Rumour 2012 Brownlow to be re-awarded

[The Blue Baggers]

woewoden?

aka wowoeful

 

[MagpieJo]

Cousins is a ****en legend!!!

everyone was just jealous when that doco came out,

one of my ex gf's and now a good friend met him in a laundromat in balaclava and he ****** the s**t out of her all night

he was a pimp

Oops read that wrong thought he had a funny beanie on

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Cousins is a ****en legend!!!

everyone was just jealous when that doco came out,

one of my ex gf's and now a good friend met him in a laundromat in balaclava and he ****** the s**t out of her all night

he was a pimp

Haha, yeah, I often find myself jealous of ice junkies.

 

[MiloStedman]

You do realise that for most of those years' you'll find that pretty much all the top contenders have been done for doping at one time or another. Looking at 2000 as an example you have to go to 8th place to find a clean rider. The Brownlow count just means going to second place.

1 - Lance Armstrong DSQ
2 - Jan Ullrich - tested positive banned 2006
3 - Joseba Beloki ? - but did ride for Festina so very questionable
4 - Christophe Moreau - suspended for EPO use
5 - Roberto Heras - suspended for EPO use
6 - Richard Virenque - part of the Festina team during the doping affair (Moreau was also in that team)
7 - Santiago Botero - named in the Spainish doping clearout in 2006, although cleared by Columbian cycling never road in Europe again, join the dots
8 - Fernando Escartin - CLEAN

What a s**t sport.

 

[MiloStedman]

I'm absolutely certain that if those races were done without Armstrong the order and riders inside the top 10 would be completely different. I'm far less confident of that with the brownlow. Cotchin and Mitchell likely would have won it if Jobe wasn't playing/was of a lower standard. Ullrich might not have won it (though he was definitely the second best GC rider at the time so it's the worst example possible) in 2000 if Armstrong wasn't competing.

That's a guess.

 

[Slax]

What a s**t sport.

Each to their own, but given the way the AFL is going is now its more of a sport than AFL.

 

[MiloStedman]

Each to their own, but given the way the AFL is going is now its more of a sport than AFL.

Because one team took a bunch of unsafe, but not banned drugs? Yup.

Come talk to me when the top-seven teams all get done.

 

[Slax]

Because one team took a bunch of unsafe, but not banned drugs? Yup.

Come talk to me when the top-seven teams all get done.

Professional cycling now is what I'm talking about and it has the strictist drug code of any sport in the world. I have absolutely no doubt that there are AFL players currently playing who have deliberately taken performance enhancing drugs (this does not mean Essendon players invovled with Dank). Every professional cyclist is required to have a blood passport with random checks done constantly, AFL players whinge about getting a single tester rolling up once a year at 5:30am, what a bunch of soft utensils. international athletes such as cyclists and those in athletics will get this regularly not once off.

Performnce enhancing drugs will exist when the risk and reward factors are great enough for someone to justify it in their own mind. If you are looking at being a fringe player for 2-3 years tops getting no mroe than $100k, but if you take something like EPO which will increase your endurance significantly (definitely of benefit in the AFL) with little to no chance of being caught if you use it properly (impossible to detect 48 hours after injection without a blood passport) then it can easily become justifable to someone. If people want to bury their heads in the sand and think it doesn't happen then let them, but the truth is players use them and will continue to use them when the rewards can end up earning you more than an extra $1m dollars over your career, players will do it.

AFL tough on drugs? Don't make me laugh

 

[MiloStedman]

Professional cycling now is what I'm talking about and it has the strictist drug code of any sport in the world. I have absolutely no doubt that there are AFL players currently playing who have deliberately taken performance enhancing drugs (this does not mean Essendon players invovled with Dank). Every professional cyclist is required to have a blood passport with random checks done constantly, AFL players whinge about getting a single tester rolling up once a year at 5:30am, what a bunch of soft utensils. international athletes such as cyclists and those in athletics will get this regularly not once off.

Performnce enhancing drugs will exist when the risk and reward factors are great enough for someone to justify it in their own mind. If you are looking at being a fringe player for 2-3 years tops getting no mroe than $100k, but if you take something like EPO which will increase your endurance significantly (definitely of benefit in the AFL) with little to no chance of being caught if you use it properly (impossible to detect 48 hours after injection without a blood passport) then it can easily become justifable to someone. If people want to bury their heads in the sand and think it doesn't happen then let them, but the truth is players use them and will continue to use them when the rewards can end up earning you more than an extra $1m dollars over your career, players will do it.

AFL tough on drugs? Don't make me laugh

I'll just remind you again, the top seven cyclists in the Tour dé France were on drugs. The top seven.

Great speculation you have there, but once other players get proven to have taken these drugs, then that statement is really quite irrelevant. Would be just as relevant as me saying I have "no doubt" the top 100 cyclists in the Tour dé France inject every night.

I have no idea where I said the AFL's tough on drugs, but if you're going to put those words in my mouth, then I'll just quote to you again that the top seven cyclists in the Tour dé France were on drugs. The top seven.

 

[Slax]

I'll just remind you again, the top seven cyclists in the Tour dé France were on drugs. The top seven.

Great speculation you have there, but once other players get proven to have taken these drugs, then that statement is really quite irrelevant. Would be just as relevant as me saying I have "no doubt" the top 100 cyclists in the Tour dé France inject every night.

I have no idea where I said the AFL's tough on drugs, but if you're going to put those words in my mouth, then I'll just quote to you again that the top seven cyclists in the Tour dé France were on drugs. The top seven.

At least the UCI had proper drug testing going on in 2000, the AFL sure didn't. I wouldn't of been surprised in 7% of AFL players at the time had experimented with performance enhancing drugs at the time to guage there benefit, none will admit it but they would of.

I know for a fact from an ex-player that the use of performance enhancing drugs during the 1980s and early 90s was rife. He said he had no doubt that there were multiple players on every list who had used them with that number at some clubs in double figures. No-one likes to admit it publicly because it will tarnish their reputation and open up a can of worms that no-one wants, especially the player who would say it because it will destroy long existing friendships.

The AFL is as ready to handle drug cheats as it is to really handle an openly gay player. We still have a problem with racial vilifaction so how can we deal with far more confronting problems for the public? For the two or three well publicised incidents in recent times there are easily 10 times that number that have gone unreported. The fact that even in top level regional footy there are no more than handful of players who have come out, this shows we're not ready despite the fact the AFL says we are.

 

[Oneiros]

Haha, yeah, I often find myself jealous of ice junkies.

Any path in life that leads to you eventually bombed out with a packet of drugs up your anal cavity is a path I don't want to take, no matter who you shag along the way.

 

[Skippos]

I'll just remind you again, the top seven cyclists in the Tour dé France were on drugs. The top seven.

Great speculation you have there, but once other players get proven to have taken these drugs, then that statement is really quite irrelevant. Would be just as relevant as me saying I have "no doubt" the top 100 cyclists in the Tour dé France inject every night.

I have no idea where I said the AFL's tough on drugs, but if you're going to put those words in my mouth, then I'll just quote to you again that the top seven cyclists in the Tour dé France were on drugs. The top seven.

That's not evidence that there's more doping in cycling though. Could just be an indictment on the anti doping measures in cycling compared to afl really.

 

[SterlingArcher]

I'll just remind you again, the top seven cyclists in the Tour dé France were on drugs. The top seven.

Great speculation you have there, but once other players get proven to have taken these drugs, then that statement is really quite irrelevant. Would be just as relevant as me saying I have "no doubt" the top 100 cyclists in the Tour dé France inject every night.

I have no idea where I said the AFL's tough on drugs, but if you're going to put those words in my mouth, then I'll just quote to you again that the top seven cyclists in the Tour dé France were on drugs. The top seven.

The top 7, the top 7 blah blah blah.

Professional cycling takes doping much more seriously than the AFL. Don't be so stupidly ignorant.

 

[MiloStedman]

The top 7, the top 7 blah blah blah.

Professional cycling takes doping much more seriously than the AFL. Don't be so stupidly ignorant.

Not quite sure where I said anything to the contrary? I was just explaining how farcical of a sport cycling is. Don't have to agree with me, that's the beauty of opinions.

The top seven cyclists in the Tour dé France were on drugs.

 

[Doss]

Yeah, since we've gone a very long way off topic, I'm shutting this until any further in regards to the 2012 Brownlow develops.