancement. A sight benefit in competition means the difference between getting a medal/winning and losing (~1% difference between 1st and 3rd in the Rio 100 m final). There was ~ 0,5% difference between 2nd and fifth (9.89 to 9.94). Taking a substance to get that slight competition edge is what drives the whole PED industry.

However only dumb athletes would take that stuff (amphetamines before competition because they are so easily detectable.

[whufc]

I would highly doubt playing sport 'high' on any 'uppers' would increase performance.

While there might be a slight performance benefit during a game i think that would be counteracted by the 'come down' which would decrease a players recovery and ability to complete their rehab, training during the week etc.

The science suggests otherwise.

Plus why are they on the banned WADA list for PEDs??

http://list.wada-ama.org/list/s6-stimulants/

WADA and ASADA don't care what people take in their own time for recreation use (that's the sport's concern with respect to their public image) they are only concerned with what improves performance.

Re you 2nd point about there only being a slight performance benefit. Athletes take PEDS to only get a slight performance enhancement. A sight benefit in competition means the difference between getting a medal/winning and losing (~1% difference between 1st and 3rd in the Rio 100 m final). There was ~ 0,5% difference between 2nd and fifth (9.89 to 9.94). Taking a substance to get that slight competition edge is what drives the whole PED industry.

However only dumb athletes would take that stuff (amphetamines before competition because they are so easily detectable.

Like I said some of those stimulants may improve their performance on the park but in the case of an addict or regular user overalls I can't believe their performance will be enhanced

Most of the stimulants also suppress appetite this can not be good for a footballer Monday to Friday, most stimulants have a reasonable come down, I highly doubt a player taking stimulants on match day is going to be overly effective at training for the next few days.

What I'm saying is that I believe a regular user would offset their slight game day advantage with poor midweek training, body conditioning, focus to learning etc etc

[Bombers4EVA]

I would highly doubt playing sport 'high' on any 'uppers' would increase performance.

While there might be a slight performance benefit during a game i think that would be counteracted by the 'come down' which would decrease a players recovery and ability to complete their rehab, training during the week etc.

The science suggests otherwise.

Plus why are they on the banned WADA list for PEDs??

http://list.wada-ama.org/list/s6-stimulants/

WADA and ASADA don't care what people take in their own time for recreation use (that's the sport's concern with respect to their public image) they are only concerned with what improves performance.

Re you 2nd point about there only being a slight performance benefit. Athletes take PEDS to only get a slight performance enhancement. A sight benefit in competition means the difference between getting a medal/winning and losing (~1% difference between 1st and 3rd in the Rio 100 m final). There was ~ 0,5% difference between 2nd and fifth (9.89 to 9.94). Taking a substance to get that slight competition edge is what drives the whole PED industry.

However only dumb athletes would take that stuff (amphetamines before competition because they are so easily detectable.

Like I said some of those stimulants may improve their performance on the park but in the case of an addict or regular user overalls I can't believe their performance will be enhanced

Most of the stimulants also suppress appetite this can not be good for a footballer Monday to Friday, most stimulants have a reasonable come down, I highly doubt a player taking stimulants on match day is going to be overly effective at training for the next few days.

What I'm saying is that I believe a regular user would offset their slight game day advantage with poor midweek training, body conditioning, focus to learning etc etc

So how many players from the 2006 Premiership side of West Coast do you think would of been on some sort of gear??

[whufc]

Wouldn't have a clue!!! I've never ever been to Perth never mind know what their footballers get up to in their spare time.

In my 'glory' days of being on the clubbing scene in the late 90's to early 2000's I would honestly believe at least 50% of South Australian AFL/SANFL footballers were on some form of recreational drugs, not that they would have been using for its performance 'enhancing' benefits

[Bombers4EVA]

Wouldn't have a clue!!! I've never ever been to Perth never mind know what their footballers get up to in their spare time.

In my 'glory' days of being on the clubbing scene in the late 90's to early 2000's I would honestly believe at least 50% of South Australian AFL/SANFL footballers were on some form of recreational drugs, not that they would have been using for its performance 'enhancing' benefits

I could tell ya now without any doubt the Cousins, Fletcher, Kerr and some others were on something that day. You could tell by Cousins reaction on the podium that he was on some sort of "High". And it wasn't natural.

[stan]

I disagree with this as I also thought Jobe shouldnt have lost his. But heck as per normal the bombers and there fans want to go down in a screaming heap and take as many with them.

Because it was all the AFLs fault and nobody elses.

#standbyhird?

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[Q.]

Wouldn't have a clue!!! I've never ever been to Perth never mind know what their footballers get up to in their spare time.

In my 'glory' days of being on the clubbing scene in the late 90's to early 2000's I would honestly believe at least 50% of South Australian AFL/SANFL footballers were on some form of recreational drugs, not that they would have been using for its performance 'enhancing' benefits

I could tell ya now without any doubt the Cousins, Fletcher, Kerr and some others were on something that day. You could tell by Cousins reaction on the podium that he was on some sort of "High". And it wasn't natural.

Except they obviously passed drug tests that day

You're banging on about players using stims regularly in-competition, but Saad is the only player to have tested positive on match day and that was because of his own ignorance.

Just face it, AFL players don't take rec drugs to play footy. They take rec drugs to party when the footy is over.

[Booney]

Wouldn't have a clue!!! I've never ever been to Perth never mind know what their footballers get up to in their spare time.

In my 'glory' days of being on the clubbing scene in the late 90's to early 2000's I would honestly believe at least 50% of South Australian AFL/SANFL footballers were on some form of recreational drugs, not that they would have been using for its performance 'enhancing' benefits

I could tell ya now without any doubt the Cousins, Fletcher, Kerr and some others were on something that day. You could tell by Cousins reaction on the podium that he was on some sort of "High". And it wasn't natural.

#clueless

[Bombers4EVA]

I disagree with this as I also thought Jobe shouldnt have lost his. But heck as per normal the bombers and there fans want to go down in a screaming heap and take as many with them.

Because it was all the AFLs fault and nobody elses.

#standbyhird?

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

Stan, I have said this before. That what the club did and also the players also being held responsible too for the drug scandal. I totally agree with the sanctions. I and many other Essendon fans I know haven't "screamed" up and down at the AFL for what has happened. We acknowledged that what they did was wrong. And we were disappointed in what has happened. And we have moved on. I am stating that I believe that Cousins and Swan should seriously look at themselves (as well as the AFL) as to whether they deserve to be a Brownlow medalist after stating that they took illicit drugs throughout their playing careers. Jobe is a champion footballer. And a great bloke. I have had the pleasure in meeting him on a few occasions. What has happened to him will haunt him for the rest of his life. But he is strong within himself and he can go ahead with his life with a clear conscience. But can Cousins and Swan live like that?

[Bombers4EVA]

Wouldn't have a clue!!! I've never ever been to Perth never mind know what their footballers get up to in their spare time.

In my 'glory' days of being on the clubbing scene in the late 90's to early 2000's I would honestly believe at least 50% of South Australian AFL/SANFL footballers were on some form of recreational drugs, not that they would have been using for its performance 'enhancing' benefits

I could tell ya now without any doubt the Cousins, Fletcher, Kerr and some others were on something that day. You could tell by Cousins reaction on the podium that he was on some sort of "High". And it wasn't natural.

Except they obviously passed drug tests that day

You're banging on about players using stims regularly in-competition, but Saad is the only player to have tested positive on match day and that was because of his own ignorance.

Just face it, AFL players don't take rec drugs to play footy. They take rec drugs to party when the footy is over.

Not banging on bud, just having a conversation on a topic I had read and wanted people to have a general discussion about it. Thought what I read had some very valid points.

[Dogwatcher]

The Brownlow is for best and fairest in the AFL, not the best and fairest in life.
If it was, there'd be a shed load of medal winners under question in this thread, just for being shit blokes or having criminal records.

[Magellan]

The Brownlow is for best and fairest in the AFL, not the best and fairest in life.
If it was, there'd be a shed load of medal winners under question in this thread, just for being shit blokes or having criminal records.

Like Dane Swan.

[Lightning McQueen]

Although it doesn't affect my time in the house, I think it's justified that Watson loses his medal as he was found guilty of using a performance enhancing banned substance.
As for the other two mentioned, I don't think there is any comparison, if they felt that they could've rocked up wizzing off their tits to play footy in front of 20 odd camera's, tens of thousands of supporters, medical staff, team mates and coaching staff, well then I don't know who's the most cooked.

[Booney]

Although it doesn't affect my time in the house, I think it's justified that Watson loses his medal as he was found guilty of using a performance enhancing banned substance.
As for the other two mentioned, I don't think there is any comparison, if they felt that they could've rocked up wizzing off their tits to play footy in front of 20 odd camera's, tens of thousands of supporters, medical staff, team mates and coaching staff, well then I don't know who's the most cooked.

Technically, they weren't found guilty. CAS found that they were to, "a comfortable satisfaction" involved in the use of performance enhancing substances.

*edit* "Comfortable satisfaction" I had "reasonable satisfaction".

[Lightning McQueen]

Although it doesn't affect my time in the house, I think it's justified that Watson loses his medal as he was found guilty of using a performance enhancing banned substance.
As for the other two mentioned, I don't think there is any comparison, if they felt that they could've rocked up wizzing off their tits to play footy in front of 20 odd camera's, tens of thousands of supporters, medical staff, team mates and coaching staff, well then I don't know who's the most cooked.

Technically, they weren't found guilty. CAS found that they were to, "a reasonable satisfaction" involved in the use of performance enhancing substances.

Tomatoes/ red things that have seeds in them.

[Booney]

Although it doesn't affect my time in the house, I think it's justified that Watson loses his medal as he was found guilty of using a performance enhancing banned substance.
As for the other two mentioned, I don't think there is any comparison, if they felt that they could've rocked up wizzing off their tits to play footy in front of 20 odd camera's, tens of thousands of supporters, medical staff, team mates and coaching staff, well then I don't know who's the most cooked.

Technically, they weren't found guilty. CAS found that they were to, "a reasonable satisfaction" involved in the use of performance enhancing substances.

Tomatoes/ red things that have seeds in them.

For sure, but for mine the difference between being found guilty or someone finding to a comfortable satisfaction your wrong doing would be worth fighting for, ie - not giving my brownlow* back.






*I've never actually won a brownlow.

[am Bays]

Except they obviously passed drug tests that day

You're banging on about players using stims regularly in-competition, but Saad is the only player to have tested positive on match day and that was because of his own ignorance.

Just face it, AFL players don't take rec drugs to play footy. They take rec drugs to party when the footy is over.

Spot on