SA Footy

Here's a question for you. Do you think that Ben Cousin's and Dane Swan should hand in their Brownlow Medals based on their own admissions that they took illicit drugs during their AFL careers? Even go as far as saying that allegedly during those years that they won their Brownlow Medals? Just a question into their integrity as players who won the AFL's most prestigious award for the Best and Fairest player. Now I'm not saying that they weren't the "Best" player for that season. But to say that they were the "Fairest". That would have to be seriously questionable. Especially after the drug scandal that Jobe Watson was punished for and the end result being him handing back his medal. I know some of you will say that there's a difference in Performance drugs to Illicit drugs. I don't. And I think that they should all be reprimanded the same way as Jobe has. Just my thoughts. Anyone care to offer theirs?

In a word, no. Why? I don't think Watson should have handed his Brownlow back. I think the whole investigation was so shambolic, as was the "supplements program", that very little was proven beyond reasonable doubt. In fact the CAS finding was "to a reasonable satisfaction", hardly enough to hang, draw and quarter someone.

So no, I don't think Swan and Cousins should hand back their awards after admitting to illicit drug use during their careers.

This might create some debate, however.

Booney wrote:In a word, no. Why? I don't think Watson should have handed his Brownlow back. I think the whole investigation was so shambolic, as was the "supplements program", that very little was proven beyond reasonable doubt. In fact the CAS finding was "to a reasonable satisfaction", hardly enough to hang, draw and quarter someone.

So no, I don't think Swan and Cousins should hand back their awards after admitting to illicit drug use during their careers.

This might create some debate, however.

As you can see Booney, I am a Essendon supporter. I will even go as far as saying I am a very loyal and proud supporter of the mighty Bombers. I am not going to agree or disagree with everything that has happened. And there will be plenty that will say he should have and he shouldn't have handed in his Brownlow Medal. I am talking about the integrity of those that achieve the prestigious award and then come out once retired and say that they took illicit drugs during their careers (allegedly). Whether they took it during or after the seasons. It still seems to me that they weren't acting in all "Fairness" to the AFL and to the rest of their colleagues.

No. As long as the drugs aren't performance enhancing then play on...

saintal wrote:No. As long as the drugs aren't performance enhancing then play on...

So if you "allegedly" take speed or meth or any type of illicit drug that gives you a high. You don't think that will increase your performance on field?

Bombers4EVA wrote:

saintal wrote:No. As long as the drugs aren't performance enhancing then play on...

So if you "allegedly" take speed or meth or any type of illicit drug that gives you a high. You don't think that will increase your performance on field?

100% No.

Bombers4EVA wrote:

saintal wrote:No. As long as the drugs aren't performance enhancing then play on...

So if you "allegedly" take speed or meth or any type of illicit drug that gives you a high. You don't think that will increase your performance on field?

In all likely hood, no. At amateur level for a short period of time, perhaps. At the elite level for 4 quarters to gain an advantage and get the "3 votes", highly unlikely.

carey wrote:

Bombers4EVA wrote:

saintal wrote:No. As long as the drugs aren't performance enhancing then play on...

So if you "allegedly" take speed or meth or any type of illicit drug that gives you a high. You don't think that will increase your performance on field?

100% No.

So the effects won't make you feel invincible or untouchable? Run that little bit harder? Give you that little bit more energy?

Stimulants are banned for in-competition use.

Swan has suggested he used recreational drugs out-of-competition.

Q. wrote:Stimulants are banned for in-competition use.

Swan has suggested he used recreational drugs out-of-competition.

Thanks for clarifying to me that Q. I was under the impression by the way he was talking about it. That he took them during the season. But aren't illicit drugs banned also? Or are they only banned during the season?

Bombers4EVA wrote:

carey wrote:

Bombers4EVA wrote:

saintal wrote:No. As long as the drugs aren't performance enhancing then play on...

So if you "allegedly" take speed or meth or any type of illicit drug that gives you a high. You don't think that will increase your performance on field?

100% No.

So the effects won't make you feel invincible or untouchable? Run that little bit harder? Give you that little bit more energy?

It might, but I doubt it would be reliable. Just because you can get high or stimulated doesn't mean it's going to advantage you on the ground.

It might not be that accurate an analogy, but I recall Dermie recounting when he was at the Hawks in the 80s he took some caffeine powder (yes, hard core stuff, I know) pre-game in order to get a buzz so he would be extra alert on the field and play better. He said for the first quarter he felt invincible, and played well, and then for the rest of the game came down from the high, felt sluggish and played like shit.

And John Howard's character (the actor, not the former PM) in 'The Club' smoked a joint pre-game and spent the rest of the match standing around watching the game go by. I know it's not real-life, but a high from marijuana is hardly going to stand you in good stead playing a fast-paced contact sport.

Bombers4EVA wrote:

carey wrote:

Bombers4EVA wrote:

saintal wrote:No. As long as the drugs aren't performance enhancing then play on...

So if you "allegedly" take speed or meth or any type of illicit drug that gives you a high. You don't think that will increase your performance on field?

100% No.

So the effects won't make you feel invincible or untouchable? Run that little bit harder? Give you that little bit more energy?

Spot on

So if you "allegedly" take speed or meth or any type of illicit drug that gives you a high. You don't think that will increase your performance on field?[/quote]

100% No.[/quote]
So the effects won't make you feel invincible or untouchable? Run that little bit harder? Give you that little bit more energy?[/quote]

Spot on[/quote]
I can remember quite a few games where I've played against teams who their players would have been under some sort of illicit drugs. And did those guys tear us apart. Especially in 2 - 3 quarters.

Bombers4EVA wrote:I can remember quite a few games where I've played against teams who their players would have been under some sort of illicit drugs. And did those guys tear us apart. Especially in 2 - 3 quarters.

But we're talking about a couple of blokes winning a Brownlow in the last 10 years,a little different to a fella flying for half a match in the park on a Saturday.

Bombers4EVA wrote:Here's a question for you. Do you think that Ben Cousin's and Dane Swan should hand in their Brownlow Medals based on their own admissions that they took illicit drugs during their AFL careers? Even go as far as saying that allegedly during those years that they won their Brownlow Medals? Just a question into their integrity as players who won the AFL's most prestigious award for the Best and Fairest player. Now I'm not saying that they weren't the "Best" player for that season. But to say that they were the "Fairest". That would have to be seriously questionable. Especially after the drug scandal that Jobe Watson was punished for and the end result being him handing back his medal. I know some of you will say that there's a difference in Performance drugs to Illicit drugs. I don't. And I think that they should all be reprimanded the same way as Jobe has. Just my thoughts. Anyone care to offer theirs?

Ben Cousins has probably sold his anyway............

Booney wrote:

Bombers4EVA wrote:I can remember quite a few games where I've played against teams who their players would have been under some sort of illicit drugs. And did those guys tear us apart. Especially in 2 - 3 quarters.

But we're talking about a couple of blokes winning a Brownlow in the last 10 years,a little different to a fella flying for half a match in the park on a Saturday.

Yeah I know. Just wanting to clarify the difference in taking illicit drugs compared to performance drugs and the effects both have on players. And we all know now through Swan's admission and and Cousin's that they took illicit drugs. Whether or not they did or did not use them during the seasons. We will never know. But to me that still questions their integrity and character. And being a Brownlow medalist is supposed to say that your achievements during that season were above and beyond what they now have admitted to. That they weren't acting "Fair" during their playing careers.

amber_fluid wrote:

Bombers4EVA wrote:Here's a question for you. Do you think that Ben Cousin's and Dane Swan should hand in their Brownlow Medals based on their own admissions that they took illicit drugs during their AFL careers? Even go as far as saying that allegedly during those years that they won their Brownlow Medals? Just a question into their integrity as players who won the AFL's most prestigious award for the Best and Fairest player. Now I'm not saying that they weren't the "Best" player for that season. But to say that they were the "Fairest". That would have to be seriously questionable. Especially after the drug scandal that Jobe Watson was punished for and the end result being him handing back his medal. I know some of you will say that there's a difference in Performance drugs to Illicit drugs. I don't. And I think that they should all be reprimanded the same way as Jobe has. Just my thoughts. Anyone care to offer theirs?

Ben Cousins has probably sold his anyway............

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

MAke no mistake and I've said this on here before, all throughout the Bomber doping scandal, ICE, cocaine, speed etc are all performance enhancing as well detrimental to your health

Everything Q, MW and Bombers4EVA has said is true, those drugs impair your bodies normal endocrine and nervous system so the euphoric high makes you run faster and longer and jump higher as the the bodies natural feelings of fatigue are diminished.

Athlete don't take them pre-game as they are the most easily detected (or their masking agents) in urine. The risk is too great given the prevalence of post match testing at the elite level

If you want to know what the side effects of amphetamines in elite sport watch this video of Tommy Simpson on Mt Ventoux in Le tour .

He dies of a heart attack as his bodies ability to regulate itself has been over-ridden by the "speed" in his system

Amphetamines like speed were the "first generation" of PEDs used in sport in the 19th and 20th century and they are the most easily detected.

Booney Watson lost his Brownlow because he broke the WADA and ASADA drug testing code by filling in and signing drug testing forms stating he wasn't taking any other supplements when he and the other 33 later admitted to taking what they thought was Thyomosin4 but was most likely Thyomosin beta 4.

am Bays wrote:MAke no mistake and I've said this on here before, all throughout the Bomber doping scandal, ICE, cocaine, speed etc are all performance enhancing as well detrimental to your health

Everything Q, MW and Bombers4EVA has said is true, those drugs impair your bodies normal endocrine and nervous system so the euphoric high makes you run faster and longer and jump higher as the the bodies natural feelings of fatigue are diminished

If you want to know what the side effects of amphetamines in elite sport watch this video of Tommy Simpson on Mt Ventoux in Le tour .

He dies of a heart attack as his bodies ability to regulate itself has been over-ridden by the "speed" in his system

Amphetamines like speed were the "first generation" of PEDs used in sport in the 19th and 20th century and they are the most easily detected.

Booney Watson lost his Brownlow because he broke the WADA and ASADA drug testing code by filling in and signing drug testing forms stating he wasn't taking any other supplements when he and the other 33 later admitted to taking what they thought was Thyomosin4 but was most likely Thyomosin beta 4.

So based on that then Cousins and Swan should be given the options of either handing theirs in by their own or have it taken off of them.

There's no evidence that they took them pre-game to get an advantage. Hence why they passed all drug tests in competition. Post game (and testing though)....

There is lots of anecdotal suppositional evidence that they took them and stories of them being tipped off on training testing but they never got caught with it in official tests that would mean they broke the WADA or ASADA code.

Watson however along with the other 33 through their own admissions of taking supplements and not declaring them, got done.

Now you can argue what is fair, are Cousins and Swan guilty of worse with respect to the spirit of performance but at the end of they day in terms of proving beyond all reasonable doubt they haven't broken teh WADA or ASAA code.

I feel for the Essendon players, they got sold up the river by their club, their senior coach and that disgrace to my former profession - sport science (I can't even say his name), and have paid a huge price.