Australia - Holier than thou????

Remove this Banner Ad

hoss

Norm Smith Medallist
May 28, 2004
9,703
6,460
South
AFL Club
Fremantle
I reckon Australia (over the last 10 years) has lost it's purer than pure image regarding drugs in sport. I'm not talking Warnie's diuretic or Alex Watson's coffee - these are minor (like Andrea Raducan's lost gold medal in Sydney...ridiculous).

I'm talking the big stuff - steroids, human growth hormones, EPO etc. Australia has often critisised the USSR, East Germany, China etc but over the last few years has had many drug problems in cycling, athletics, weightlifting etc.

The USA have only just started to comply with World anti-doping codes (after years of being the only non-signatory). It's amazing how many poor performances they've had recently from elite athletes who are under the drugs microscope.

The history of drugs in sport is interesting and in many ways like modern times.

Doping in sport first occurred soon after sport became more professional in Greece 400BC. Olympic winners in these times were rewarded with the equivalent of $500,000 (todays money), food, tax exemptions, no war service etc. The rewards were pretty great so people began to cheat. This caused the demise of the Olympic Games and sport.

Sport re-emerged in Roman times with both the animals and Gladiators doped up before going out in the ring (you wouldn't do it otherwise). In chariot races the horses were doped to become faster.

Christianity killed sport as physical development was seen to hinder intellectual development. Theodosius (around 390 AD ?) banned all sport other than boxing and wrestling.

Sport was dead until the 19th century when it re-emerged in England (which was then an agricultural rural-based society). These sports were unstructured recreational activities and were "rural" - sack races, leap frog, co(k-fighting etc.

The 1st person in modern times to die from doping was surprise ( a CYCLIST!!) The drug of choice for athletes in the early 1900's was strychnine (often with brandy).

In the 1930's amphetimines replaced strychnine and then in the 50's the Soviets used male hormones. To counteract this, the USA developed steroids for sports use.

Quite a history and nothing new. It all started with the demise of amateur sport thousands of years ago.

Considering the cost to taxpayers, and the fact that only a small percentage of athletes actually get busted, I think all drugs should be legal for the Olympics. If men go sterile, and women grow beards and testicles, well so be it . They may also die early (Flo Jo???) and where has that Michelle Smith (Irish swimmer)gone??

I mean, Ben Johnson's 9.79 seconds in 1988 was brilliant (drugs assisted or not). Just let 'em go for it and whatever happens to them later in life- their responsibility.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Australia is sadly noted for poor sportsmanship.


Latest case is the Warne vs Murali debate.. who should be the rightful world record holder?

Murali claimed it with 527 - when asked, Murali says Warne is a great bowler, good luck to him, many great battles ahead.

Warne equals it - says Murali bowls against piss weak opponents, on doctored wickets, blah blah blah.

One's a convicted cheat Shane, the other one's not. And then there's sportsmanship.
 
i agree with everything you said, except for the cheating thing.

Technically Warne was found to have taken his mums prescription medication, quite illegally, as some form of beauty treatment, and was not found to have intentionally broken the rules of the game.

It's not much different cheating wise to Murali's doosra being proved illegal, and him claiming he didnt know it was throwing.

Now one could argue that Shane's taking us for idiots by trying to sell a story like that, as could one argue Murali doing the same with a half-arsed attempt to bowl in the scientific study, and continuing to bowl it after the official findings were released, but either way, they are both as tainted as the other IMO.
 
Originally posted by Darky
One's a convicted cheat Shane, the other one's not. And then there's sportsmanship.



Whilst Warnie's comments reeked of bad sportsmanship to say that one is a (convicted) cheat and the other is not is gilding the lilly a bit.


Warne has a brilliant, smooth action that is well within the rules, Murali would be more at home on a baseball pitcher's mound. Whether the drug Warne took could be considered performance enhancing is debatable whereas Murali's action is plainly illegal.
 
Originally posted by localyokel
Whilst Warnie's comments reeked of bad sportsmanship to say that one is a (convicted) cheat and the other is not is gilding the lilly a bit.


Warne has a brilliant, smooth action that is well within the rules, Murali would be more at home on a baseball pitcher's mound. Whether the drug Warne took could be considered performance enhancing is debatable whereas Murali's action is plainly illegal.

I actually read to first post as saying Warne is clearly the better bowler for having a legal action, so agree with you local. Can't work out how even the strongest and most illegal banned substance could improve leg spin.
 
Originally posted by Otto's ladder
Can't work out how even the strongest and most illegal banned substance could improve leg spin.
No, but steroids help with muscle repair, quite useful, say, for a shoulder injury.
 
Originally posted by Argent
No, but steroids help with muscle repair, quite useful, say, for a shoulder injury.

TWO POINTS.....

1. There is no medical evidence to support this.

2. Warne was found with traces of a diuretic chemical in his urine sample. There was no evidence of an anabolic steroid.

Despite what was widely reported in the media, it is not possible to mask the presence of an anabolic steriod by diluting a urine sample with the administration of a diuretic.


And Another.....Murali does not throw...he bowls with a suspect action. There is a difference. He would not be able to pitch a baseball with action he uses.
 
Originally posted by flamethrower
Murali does not throw...he bowls with a suspect action


He straightens his arm during the delivery process. This is in direct contravention of the rule as below:

3. Definition of fair delivery – the arm
A ball is fairly delivered in respect of the arm if, once the bowler's arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that point until the ball has left the hand. This definition shall not debar a bowler from flexing or rotating the wrist in the delivery swing.

from;

http://www.lords.org/cricket/lw_0000000050.asp




Originally posted by flamethrower
There is a difference. He would not be able to pitch a baseball with action he uses.


Fair enough, I was exaggerating for dramatic effect.:D
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Originally posted by flamethrower
TWO POINTS.....

1. There is no medical evidence to support this.

2. Warne was found with traces of a diuretic chemical in his urine sample. There was no evidence of an anabolic steroid.

Despite what was widely reported in the media, it is not possible to mask the presence of an anabolic steriod by diluting a urine sample with the administration of a diuretic.
Are you kidding? Diuretics increase clearance rates, they don't dilute a sample. And secondly that's basically what an. steroids do... build and repair muscle. No medical evidence.. pfft.

PS: not 'traces' in the urine... enough to confirm he took MORE THAN ONE (which is what he initially claimed)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top