Claudius wrote:Some folks yesterday suggested that all the other clubs are on drugs and we are the only honest team in England.
They're all on drugs and the ref was crooked. Thats why we lost to Chelsea, not because our manager is shit.
chelsea vs arsenal feb 4 early on
Claudius wrote:Some folks yesterday suggested that all the other clubs are on drugs and we are the only honest team in England. I don't buy that theory. Wenger, the scammer, does not value work.
The points are not exclusive. Wenger doesn't instill work ethic and on top he's not the type who'd allow doping. Some are on better gear than others, Real and Chelsea are the most blatant examples. Our lot on the other hand has one key player breaking down literally every other week
jones wrote:Claudius wrote:Some folks yesterday suggested that all the other clubs are on drugs and we are the only honest team in England. I don't buy that theory. Wenger, the scammer, does not value work.
The points are not exclusive. Wenger doesn't instill work ethic and on top he's not the type who'd allow doping. Some are on better gear than others, Real and Chelsea are the most blatant examples. Our lot on the other hand has one key player breaking down literally every other week
wouldn't doping cause us to be even more injury prone? 
jones wrote:Claudius wrote:Some folks yesterday suggested that all the other clubs are on drugs and we are the only honest team in England. I don't buy that theory. Wenger, the scammer, does not value work.
The points are not exclusive. Wenger doesn't instill work ethic and on top he's not the type who'd allow doping. Some are on better gear than others, Real and Chelsea are the most blatant examples. Our lot on the other hand has one key player breaking down literally every other week
I'm not a fan of these kinds of allegations. But then I can be a bit of an ostrich when it comes to issues like this. I like to think the sport is policed well enough that doping can't be as widespread as you are implying. And also that the FA would want to provide an even playing field for all teams, and winning games/trophies is not about who's best g'd up.
For instance I don't see a coach like Ferguson allowing such in his stable, and Man U were plenty successful back then without, so why can't it be the case that the best coached team / with the most quality / cohesion is winning. No one made allegations like these last season when Leicester won it. Not hearing it about Tottenham, Why the skepticism about Chelsea?
Bryant wrote:jones wrote:The points are not exclusive. Wenger doesn't instill work ethic and on top he's not the type who'd allow doping. Some are on better gear than others, Real and Chelsea are the most blatant examples. Our lot on the other hand has one key player breaking down literally every other week
wouldn't doping cause us to be even more injury prone?
There are many types of steroids, some boost your power others are for regeneration like the stuff they give in hospitals. Ask speedy though, he's the one to hook you up if need be.
Players like to compete. If these ped's were so readily available, someone somewhere would have offered it to them, and if I was injury prone like say Welbeck, I'd use em regardless of what Wenger preaches.
Like Flamini did. 
flobaba wrote:jones wrote:The points are not exclusive. Wenger doesn't instill work ethic and on top he's not the type who'd allow doping. Some are on better gear than others, Real and Chelsea are the most blatant examples. Our lot on the other hand has one key player breaking down literally every other week
I'm not a fan of these kinds of allegations. But then I can be a bit of an ostrich when it comes to issues like this. I like to think the sport is policed well enough that doping can't be as widespread as you are implying. And also that the FA would want to provide an even playing field for all teams, and winning games/trophies is not about who's best g'd up.
It's not just England and not even just football, every top athlete is on gear. Then there's the fact the FA is run by dinosaurs who don't care about anything but making money. Steroids boost performances and by extension viewer figures for the league and income for the clubs, everyone keeps shtum about it everyone makes money off it.
For instance I don't see a coach like Ferguson allowing such in his stable, and Man U were plenty successful back then without, so why can't it be the case that the best coached team / with the most quality / cohesion is winning. No one made allegations like these last season when Leicester won it. Not hearing it about Tottenham, Why the skepticism about Chelsea?
Chelsea have had an extremely impressive injury record for years now. Oscar e.g. has played an insane amount of games for them when he was a starter, I'm talking Messi/Ronaldo like figures. Same with most of their players really, in 14/15 when they won the league they've had a core of like 13/14 players who've started every game in every competition, even in the cups you still had Hazard etc play the full 90
That's not to say other clubs like Tottenham or Leicester aren't doing it too, just that Chelsea's squad is either full of fitness freaks who all have 1 in 10000 bodies or that they are systemically doped.
Also you don't see "a coach like Ferguson allow such in his stable"? We're talking about the same old Fungus right? He's the epitome of the old boys network, know which button to push to bend which rule etc. He was probably a pioneer in this regard
Not buying it. Someone would have spilled the beans by now. They are either all using and keeping it quiet, or the claims are false and baseless, is what I'd think.
flobaba wrote:Players like to compete. If these ped's were so readily available, someone somewhere would have offered it to them, and if I was injury prone like say Welbeck, I'd use em regardless of what Wenger preaches.
You don't just stick a syringe in your ass and get out on the pitch. If you want to push your endurance and performance levels up you need to have a good idea of what you should be injecting, which is why it's more likely that it's done systemically by club medical staff than by the players in their free time. If you left a guy like David Luiz to do it himself he'd probably end up killing himself
flobaba wrote:Not buying it. Someone would have spilled the beans by now. They are either all using and keeping it quiet, or the claims are false and baseless, is what I'd think.
This is what I think as well.
You guys are like the haters at the bar complaining that the guy pulling all the girls has money or uses juju. No, he's just got better game than you.
flobaba wrote:Not buying it. Someone would have spilled the beans by now. They are either all using and keeping it quiet, or the claims are false and baseless, is what I'd think.
It took close to 50 years for the first child abuse story to come out when Andy Woodward spoke up last November. Now 400+ victims have come out involving about 150 different clubs.
Don't underestimate the don't ask don't tell mentality in football
Wasn't it rumoured a couple of years ago that Chelsea were resorting to blood infusion or whatever. They have form for this kind of stuff, being run by the mafia and all that.
It's not just performance enhancing drugs but also the use of the so called 'recreational' drugs that are just as wide spread.
There was a conspiracy theory that Rosicky wasn't injured as long/often as he was and that he was trying to dry out. As for SAF at ManU - IIRC Ferdinand was suspended /fined after failing to appear for random drug testing - hence the nickname 'Sniffer'.
AFL has recently had the Essendon doping scandal that saw their club involved in a systematic use of performance enhancing drugs that resulted with criminal charges laid against the club Dr involved in administering them, and the 12 month suspension of about 35 players(??).
Likewise both AFL & NRL has a 3 strikes system regarding the use of recreational drugs & ARU/NRL players have been caught in supplying both illegal steroids and recreational drugs.
I hate the term 'recreational' because it is simply the sport code trying to downplay the issue by showing they are not performance enhancing & there fore they are not cheating. The reality is that the 'recreational' drugs are illegal = it's preferable to be a 'recreational' criminal than a drug 'cheat'.
General wrote:Wasn't it rumoured a couple of years ago that Chelsea were resorting to blood infusion or whatever. They have form for this kind of stuff, being run by the mafia and all that.
Blood Doping was used to improve stamina & simply involves the athlete transfusing & storing their own blood and then re-injecting it back into their system once their bodies have recovered from the initial depletion. The boost of red bllod cells enables their blood to carry more oxygen which aids their oxygenation of their muscles and stamina/recovery.
Lasse Viren competed at 3 Olympics, won 4 Olympic Golds and broke several world records when reportedly using the technique, and was the primary reason why the practice came to the fore and was subsequently banned.
Point being that doping doesn't need to involve illegal substances.
Forgive me for being sceptical about these allegations based on nothing.
Their manager is proven quality and their results improved after a clear change in tactics.
Victor Moses apart, their players are playing at the level their quality suggests they should play.
They do not look physically superior to other teams not called Arsenal and were dominated by us earlier in the season and the totts a few weeks ago.
"Recreational" drug use is pretty ubiquitous among people in their twenties of my acquaintance. I wouldn't judge a footballer too harshly for using and I'd be surprised if they haven't had the opportunity on a regular basis for years.
It's all about whether they can function as players to me, drug use can be harmless or it can be devastating depending on the person.
Burnwinter wrote:"Recreational" drug use is pretty ubiquitous among people in their twenties of my acquaintance. I wouldn't judge a footballer too harshly for using and I'd be surprised if they haven't had the opportunity on a regular basis for years.
It's all about whether they can function as players to me, drug use can be harmless or it can be devastating depending on the person.
I don't consider the likes of Coke or Ice to be harmless / 'recreational', as were talking supply & demand of illegal substances with no quality control.
It's also dangerous / disruptive etc when role models / public figures are found to have been under the influence for much of their time as an 'elite' athlete, and much of their 'brilliance' can be attributed to being high.
I'm not sure about the whole role model thing. I was a huge fan of Roberto Baggio and even as a young kid I thought he looked like an idiot despite being my first favourite player ever. I don't think kids/teens get seduced into drugs because they hear their favourite player got caught doing coke.
jones wrote:flobaba wrote:Not buying it. Someone would have spilled the beans by now. They are either all using and keeping it quiet, or the claims are false and baseless, is what I'd think.
It took close to 50 years for the first child abuse story to come out when Andy Woodward spoke up last November. Now 400+ victims have come out involving about 150 different clubs.
Don't underestimate the don't ask don't tell mentality in football
Yeah what a bunch of crap. Armstrong basically did doping in plain view for years and people still denied it. There's doping in practically every sport, why wouldn't it be there in the most watched sport where most of the money is made? If anything, logic dictates that there is more doping in football than in other sports.