I'd not be surprised to find doping and other forms of cheating in football, I would just suspect if it is there it'd be widespread so I wouldn't be so sure we weren't involved.
Knowing us we'd refuse to pay for the top techniques and instead take the new pioneering ones that look promising and much cheaper but ultimately inhibit our ability.
jones wrote:Bryant wrote: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.
With the right concoctions you can recover about 40% faster after training and games.
I don't think players dope to the max. But realistically if you overtrain by even 5% a week and then that builds up week by week it can cause issues.
Players can take things like growth hormones( which many do) and probably recover 20% faster. So instead of -5% they'd be plus 15%. These aren't actual figures just for understanding the concepts.
I have friends who work in cycling and didn't believe doping was widespread. And then the whole thing blows up. Rugby players have been heavily doped since the 80's it's just more widespread now. Footballers can take stuff that doesn't show up in a urine test. They can't be blood tested. If anyone thinks players wouldn't take things they can't be tested for When their is so much money involved, well that's honestly beautiful.
When you chat to competitive athletes across sports they just see doping as part of nutrition.
For Olympics athletes are doped out of their minds. Every person is different so they all get test so they know how many days it takes each individual to get clean. They cut it that close that tour only testing clean for a day when you get on the plane.
So theirs minimal tail off of the effects.
So i guess my question is, are we the only non doping team in the league, in world football? Is this the reason we are often physically second best, and apparently outrun by every other team?
I don't for a second think Sanchez is clean. That whole barca team ran rings around everyone else all game.
Players can just get the stuff themselves without the clubs knowledge. I'd say were one of the only clubs that actively discourages it.
Interesting, but I'm still highly skeptical.
I think we just shifted to more of a passing, possession based style, and it corresponded with us signing some lightweights.
Never saw nobody rag dolling the likes of Sol Campbell or Adams/Keown. Henry could hold his own, Vieira was solid, Pires, Petit, Gilberto, firm, Bergkamp as well. Then we started signing the likes of Reyes, Fabregas took over from Vieira, Koscielny is wiry but has no weight to support his strength, etc. Nowadays we've just got smaller players all around is my view, and in a league as physical as the premiership that's bound to hurt you.
speedy wrote:I have friends who work in cycling and didn't believe doping was widespread. And then the whole thing blows up. Rugby players have been heavily doped since the 80's it's just more widespread now. Footballers can take stuff that doesn't show up in a urine test. They can't be blood tested. If anyone thinks players wouldn't take things they can't be tested for When their is so much money involved, well that's honestly beautiful.
It's not that long ago when that Russian hacker team made a number of US athletes' "supplemental" records public. The likes of Serena Williams have been doing steroids and stuff like Hydromorphon and Oxycodon for years, substances that would get you in jail in most countries. Worst of all the WADA is 100% in the know and just signs exceptional permits for those who apply for them
It's bordering on denial of reality to claim doping isn't the rule in sports
"Los Angeles Olympics in 1984, the USOC screened U.S. athletes at UCLA’s lab before the Games. Because the tests were informational and not official, of the 86 Americans who were positive, only two were denied spots on the Olympic team. During the final week of the Games, some 20 medal winners, many from track and field disciplines, tested positive. When a document linking athletes’ names to the urine samples mysteriously disappeared from an IOC hotel room, the doped victors kept their medals."
USA is just as bad as Russia.
From the same articke above
"World Anti-Doping Agency studies indicate that testing snares less than 2 percent of doped athletes." and that's just if they're careless.
La Liga lack of drug tests worries anti-doping agency Wada
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38928615
Its obvious Messi is doped to the eyeballs. They basically took Tiny Tim and built a functioning footballer out of shots. He's a miracle of science.
There used to be a joke that the Olympics were determined by whom ever had the better / more effective doping programs - particularly swimming, and the 'trick' was not to show too dramatic a jump in performance over a short period of time, let alone leading into the main comps.
Essentially this was what drew questions re Viren as his performances outside the major meets had been nothing to rave about, and he'd also had an injury disrupted training program but then started showing dramatic improvement leading into the 1980 Olympics, but went to crap again afterwards.
Qwiss! wrote:Its obvious Messi is doped to the eyeballs. They basically took Tiny Tim and built a functioning footballer out of shots. He's a miracle of science.
Leaving the obvious football talent aside he's quite the incredible athlete, been so as a teenager already. Many quick midgets around but there's nobody who combines his ridiculous balance and ability to put his feet to ground at like five times the normal rate. Not to say he doesn't dope but I don't think you can boost stuff like that with steroids
Na not really there's videos of him splaying the same way when he's 11 on youtube
Yep and Barton is all wasps.
Qwiss! wrote:Yep and Barton is all wasps.
No, sir. But he is most waspish.
