Nadal: Drug Testers "harass" players and Gasquet is innocent [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Nadal: Drug Testers "harass" players and Gasquet is innocent

nobama
01-28-2009, 11:28 PM
Glad Nadal is speaking out. This is ridiculous. :rolleyes:

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/253168,nadal-rebels-against-new-anti-doping-code-its-a-disgrace--feature.html
Nadal rebels against new anti-doping code: 'It's a disgrace' - Feature

Melbourne - A group of 65 sportsmen already challenged it before Belgian courts, but the new World Anti-Doping Code received a severe blow Wednesday from one of the biggest names in sport, tennis world number one Rafael Nadal. The Spaniard is outraged about a rule that forces high-performance sportsmen to say where they are going to be for an hour each day, 365 days a year.

"I think it shows a lack of respect for privacy," Nadal said after qualifying for the semifinals of the Australian Open. "I think it's a disgrace, particularly knowing what our sport is like."

The new code from the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) went into force on January 1, and forces sportsmen identified by their international federations to inform the organization of their daily whereabouts every three months.

If a sportsperson cannot be found where they said they would be three times in an 18-month period, he or she is considered to have violated anti-doping regulations and is liable for sanctions.

"Even my mother or my uncle do not know where I am sometimes, so having to send a message or to be scared all day in case there is a last-minute change seems to me to be a complete exaggeration," Nadal warned.

He opted to designate the hotel where he stays during each tournament and 7 am as his contact details.

"That is the only time when I am sure I will be there," the player said.

He has already had a visit from anti-doping agents at his home on the Spanish island of Mallorca, at 8am on a Saturday. He had just had a night out with his friends.

"So you can imagine..."

"Those are things that completely have to change, and there is a unanimous voice on that in the locker room," said the Spaniard, who is also the vice president of the ATP players' council. "It is an intolerable hunt. We have proved that we are a clean sport. You can count (doping) cases with one hand."

The French Open and Wimbledon champion said he is ready to join "immediately" the group of 65 footballers, cyclists and volleyball players who are looking to fight the code at the courts. They appeal to the right to privacy that is upheld in the Belgian constitution and in the Council of Europe's European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

In case they win, their move could become a precedent that gets WADA into trouble.

"In the end we are humans and we do not have to feel like criminals just because we do sport," Nadal said.

WADA claims that recent changes in rules - which used to demand that sportsmen be available for tests in this way only out of season - were intended to make things easier for sportsmen. Now they are only required to report their location one hour per day, and not for the whole day.

Stuart Miller, the head of the anti-doping programme of the International Tennis Federation (ITF), said this should not be a problem.

"Except for the notion that if you provide information about your whereabouts on a quarterly basis, it's possible your plans might change," was quoted as saying in the daily USA Today.

In that case, he stressed, players can notify the relevant authorities by e-mail, text message or even fax.

Some tennis players, however, cannot quite get organized and say the last thing on their minds is telling anti-doping authorities about their whereabouts.

US doubles expert Mike Bryan has said he has already missed two dates and admitted that the possibility of a third is "a little scary."

Perhaps he should follow the advice of Kelly Wolf, an agent for the firm Octagon.

"You almost have to think of WADA as your mother, father, girlfriend and boyfriend," said Wolf.

However, Nadal, for one, has no intention of getting that close to the agency.

Smoke944
01-28-2009, 11:30 PM
Absolute fucking joke.

tennizen
01-28-2009, 11:35 PM
WTF:retard:

zicofirol
01-28-2009, 11:39 PM
absolutely insane with the doping crap. You could see it coming though, its been a witch hunt the last 5 years, especially in cycling...

To say this violates individual rights is an understatement.

leng jai
01-28-2009, 11:41 PM
This isn't suss at all.

Pretty ridiculous though.

Guevara01
01-28-2009, 11:41 PM
I agree with Rafa completely. Such an unnecessary waste of time, and money. To keep tabs on the players shows disrespect.

The Pro
01-28-2009, 11:43 PM
He has already had a visit from anti-doping agents at his home on the Spanish island of Mallorca, at 8am on a Saturday. He had just had a night out with his friends.

"So you can imagine..."


LOL. I can imagine a hung-over Nadal giving a grumpy sample. Was probly an almighty sample as well. :p

cobalt60
01-28-2009, 11:44 PM
It is just irrational that's all.

nobama
01-28-2009, 11:44 PM
It's basically your guilty until we prove you innocent. How retarded is that.

GlennMirnyi
01-28-2009, 11:45 PM
Hope the mods won't go crazy over the comments here.

When you're against anti-doping policies, you're opening breaches to suspicion, I'm sorry.

Diprosalic
01-28-2009, 11:51 PM
i think he's right.

Caio_Brasil
01-28-2009, 11:51 PM
It's definetely wrong but it may be the only to catch some dopers. This only happens because some people want to cheat and the others pay with crap like that.

rocketassist
01-28-2009, 11:53 PM
I have no business telling interfering Annies where I'm going, so the same applies to tennis players.

bluefork
01-28-2009, 11:58 PM
I'm all for tough rules against dopers, but this is ridiculous. As Mellow Yellow said, it's a case of guilty until proven innocent. The guys who aren't doping suffer harsh consequences just to catch the few who are. There has to be a more fair way.

lurker
01-28-2009, 11:59 PM
If WADA wants to do this, they need to fork over the money and resources to provide all the players with the goofproof means to communicate last minute changes in location to WADA. Nobody can be expected to be where they say they will be 3 months from now. Can you? And can you remember 3 months from now, where you even said you'd be? And why should YOU be the one to keep track? This is guilty until, well, you're just guilty. And if they can't catch you, they'll make sure you fail three appointments so they can say you're guilty. This is a total violation of human rights.

trixtah
01-29-2009, 12:05 AM
Hope the mods won't go crazy over the comments here.

When you're against anti-doping policies, you're opening breaches to suspicion, I'm sorry.

You know what's funny? You're only acting like an ass because it's Rafa--if it were any of your favorite players saying this you'd be all up in arms, spouting the general nonsense that you normally do. Rafa's physique isn't even that great--the fact that you're always hating on him in the manner above just goes to show your respect for him. Good on you.

Only people against it are those who use drugs. The mention of cyclists makes it just all the more obvious.

Ridiculous, sometimes I wonder what percent of the MTF population has graduated high school.

nobama
01-29-2009, 12:09 AM
Apparently Fed has commented on this too:

http://http//www.derbund.ch/zeitungen/sport/Federer-wuenscht-sich-bessere-Loesung/story/14095616
translation:
"I am supporting an aggressive control so that when somebody is cheating he is caught quickly and punished respectively. That's why I understand the new stricter changes. However a better solution for tennis should be found."

GlennMirnyi
01-29-2009, 12:12 AM
You know what's funny? You're only acting like an ass because it's Rafa--if it were any of your favorite players saying this you'd be all up in arms, spouting the general nonsense that you normally do. Rafa's physique isn't even that great--the fact that you're always hating on him in the manner above just goes to show your respect for him. Good on you.



Ridiculous, sometimes I wonder what percent of the MTF population has graduated high school.


Sorry for not answering earlier, you're in the 0,001 percent of people I find so useless in MTF that I have them on ignore.

NONE of my favorite players had any doping suspicions against them, or have complained about it. :wavey:

The amount of respect I have for Nadull is comparable with the amount of coherence your posts have. None.

Quadruple Tree
01-29-2009, 12:15 AM
It is extreme, but really the athletes only have themselves to blame for this. How many doping scandals have there been in the last few years? If the athletes would do a better job of policing themselves such measures wouldn't be needed. No one is forcing anyone to be a professional athlete. If they feel this is too much to ask then they are free to go and find another occupation. I would like to know that when I watch sports that the winner is winning because of more talent and/or putting in more effort in training and conditioning instead of doping.

Forehander
01-29-2009, 12:17 AM
Just tell them some bullcrap location.

Guy Haines
01-29-2009, 12:21 AM
Hope the mods won't go crazy over the comments here.

When you're against anti-doping policies, you're opening breaches to suspicion, I'm sorry.

You're backtracking here, and thus less false or libelous than your first post on this thread.

So, even if anti-doping policies have reached a stage of 365-days a year Big Brotherdom, there is no room for criticism? Especially from the people subject to the policies?

You just don't like the player who is making the complaints.

Henry Chinaski
01-29-2009, 12:22 AM
Mike Bryan is just one mistaken text message away from a doping ban?

I am therefore in favour of this system for comedic purposes.

Guy Haines
01-29-2009, 12:23 AM
I have no business telling interfering Annies where I'm going, so the same applies to tennis players.

"Interfering Annies"! :spit: I love it.

GlennMirnyi
01-29-2009, 12:25 AM
You're backtracking here, and thus less false or libelous than your first post on this thread.

So, even if anti-doping policies have reached a stage of 365-days a year Big Brotherdom, there is no room for criticism? Especially from the people subject to the policies?

You just don't like the player who is making the complaints.

Bullshit.

You're in a pro sport, you make millions every year. What's the big deal of abiding by the doping rules?

This is the same thing as the guy who complains about limits on alcohol for driving.

l_mac
01-29-2009, 12:35 AM
Hope the mods won't go crazy over the comments here.

When you're against anti-doping policies, you're opening breaches to suspicion, I'm sorry.
Yes, as a doper Nadal knows the smartest thing to do is to speak openly and complain loudly. :worship:
Mike Bryan is just one mistaken text message away from a doping ban?

I am therefore in favour of this system for comedic purposes.
:lol:
This is the same thing as the guy who complains about limits on alcohol for driving.

It's exactly the same.

This isn't new, Nadal complains always about WADA needing to know where veryone is.

Buit he's not "rebelling" because he isn't refusing to tell WADA where he is, nor has he ever refused to give a sample.

Hope that helps :wavey:

l_mac
01-29-2009, 12:36 AM
Bullshit.

You're in a pro sport, you make millions every year. What's the big deal of abiding by the doping rules?


He is complaining about the lack of privacy given. He abides by the doping rules :confused:

Johnny Groove
01-29-2009, 12:37 AM
Nice to see Nadal speaking up about something for once

GlennMirnyi
01-29-2009, 12:48 AM
Yes, as a doper Nadal knows the smartest thing to do is to speak openly and complain loudly. :worship:

:lol:


It's exactly the same.

This isn't new, Nadal complains always about WADA needing to know where veryone is.

Buit he's not "rebelling" because he isn't refusing to tell WADA where he is, nor has he ever refused to give a sample.

Hope that helps :wavey:

You talk as if Nadull were a genius.

It is the same. Rules against drunk driving and against doping are the same. They punish and inhibit a few people for the greater good.

He is complaining about the lack of privacy given. He abides by the doping rules :confused:

Lack of privacy is a scapegoat.

l_mac
01-29-2009, 12:53 AM
You talk as if Nadull were a genius.


Did you see Fed's comment? That a new way needs to be found for tennis players? He needs to go on your suspect list too.

It is the same. Rules against drunk driving and against doping are the same. They punish and inhibit a few people for the greater good. :retard:

Lack of privacy is a scapegoat.Bullshit. :wavey:

Kitty de Sade
01-29-2009, 01:33 AM
All Nadal did was allude to the invasion of privacy. :shrug:

There's nothing wrong with that, and if any adult had to check in with a commission of den mothers 24/7 they'd be upset too.

Corey Feldman
01-29-2009, 01:48 AM
The Spaniard is outraged about a rule that forces high-performance sportsmen to say where they are going to be for an hour each day, 365 days a year.:eek: ridiculous

have to agree wirh Nadal on this one - and any other sportsman

GlennMirnyi
01-29-2009, 01:48 AM
Did you see Fed's comment? That a new way needs to be found for tennis players? He needs to go on your suspect list too.


:retard:



Bullshit. :wavey:

Federer didn't complain at all.

He actually concurred with the idea. ;)

Johnny Groove
01-29-2009, 01:49 AM
Federer didn't complain at all.

He actually concurred with the idea. ;)

He concurred with the premise, not the execution.

~Maya~
01-29-2009, 01:52 AM
:retard:ed rule. It will probably fail in court

wilmar
01-29-2009, 02:29 AM
You don't have to be pregnant to be against abortion.
You don't have to be a homosexual to be for gay rights.
You don't have to be black to be against racism.
Simple as that.

And furthermore, Nadal is NOT against the basic principle of doping checks. He is not happy with how these checks are being carried out.
You may love smoking. Still, you won't stuff a whole pack into your mouth each time your urge comes. It's not that WHAT. It's the HOW.

Lack of privacy is a scapegoat.

Since you don't mind the invasion of privacy a twee bit, perhaps the moderators here can impose a rule for you to report your whereabouts for an hour, every day, for 365 days of the year.
Who knows, it may help raise the quality of your posts here.

jrm
01-29-2009, 02:36 AM
Sportmen have brought it on themselves ... don't blame Anti-doping, blame cyclists, track and field athletes etc

fangirl
01-29-2009, 02:43 AM
I agree that it is an invasion of privacy.

I hope they walk in on him having sex. That will teach them.

wilmar
01-29-2009, 02:55 AM
I agree that it is an invasion of privacy.

I hope they walk in on him having sex. That will teach them.

Unfortunately, that is what they after. They pounced on Rafa once last year while he was in the middle of a shower.

Just won't leave his bubble butt alone. Sigh...I guess they see it as a job perk. Pun intended.

thesonofgray
01-29-2009, 03:44 AM
I'll be in northeast Afghanistan near the Pakistan border at midnight every day.

Come and find me b1tches. :devil:

superslam77
01-29-2009, 03:48 AM
not only a doper but also a terrorist :confused:

if not injected by dope it's by paul gasol :wavey:

sheeter
01-29-2009, 04:12 AM
Ridiculous rule.

Kip
01-29-2009, 04:30 AM
Hope the mods won't go crazy over the comments here.

When you're against anti-doping policies, you're opening breaches to suspicion, I'm sorry.

Yes, why not have a police state and make everyone submit to drug testing daily. You may not have ever done drugs and/or failed a test but if you knowing what you do not do as a grown adult don't submit to anything and everything we say, it is because you are guilty with something to hide?

I would dare you to come to me with that bs logic and I'd tell you were to stick it!

Utter ridiculousness!

TankingTheSet
01-29-2009, 04:44 AM
absolutely insane with the doping crap. You could see it coming though, its been a witch hunt the last 5 years, especially in cycling...

To say this violates individual rights is an understatement.

I fully agree. Moreover the climate is so harsh that the number of tests has increased greatly including very new tests with relatively scientific validation of accuracy -- so as tests increase so will the number of 'false positive' tests purely on statistical grounds. In the harsh climate imposed by WADA it's almost impossible for sportsmen to exonerate themselves from such a 'false positive' without having their career + life ruined. And at the same time they will be marked as dopers/sinners by most people even which causes problems in their own private social relationships. A good understanding of this matter requires deep scientific/medical knowledge and unfortunately most people do not have this and follow the 'black-and-white' thinking that is pervasive.

It has all characteristics of a witch hunt. You can also draw parallels with actual witch hunts for example in the middle ages. The same kind of distinction between "good and evil" is made any supposed "evidence" is taken as proof of guilt with little possibility to prevent the worst (death by the stake in the middle ages, ruining of career + life for sportsmen).

LoveFifteen
01-29-2009, 05:09 AM
Unfortunately, that is what they after. They pounced on Rafa once last year while he was in the middle of a shower.

Just won't leave his bubble butt alone. Sigh...I guess they see it as a job perk. Pun intended.

One of them has to watch the urine leaving Nadal's penis every time he is tested. It's got to be extremely humiliating to have some random official seeing your penis all the time.

This rule is ridiculous. How on earth can you know where you will be for an hour a day for the next three months?!

MIMIC
01-29-2009, 06:03 AM
:lol: This rule must be what it's like to be on parole.

Henry Chinaski
01-29-2009, 06:11 AM
It's tough to see how this can work in tennis especially if the warnings have to be given 3 months in advance (is that true? seems absurd)
The problems are especially evident for lower ranked players who might be 2nd or 3rd alternate in three different events in 3 different countries just a couple of days before the tournaments start.

wilmar
01-29-2009, 06:29 AM
One of them has to watch the urine leaving Nadal's penis every time he is tested. It's got to be extremely humiliating to have some random official seeing your penis all the time.

if that's the case, Rafa's penis was seen over 35 times last year. What's the difference from a porn actor then?

And oh dear, the mental image of the WTA players being checked the same way came to my mind now, squatting and all...I feel sick all of a sudden...

This rule is ridiculous. How on earth can you know where you will be for an hour a day for the next three months?!

I doubt the officials themselves can be so sure of their own schedules for three months!

:lol: This rule must be what it's like to be on parole.

They probably have it better!

Nathaliia
01-29-2009, 06:30 AM
He said people caught can be counted on one hand. I think, with the new rules, number of hands needed to count the dopers may grow.

But giving the place in 3 months in advance, is absurd.

GuiroNl
01-29-2009, 07:11 AM
Some people over here and at WADA have the mistaken assumption that rules/legislation are there to capture all offenders.

Just compare it to the police. In most countries the police isn't allowed to just enter your home, have a tap on your phone, eavesdrop/shoulder surf on your internet traffic, etc. whenever it pleases them. They need to get a warrant to do these things, which they can only do after producing probable cause (in other words, innocent people are left unbothered).

Now, you might say we need to get rid off these warrants because it hampers the police in their job and they can't catch all the criminals. However, some smart people in the past already realised that if we give the police unlimited power, sure more criminals will be caught but at the same time no citizen is protected from the police anymore. In other words, we have the premise for a police state.

The consequence is that we as a society have accepted that not all criminals are caught in exchange for some privacy, human rights, etc.

Same thing holds for this ridiculous WADA rule. WADA wants to catch all dope offenders and is now creating rules that gives itself practically unlimited power. Unfortunately for WADA and sports there is a trade-off between catching offenders and common sense.

GuiroNl
01-29-2009, 07:36 AM
I'd like to add to my previous post that even though I'm against this new WADA rule it is not all bad. A rule like this shows that WADA is committed to doing their job and at the same time it allows them to find the limits to their power (the power that is allowed by the players, media, fans, etc.).

More importantly I'm interested in seeing how much of an improvement WADA expects. I think that, at least in tennis, no significant improvements will be made at all measured in the number of caught offenders etc.

Leopold Stotch
01-29-2009, 07:40 AM
its been a witch hunt the last 5 years, especially in cycling...

with good reason.

aurora2006
01-29-2009, 08:36 AM
You've never complained about the weather, your job, or your mum's cooking?



You don't have to be pregnant to be against abortion.
You don't have to be a homosexual to be for gay rights.
You don't have to be black to be against racism.
Simple as that.

And furthermore, Nadal is NOT against the basic principle of doping checks. He is not happy with how these checks are being carried out.
You may love smoking. Still, you won't stuff a whole pack into your mouth each time your urge comes. It's not that WHAT. It's the HOW.



Since you don't mind the invasion of privacy a twee bit, perhaps the moderators here can impose a rule for you to report your whereabouts for an hour, every day, for 365 days of the year.
Who knows, it may help raise the quality of your posts here.

You finished him (Glenn)! :worship: :lol:

JolánGagó
01-29-2009, 09:02 AM
Sportpeople are citizens with their civil rights. One thing is antidoping control, another very different to having to inform those suc*ers of every movement they make in their private life. As it is now, privacy invasion borders the intolerable. The new proposal is outrageous and plain wrong, it must be challenged and defeated.

thalle
01-29-2009, 09:16 AM
Sorry for not answering earlier, you're in the 0,001 percent of people I find so useless in MTF that I have them on ignore.

NONE of my favorite players had any doping suspicions against them, or have complained about it. :wavey:

The amount of respect I have for Nadull is comparable with the amount of coherence your posts have. None.
Nobody (ie. newspapers, magazines etc) cares about your favorites such as Chris G.s view on this. They need a big athlete as Nadal to speak up. Besides there's a big difference on speaking up and rejecting the rules.

tennizen
01-29-2009, 09:46 AM
:lol: at all the people trying to convince Glenn. If he weren't so much in love with himself and his opinions, there would have been a point to that.

wilmar
01-29-2009, 10:02 AM
You finished him (Glenn)! :worship: :lol:

Thanks ;)

:lol: at all the people trying to convince Glenn. If he weren't so much in love with himself and his opinions, there would have been a point to that.

Yes, indeed hard to teach a dog new tricks.
Showing up his folly is not to convince him, but more to prevent anyone from falling prey to his warp sense of judgement and argument. :angel:

Chair Umpire
01-29-2009, 12:40 PM
Got to love Glenn and his perpetual bitterness towards Nadal's success, 90% of the cr*p he post is always against the same player, and he still trying to convince us he's being impartial and non-biased. :lol: :lol:

ugotlobbed
01-29-2009, 12:46 PM
uncle tony couldnt get to rafa in time

Angle Queen
01-29-2009, 01:00 PM
Some bad apples have made it bad for the whole bunch but to have to give your whereabouts for a hour each day, every day :rolleyes: . That's ridiculous even in this day-n-age of instant/easy communications.

SaFed2005
01-29-2009, 01:58 PM
Have to agree with Nadal here. These rules seem ridiculous.

GlennMirnyi
01-29-2009, 02:56 PM
He concurred with the premise, not the execution.

Meanwhile Nadull complained about it all.

You've never complained about the weather, your job, or your mum's cooking?



You don't have to be pregnant to be against abortion.
You don't have to be a homosexual to be for gay rights.
You don't have to be black to be against racism.
Simple as that.

And furthermore, Nadal is NOT against the basic principle of doping checks. He is not happy with how these checks are being carried out.
You may love smoking. Still, you won't stuff a whole pack into your mouth each time your urge comes. It's not that WHAT. It's the HOW.



Since you don't mind the invasion of privacy a twee bit, perhaps the moderators here can impose a rule for you to report your whereabouts for an hour, every day, for 365 days of the year.
Who knows, it may help raise the quality of your posts here.

It's a whole different point, you genius.

This isn't about rights. It's about fighting the biggest plague of all professional sports - doping. If you weren't a Nadull fan, you'd agree with this. Things must be done, because it's ruining the sport, the competition and the quality of it all. It's simple - if you have nothing to hide, you don't complain about a rule that's supposed to be used to clean the sport.

Last time I checked, posting ain't a crime, so your point fails pathetically.

Racism, for instance, is a hateful, pathetic attitude without ANY rationality behind it. Being against it is the only thing a rational, decent human being can do. Doping is just the same thing. Anyone MUST be against it.

Keep your flawed points to yourself. If someone is against answering to doubts about himself when it comes to crime, that person is guilty until proven innocent.

Yes, why not have a police state and make everyone submit to drug testing daily. You may not have ever done drugs and/or failed a test but if you knowing what you do not do as a grown adult don't submit to anything and everything we say, it is because you are guilty with something to hide?

I would dare you to come to me with that bs logic and I'd tell you were to stick it!

Utter ridiculousness!

Great idea. Since in many places using drugs is a crime, it would be a good way to make things better. So many crimes and so much money goes to dealers hands because of this.

Would you? I don't wanna know your bizarre perversions and preferences, thanks.

You finished him (Glenn)! :worship: :lol:

:rolleyes: sorry, honey, if I'm not here 24-7 to answer to dolts.

Nobody (ie. newspapers, magazines etc) cares about your favorites such as Chris G.s view on this. They need a big athlete as Nadal to speak up. Besides there's a big difference on speaking up and rejecting the rules.

What do I care if my favorites are fanboyed by the media or not? This kind of preoccupation comes to the head only of very shallow and futile people. I couldn't care less if they make headlines or not. I even prefer they don't. I care about tennis. I'm not like you, fangirl, who only likes Nadull because he's famous. Or any other player, in that matter.

:lol: at all the people trying to convince Glenn. If he weren't so much in love with himself and his opinions, there would have been a point to that.

When someone's surrounded by people like you, opportunistic and clueless, one has to regard his/her own opinions in a pretty high level.

Got to love Glenn and his perpetual bitterness towards Nadal's success, 90% of the cr*p he post is always against the same player, and he still trying to convince us he's being impartial and non-biased. :lol: :lol:

Contrary to some people here, who like to pretend they're impartial but are just closeted fanboys, I can live with the fact that I'm hardly partial when it comes to tennis. Nadull is a moonballer, he's awful for the sport and I hate him.

Got it?

tennizen
01-29-2009, 03:21 PM
When someone's surrounded by people like you, opportunistic and clueless, one has to regard his/her own opinions in a pretty high level.


opportunistic: Definition from Webster

taking advantage of opportunities as they arise: as a: exploiting opportunities with little regard to principle or consequence

clueless: Definition from Webster

completely or hopelessly bewildered, unaware, ignorant, or foolish

I am amazed that I am both at the same time:cool:

dam0dred
01-29-2009, 03:23 PM
I'm sure this would be annoying for the players but honestly, it seems like a small price to pay considering the ridiculous bubble of privilege and luxury most of these athletes live in. You get millions of dollars to play a game you love, excuse me if I don't feel sorry for you having to check in with anti-doping officials now and then.

What is a disgrace is how fast the number of doping suspensions has risen over the last few years. Get over it, Rafa.

Chair Umpire
01-29-2009, 03:24 PM
I can live with the fact that I'm hardly partial when it comes to tennis. Nadull is a moonballer, he's awful for the sport and I hate him.

Got it?

Yeah man, don't worry, that was already clear as water. Keep it coming with your personal anti-Nadal-the-doper-moonballer crusade (I'm sure he also steals lollipops to children, btw), but don't forget to take your tranquilizers. :lol:

schorsch
01-29-2009, 03:29 PM
LOL. I can imagine a hung-over Nadal giving a grumpy sample. Was probly an almighty sample as well. :p

He said in a recent interview he has never ever been drunk and hardly ever drinks alcohol.

GugaF1
01-29-2009, 03:44 PM
Yeah man, don't worry, that was already clear as water. Keep it coming with your personal anti-Nadal-the-doper-moonballer crusade (I'm sure he also steals lollipops to children, btw), but don't forget to take your tranquilizers. :lol:


Exactly, I dont know the point of repeating things that everybody knows already. Is like a kid that comes and say "mommy I don´t like him" so anything regarding Nadal is going to completely unobjective and negative, so what is the point of listening to someone like that. If you had a poll about nicest shoe laces or whatever is going to be against him.

So why not leave it like a recorded message, an avatar ready. And whatever subject comes about Nadal "I am against it" it is utter nonsense that just because you don´t like a person everything related to that person must be bad. So closed minded is unbelievable :retard:

JolánGagó
01-29-2009, 04:10 PM
I'm sure this would be annoying for the players but honestly, it seems like a small price to pay considering the ridiculous bubble of privilege and luxury most of these athletes live in. You get millions of dollars to play a game you love, excuse me if I don't feel sorry for you having to check in with anti-doping officials now and then.

You obviously have no clue, must be one of those thinking money makes you happy by itself.

anon57
01-29-2009, 04:14 PM
I'm sure this would be annoying for the players but honestly, it seems like a small price to pay considering the ridiculous bubble of privilege and luxury most of these athletes live in. You get millions of dollars to play a game you love, excuse me if I don't feel sorry for you having to check in with anti-doping officials now and then.

What is a disgrace is how fast the number of doping suspensions has risen over the last few years. Get over it, Rafa.
I would agree that the athletes were making a big fuss about nothing if they only had to check in with WADA once in a while but the anti-doping agency had taking their measures way to far, it's just looking for athletes doping, it's turned into a witch hunt where athletes are guilty until proven innocent which imo is wrong. It's ridiculous that athletes have to give their whereabouts for one hour every single day for the next three months. I don't know where I'll be three months from now, I expect that it's more or less the same for pro-athletes.

scoobs
01-29-2009, 04:16 PM
Just to be clear - this issue is fine as a discussion.

Stating or implying that a player is a doper without any evidence is not fine, and will lead to sanctions against those posters.

And no, this article does not constitute evidence of any kind.

Pfloyd
01-29-2009, 04:24 PM
Why are people pleasing the attention whore?

GlennMirnyi
01-29-2009, 05:10 PM
opportunistic: Definition from Webster

taking advantage of opportunities as they arise: as a: exploiting opportunities with little regard to principle or consequence

clueless: Definition from Webster

completely or hopelessly bewildered, unaware, ignorant, or foolish

I am amazed that I am both at the same time:cool:

Opportunistic people are cowards, simple. One of those that only show their faces when the situation is good for them.

Exactly, I dont know the point of repeating things that everybody knows already. Is like a kid that comes and say "mommy I don´t like him" so anything regarding Nadal is going to completely unobjective and negative, so what is the point of listening to someone like that. If you had a poll about nicest shoe laces or whatever is going to be against him.

So why not leave it like a recorded message, an avatar ready. And whatever subject comes about Nadal "I am against it" it is utter nonsense that just because you don´t like a person everything related to that person must be bad. So closed minded is unbelievable :retard:

Close minded... :rolleyes:

Better than being a top-player fanboy. :)

tennizen
01-29-2009, 05:27 PM
Opportunistic people are cowards, simple. One of those that only show their faces when the situation is good for them.


I knew that already:D. Although I fail to see the connection between my post and your analysis of my character. Anyway, I don't wish to derail this thread with conversations about me so maybe next time you can explain better when we get to chat:hug:

Boarder35m
01-29-2009, 05:36 PM
Doping is a serious topic therefore it would be good to keep this threat serious.
(This goes especcially to GlennMirnyi and tennizen) :p

I remember a discussion about cameras being installed in big places to stop criminals.
A lot of people agreed on that a lot of other said that they feel this would interfer their pivacy and I guess both are right with their opinion.

With doping it is just the same. On one hand everybody wants a clean sport and a lot controls on the other hand noone would like to be watched while peeing and noone can say where he will be the next 3 months. And even if you are a tennis pro yoo may forget something (in this case sending an e-mail with your curent adress) like everyone from us tends to forget things when we are in our job or in our privatlife.

In my opinion it would be enough if the players give a rough calender to the WADA saying which tournaments they want to attend or where they are going to be for training. But if you lose early in a tournament you may have the possibility to change that schedule.

Arkulari
01-29-2009, 05:46 PM
I think doping has to be eliminated, but to me, they have to make the test on the competition days, when the players are doing their jobs, they are like 10 months a year on the tour, so there are plenty of opportunities to test them :shrug:

WADA is going all Big-Brotherish on this and it simply goes against the players' rights :shrug:

I agree with Roger, there must be another way ;)

Shabazza
01-29-2009, 05:55 PM
This "hunt" is just ludicrous. Unbelievable.

dam0dred
01-29-2009, 06:09 PM
You obviously have no clue, must be one of those thinking money makes you happy by itself.

How you got that from my post is beyond me. All I said is that considering all the perks of their job, this is a small sacrifice in comparison.

You must be one of those who is a complete flaming moron, poor chap.

Rosa Luxembourg
01-29-2009, 08:48 PM
please this is so difficult to be in a certain place(s) chosen by yourself 3 times in year and a half... I mean, sure it is. :rolleyes:

l_mac
01-29-2009, 08:55 PM
please this is so difficult to be in a certain place(s) chosen by yourself 3 times in year and a half... I mean, sure it is. :rolleyes:

:retard:

You might want to read the OP again.

GlennMirnyi
01-29-2009, 10:27 PM
Poor athletes... they don't have to use their brain, they don't have to study, they don't have to even take much care about themselves (they hire people for that anyway)... what a hassle to inform their locations for a few times in the year... :rolleyes:

Rosa Luxembourg
01-29-2009, 10:48 PM
^^^my thoughts exactly

l_mac
01-29-2009, 10:53 PM
:retard: :retard: :retard:

The Spaniard is outraged about a rule that forces high-performance sportsmen to say where they are going to be for an hour each day, 365 days a year.

The new code from the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) went into force on January 1, and forces sportsmen identified by their international federations to inform the organization of their daily whereabouts every three months.

If a sportsperson cannot be found where they said they would be three times in an 18-month period, he or she is considered to have violated anti-doping regulations and is liable for sanctions.

Margy
01-29-2009, 11:01 PM
This is truly absurd. I can't imagine trying to pinpoint my location for a specific time every day of the year three months in advance. The athletes ought to say, "sure we'll do it as long as everyone on the regulatory side also does it so we can contact them at any time. If we don't find them where they said they would be 3 times, then we get a free ride for the next year!" What's good for the goose should be good for the gander!

Quadruple Tree
01-29-2009, 11:07 PM
This is truly absurd. I can't imagine trying to pinpoint my location for a specific time every day of the year three months in advance. The athletes ought to say, "sure we'll do it as long as everyone on the regulatory side also does it so we can contact them at any time. If we don't find them where they said they would be 3 times, then we get a free ride for the next year!" What's good for the goose should be good for the gander!

Unlike athletes in many sports, I am unaware of any scandals involving anti-doping regulators that has undermined the legitimacy of the profession. Your argument is fail.

Clara Bow
01-30-2009, 12:02 AM
please this is so difficult to be in a certain place(s) chosen by yourself 3 times in year and a half... I mean, sure it is. :rolleyes:

You are supposed to report where you are every day of the year- not just three times a year in a half. And if for some reason you have to make a quick trip to say- go to see a sick friend and don't report it- you could get in trouble if they check to see where you are.

Read what Mike Bryan said in the original article. It is about having to say where you are every single day- no slips of the brain allowed.

From the article that Mellow posted

The Spaniard is outraged about a rule that forces high-performance sportsmen to say where they are going to be for an hour each day, 365 days a year.


I think that a number Nadal haters will just see what they want to see here (not all of course) . No changing a myopic vision. And of course- they will dismiss anyone who is a fan of Nadal as not worthy of having a say about this. Nothing ever changes here.

When my fried was on probation in college, she had much, much, much laxer conditions than this (report to her probation officer once a week)- and she had a DUI while underage so was guilty you know...of a crime.

I do think that they need to test often in tennis- but I do not think having to say where you are beforehand every day is the answer. They might as well install a microchip.

wilmar
01-30-2009, 01:55 AM
This isn't about rights. It's about fighting the biggest plague of all professional sports - doping. If you weren't a Nadull fan, you'd agree with this.

Excuse me, you seem to miss the point of many here. (Hardly surprising though)

We all AGREE that doping is present in sports and doping is illegal.

We just DISAGREE with the WAY doping checks are going to be carried out.

So my support remains if this came out from Nadal or Federer.
Hell, it would still be as firm even if it came from my most beloved Djokovic or Stepanek!

Unlike you, in such a serious situation, I base my reasoning on facts/premise and don't allow personal preferences (or lack of) to cloud my judgement.

Things must be done, because it's ruining the sport, the competition and the quality of it all. It's simple - if you have nothing to hide, you don't complain about a rule that's supposed to be used to clean the sport.

Things must be done, but in the best possible and most sensible way. This George Owell 1984 control is surely not the BEST method.

Two wrongs don't make one right.

Given your reasoning, if you're a soldier during a war, you'd be the type to pull the trigger first for fear of your own safety, and then go over to see if you've shot an enemy, or god forbid, an ally.

No one in the right mind will complain against anti-doping. But many can and will surely have their opinion about how anti-doping is carried out.

To give your location every single day for 365 days is already tough enough. But one hour of every single day?!?!?!? Pure absurdity!

No one can give that kind of one-hour commitment. Take just this day alone, it is tough as it is to give accurately on an hourly basis where you are exactly and what you'll be doing exactly.

And to be expected to be a clairvoyant to provide that for 365 days?!?!? Only to be penalised in the end not because of doping, but because of incorrect location/activity prediction.

Last time I checked, posting ain't a crime, so your point fails pathetically.

Posting ain't a crime. Being a tennis player isn't as well. So my point stands. So all tennis players (and not ONLY Nadal) shouldn't be subjected to be treated as convicts.

While posting or playing sports ain't crimes, defamation surely is, and you are guilty of that for accusing Nadal of being on drugs when you have no hard facts.

By your own reasoning, if you have doubts about answering to my charge, you are guilty. I hereby challenge you to provide rock solid evidence.

If not, be silent forever on this issue.

Henry Chinaski
01-30-2009, 02:05 AM
Sportpeople are citizens with their civil rights. One thing is antidoping control, another very different to having to inform those suc*ers of every movement they make in their private life. As it is now, privacy invasion borders the intolerable. The new proposal is outrageous and plain wrong, it must be challenged and defeated.

The most fascinating post in this thread.

Not for Jolan's point but for his decision to censor what is presumably a "k" in the word "suckers".

Bearing in mind that this forum doesn't censor swear words and that "sucker" can by no means be even considered a swear word, I am utterly intrigued by this post.

Snoo Foo
01-30-2009, 02:11 AM
maybe it's a typo & it was spost to be fuc*ers?

Henry Chinaski
01-30-2009, 02:13 AM
that's a possibility but it still leaves some unanswered questions.

GlennMirnyi
01-30-2009, 03:37 AM
Excuse me, you seem to miss the point of many here. (Hardly surprising though)

We all AGREE that doping is present in sports and doping is illegal.

We just DISAGREE with the WAY doping checks are going to be carried out.

So my support remains if this came out from Nadal or Federer.
Hell, it would still be as firm even if it came from my most beloved Djokovic or Stepanek!

Unlike you, in such a serious situation, I base my reasoning on facts/premise and don't allow personal preferences (or lack of) to cloud my judgement.



Things must be done, but in the best possible and most sensible way. This George Owell 1984 control is surely not the BEST method.

Two wrongs don't make one right.

Given your reasoning, if you're a soldier during a war, you'd be the type to pull the trigger first for fear of your own safety, and then go over to see if you've shot an enemy, or god forbid, an ally.

No one in the right mind will complain against anti-doping. But many can and will surely have their opinion about how anti-doping is carried out.

To give your location every single day for 365 days is already tough enough. But one hour of every single day?!?!?!? Pure absurdity!

No one can give that kind of one-hour commitment. Take just this day alone, it is tough as it is to give accurately on an hourly basis where you are exactly and what you'll be doing exactly.

And to be expected to be a clairvoyant to provide that for 365 days?!?!? Only to be penalised in the end not because of doping, but because of incorrect location/activity prediction.



Posting ain't a crime. Being a tennis player isn't as well. So my point stands. So all tennis players (and not ONLY Nadal) shouldn't be subjected to be treated as convicts.

While posting or playing sports ain't crimes, defamation surely is, and you are guilty of that for accusing Nadal of being on drugs when you have no hard facts.

By your own reasoning, if you have doubts about answering to my charge, you are guilty. I hereby challenge you to provide rock solid evidence.

If not, be silent forever on this issue.

:lol:

So many words to defend such a weak point.

What you can't get, to rebut your first point, is that Nadull is the only one being really vocal about this. That's enough to put him as suspect. Sorry if you're so naive, but the world is not a flowery garden.

I couldn't care less about how tennis players are treated. Too many doping scandals around and the best way to deal with it is to enforce the most rigorous possible way of control. After the initial shock, I'm sure controls can be loosened a bit.

Being a tennis player ain't a crime, but being a doper is a crime for the sport. So if you're not following the rules and proving you're clear, you're a suspect of being a doper, and in conclusion, a criminal.

Defamation, my friend? How can you be sooooooo naive? Such naiveté is laughable to me. Nowhere in this thread I said Nadull is a doper, and I'm not saying he is now. What I have said is that he looks awfully suspicious being so rebellious about something like this. If you have nothing to hide, you're not afraid of being investigated. Doesn't matter how.

Also, you must have missed Fuentes' list, mate. I'm not gonna delve too much into this, as it's not my point here, and this discussion seems to be frowned upon by the mods here, even though it shouldn't.

wilmar
01-30-2009, 05:05 AM
:lol:
So many words to defend such a weak point.

you are hardly verbally constipated yourself.

What you can't get, to rebut your first point, is that Nadull is the only one being really vocal about this. That's enough to put him as suspect.

IT is NOT enough to make Nadal or anyone else a suspect. Being vocal about something just means you are passionate about something. It doesn't automatically make you guilty of it. I am very vocal here. But I don't do drugs. I don't even smoke!

Firstly, Nadal is not the only one vocal about it (and he responded to a question about it). Federer also responded. And please don't come compare their responses to say Nadal is more vocal. That is subjected to your warped interpretation and hardly scientific.

Also, there may have been other players who have responded, but don't carry enough weight/interest to warrant a headline or an article. Maybe that's why we didn't hear anything from say...Guccione.

Secondly, Nadal is the World #1 and also in the ATP council. He has to defend the basic rights/humane dignity and work for the better welfare of his fellow players.
A good leader speaks up for his peers. And you take this to mean admission of guilt. It's such a feeble stand I can hardly muster a weak grin.

Thirdly, Nadal has been checked the most times (over 35) last year but cleared each time. We have to cut him some slack for voicing his displeasure.
Perhaps you're used to having a stranger staring down your penis almost every week of the year, but Rafa is definitely not as kinky as you in that department.

I couldn't care less about how tennis players are treated. Too many doping scandals around and the best way to deal with it is to enforce the most rigorous possible way of control. After the initial shock, I'm sure controls can be loosened a bit.

Yes, better to kill all than to leave out any guilty. George Owell will give you a standing ovation on your tyrannical beliefs.

Being a tennis player ain't a crime, but being a doper is a crime for the sport. So if you're not following the rules and proving you're clear, you're a suspect of being a doper, and in conclusion, a criminal.

Defamation, my friend? How can you be sooooooo naive? Such naiveté is laughable to me. Nowhere in this thread I said Nadull is a doper, and I'm not saying he is now. What I have said is that he looks awfully suspicious being so rebellious about something like this. If you have nothing to hide, you're not afraid of being investigated. Doesn't matter how.

Firstly, Nadal did follow the rules despite voicing his concerns. So he is not a criminal.

But you claimed that Nadal is the biggest suspect simply because he "doth protest too much".
By your own line of logic (and you have reiterated many times here), one is guilty until proven innocent.
By inference, you are claiming that Nadal is guilty and suggesting that he is using dope, even though he has been proven by the World Anti-Drugs Agency (till this minute you're reading this) to be clean.
So, by claiming, or even suggesting, that something is false when it is proven to be true (resulting in the damage to one's integrity and reputation), is libel, slander and defamation in the eyes of the law.
Maybe this law is not in your belief system. But it certainly upheld in the legal courts worldwide.

trixtah
01-30-2009, 06:25 AM
you are hardly verbally constipated yourself.



IT is NOT enough to make Nadal or anyone else a suspect. Being vocal about something just means you are passionate about something. It doesn't automatically make you guilty of it. I am very vocal here. But I don't do drugs. I don't even smoke!

Firstly, Nadal is not the only one vocal about it (and he responded to a question about it). Federer also responded. And please don't come compare their responses to say Nadal is more vocal. That is subjected to your warped interpretation and hardly scientific.

Also, there may have been other players who have responded, but don't carry enough weight/interest to warrant a headline or an article. Maybe that's why we didn't hear anything from say...Guccione.

Secondly, Nadal is the World #1 and also in the ATP council. He has to defend the basic rights/humane dignity and work for the better welfare of his fellow players.
A good leader speaks up for his peers. And you take this to mean admission of guilt. It's such a feeble stand I can hardly muster a weak grin.

Thirdly, Nadal has been checked the most times (over 35) last year but cleared each time. We have to cut him some slack for voicing his displeasure.
Perhaps you're used to having a stranger staring down your penis almost every week of the year, but Rafa is definitely not as kinky as you in that department.



Yes, better to kill all than to leave out any guilty. George Owell will give you a standing ovation on your tyrannical beliefs.



Firstly, Nadal did follow the rules despite voicing his concerns. So he is not a criminal.

But you claimed that Nadal is the biggest suspect simply because he "doth protest too much".
By your own line of logic (and you have reiterated many times here), one is guilty until proven innocent.
By inference, you are claiming that Nadal is guilty and suggesting that he is using dope, even though he has been proven by the World Anti-Drugs Agency (till this minute you're reading this) to be clean.
So, by claiming, or even suggesting, that something is false when it is proven to be true (resulting in the damage to one's integrity and reputation), is libel, slander and defamation in the eyes of the law.
Maybe this law is not in your belief system. But it certainly upheld in the legal courts worldwide.

No point arguing with him until he reads the OP--obviously hasn't yet, as seen by his most recent posts in here. He saw the words "Nadal" and "doping" and got a massive hard-on or something, compelling him to post nonsense. They are truly asking too much--if someone can't see that, they're blind.

l_mac
01-30-2009, 07:33 AM
Also, you must have missed Fuentes' list, mate.

Post it. Or if you're scared of getting banned, PM me it.

jazar
01-30-2009, 07:34 AM
The Spaniard is outraged about a rule that forces high-performance sportsmen to say where they are going to be for an hour each day, 365 days a year.


surely thats very easy to get round, i mean they have to sleep, so just say from like 2.30 til 3 in the morning they will be in bed, simple

wilmar
01-30-2009, 07:43 AM
He saw the words "Nadal" and "doping" and got a massive hard-on or something

:haha: I know Nadal is quite an icon among gay fans, didn't know he had that effect on haters too :lol:

surely thats very easy to get round, i mean they have to sleep, so just say from like 2.30 til 3 in the morning they will be in bed, simple

Sleeping time.
That's the best solution should they refuse to modify the methods. But it's one hour, not half.

And then there's the issue of location, they have to say WHERE they will be sleeping every day of the year.

fangirl
01-30-2009, 08:47 AM
Unfortunately, that is what they after. They pounced on Rafa once last year while he was in the middle of a shower.

Just won't leave his bubble butt alone. Sigh...I guess they see it as a job perk. Pun intended.

Those little perverts. Although I can't really blame them - the boy has a wonderful arse.

Jade Fox
01-30-2009, 09:01 AM
I'm totally with Rafa and any player speaking against this. Just because some players have been caught doping in the past doesn't mean that this type of reaction is warranted. This is turning into a case where the solution is worse than the problem.

wilmar
01-30-2009, 10:03 AM
Those little perverts. Although I can't really blame them - the boy has a wonderful arse.

I'm so with you on this!;)

give them an inch, they'll want a mile.
Before you know it, they'll implement full nude body search to improve the quality and accuracy of their doping checks!

Margy
01-30-2009, 02:36 PM
Unlike athletes in many sports, I am unaware of any scandals involving anti-doping regulators that has undermined the legitimacy of the profession. Your argument is fail.

It wasn't meant to be a logical argument. Since the requirement in itself is so absurd, if they expect it to be accepted then any absurd response should also be acceptable. Seriously, could you tell me now where you will be at 8pm 3 months from now and be willing to stake your career on it. Or do you consider it reasonable to have to maintain these people on speeddial on your phone to tell them where you are going at any time if you change your plans (that is if you even remember where you said you would be three months earlier). It's ridiculous! And if the people proposing this tried to do it themselves they would see that.

foolish pleasure
01-30-2009, 04:30 PM
It wasn't meant to be a logical argument. Since the requirement in itself is so absurd, if they expect it to be accepted then any absurd response should also be acceptable. Seriously, could you tell me now where you will be at 8pm 3 months from now and be willing to stake your career on it. Or do you consider it reasonable to have to maintain these people on speeddial on your phone to tell them where you are going at any time if you change your plans (that is if you even remember where you said you would be three months earlier). It's ridiculous! And if the people proposing this tried to do it themselves they would see that.

you guys really should have done a little more research instead of just assuming that nadal's description of how this works is gospel.

this is how it works--an athlete gives a preliminary itinerary with contact information, a cell phone number suffices, to WADA--it does not have to be a minute by minute accounting--they just have to say the geographic location and be reachable.

if they are called for an unannounced drug test (and the announced ones don't work for obvious reasons), they have a limited amount of time (less than an hour usually) to meet up with the doping control agent and take the test--this is because there are some very well known things that can be done by an athlete in under an hour to make the test ineffective.

however, atheletes are given 3 "passes" that means 3 times when they can miss the control and not have it count as a "positive" (this is exactly the same if you are required to take a drug test where you work, as i am, and if i refuse or miss it, it counts as if i had failed it--and i don't get 3 passes. i also am required to be finger printed).

all of these athletes have their schedules more or less planned out for the whole year. they also have very well-paid management companies who are certainly able to send off an email or a text message at a moments notice saying: "nadal won't be in rome on 4/3/09, will be in madrid--can be reached at cell ########. kthnxbye"

the reason this was done is because the most well-known tactic for a doper is to say he's going to be in X-major city, then at the last minute say he went to nowhereistan in which people can only communicate by smoke signals, but which also curiously happens to be the number one place for having blood transfusions performed in the comfort of your own yurt...

for what they get paid for what they do, players and managers, i hardly think this qualifies as a great burden. ffs, if this was my greatest imposition in exchange for a multi-million dollar salary--i'd sign up in less than a heart beat (what they make for one or two rounds is more than most people make in year!). it's not like they are some poor at-will employee working for minimum wage in the US where they can be fired for any reason or no reason at all at a moments notice, and are living pay check to pay check, and probably never earn enough to qualify for unemployment benefits, and so then end up living under an over pass somewhere, with people like you, who defend millionaire dopers and cheats, spitting on them and hurling insults at them and treating them like they a human trash.

i have no use for dopers in sports, and it is all the doping cheats that have brought this about, and the omerta that keeps the clean players from exposing the known cheats in their midst. you have athletes who aren't top tier but who still feel the need to dope just to be able to earn a living because so many dope in their given sport, that even truly talented non-dopers can't compete cleanly. doping in sports has killed people and ruined their health. clean athletes should be outraged at any doper or any hint of doping and be the first to line up for testing and the most vocal defenders of testing. and fans should not applaud those who say, "waahhh, don't treat us like criminals," but those who say--"i'm clean, i've got nothing to hide, sign me up."

all jobs have aspects to them that suck--in comparison with the crap that ordinary people have to go through day in and day out just to earn enough not to end up in the street--this is nothing.

hablovah19
01-30-2009, 04:54 PM
Hope the mods won't go crazy over the comments here.

When you're against anti-doping policies, you're opening breaches to suspicion, I'm sorry.

I agree.

anon57
01-30-2009, 05:22 PM
you guys really should have done a little more research instead of just assuming that nadal's description of how this works is gospel.

this is how it works--an athlete gives a preliminary itinerary with contact information, a cell phone number suffices, to WADA--it does not have to be a minute by minute accounting--they just have to say the geographic location and be reachable.

I think that the rules have changed, it used to be that you had to give contact information about where you werre going to be and the atheletes just had to make sure they would get there in time when there was an doping official. But now athletes have to give one hour between 6.00 am and 11.00 am every day for the next three months and give their exact whereabouts for that hour. If the whereabout form says they're going to be at home, they're not even allowed to go over to their neighbours house to borrow a cup of sugar during that time.

l_mac
01-30-2009, 05:24 PM
I think that the rules have changed, it used to be that you had to give contact information about where you werre going to be and the atheletes just had to make sure they would get there in time when there was an doping official. But now athletes have to give one hour between 6.00 am and 11.00 am every day for the next three months and give their exact whereabouts for that hour. If the whereabout form says they're going to be at home, they're not even allowed to go over to their neighbours house to borrow a cup of sugar during that time.

The rule changed on January 1st.

anon57
01-30-2009, 05:36 PM
The rule changed on January 1st.

And they're using the stricter rules now right:confused:

l_mac
01-30-2009, 05:54 PM
And they're using the stricter rules now right:confused:

Yes, I think so. I think that's why Rafa is complaining. Because not even his mother or his uncle know where he is at all times :tape:

GlennMirnyi
01-30-2009, 06:02 PM
you are hardly verbally constipated yourself.

IT is NOT enough to make Nadal or anyone else a suspect. Being vocal about something just means you are passionate about something. It doesn't automatically make you guilty of it. I am very vocal here. But I don't do drugs. I don't even smoke!

Firstly, Nadal is not the only one vocal about it (and he responded to a question about it). Federer also responded. And please don't come compare their responses to say Nadal is more vocal. That is subjected to your warped interpretation and hardly scientific.

Also, there may have been other players who have responded, but don't carry enough weight/interest to warrant a headline or an article. Maybe that's why we didn't hear anything from say...Guccione.

Secondly, Nadal is the World #1 and also in the ATP council. He has to defend the basic rights/humane dignity and work for the better welfare of his fellow players.
A good leader speaks up for his peers. And you take this to mean admission of guilt. It's such a feeble stand I can hardly muster a weak grin.

Thirdly, Nadal has been checked the most times (over 35) last year but cleared each time. We have to cut him some slack for voicing his displeasure.
Perhaps you're used to having a stranger staring down your penis almost every week of the year, but Rafa is definitely not as kinky as you in that department.

Yes, better to kill all than to leave out any guilty. George Owell will give you a standing ovation on your tyrannical beliefs.

Firstly, Nadal did follow the rules despite voicing his concerns. So he is not a criminal.

But you claimed that Nadal is the biggest suspect simply because he "doth protest too much".
By your own line of logic (and you have reiterated many times here), one is guilty until proven innocent.
By inference, you are claiming that Nadal is guilty and suggesting that he is using dope, even though he has been proven by the World Anti-Drugs Agency (till this minute you're reading this) to be clean.
So, by claiming, or even suggesting, that something is false when it is proven to be true (resulting in the damage to one's integrity and reputation), is libel, slander and defamation in the eyes of the law.
Maybe this law is not in your belief system. But it certainly upheld in the legal courts worldwide.

Yeah, but you're being vocal because you're a fan of a player under suspicion. ;)

It's not like Nadull is a big influence on headlines anywhere. Real tennis fans don't care much about what he says.

Basic rights? :haha: :haha: So winning millions of dollars every year is inhumane? Give me a freaking break. He's not a leader of the players. I doubt most of them would vote for him to be their leader. He's just a top player and as the ATP only cares about them, he's there. I'm sure the #200 of the ranking doesn't feel represented at all by this egotist moonballer who does only complain and whine about the schedule when he's being paid millions by tournaments just to show up.

35? He should be checked way more than that.

Are you one of those persons who has some kind of shame of another man looking at you? You have never used a public toilet or locker room, right? Strange people in MTF...

No, I didn't say he is guilty. Can you read? I doubt it. I said he's a SUSPECT (and he's a suspect exactly because he's against the measures of control). He should be tested everyday, as most other suspects. You're very naive. VERY.

Do you work as a lawyer? If you do, I'm surprised you're not living under a bridge right now. Your comprehension of law is very weak. :shrug:

you guys really should have done a little more research instead of just assuming that nadal's description of how this works is gospel.

this is how it works--an athlete gives a preliminary itinerary with contact information, a cell phone number suffices, to WADA--it does not have to be a minute by minute accounting--they just have to say the geographic location and be reachable.

if they are called for an unannounced drug test (and the announced ones don't work for obvious reasons), they have a limited amount of time (less than an hour usually) to meet up with the doping control agent and take the test--this is because there are some very well known things that can be done by an athlete in under an hour to make the test ineffective.

however, atheletes are given 3 "passes" that means 3 times when they can miss the control and not have it count as a "positive" (this is exactly the same if you are required to take a drug test where you work, as i am, and if i refuse or miss it, it counts as if i had failed it--and i don't get 3 passes. i also am required to be finger printed).

all of these athletes have their schedules more or less planned out for the whole year. they also have very well-paid management companies who are certainly able to send off an email or a text message at a moments notice saying: "nadal won't be in rome on 4/3/09, will be in madrid--can be reached at cell ########. kthnxbye"

the reason this was done is because the most well-known tactic for a doper is to say he's going to be in X-major city, then at the last minute say he went to nowhereistan in which people can only communicate by smoke signals, but which also curiously happens to be the number one place for having blood transfusions performed in the comfort of your own yurt...

for what they get paid for what they do, players and managers, i hardly think this qualifies as a great burden. ffs, if this was my greatest imposition in exchange for a multi-million dollar salary--i'd sign up in less than a heart beat (what they make for one or two rounds is more than most people make in year!). it's not like they are some poor at-will employee working for minimum wage in the US where they can be fired for any reason or no reason at all at a moments notice, and are living pay check to pay check, and probably never earn enough to qualify for unemployment benefits, and so then end up living under an over pass somewhere, with people like you, who defend millionaire dopers and cheats, spitting on them and hurling insults at them and treating them like they a human trash.

i have no use for dopers in sports, and it is all the doping cheats that have brought this about, and the omerta that keeps the clean players from exposing the known cheats in their midst. you have athletes who aren't top tier but who still feel the need to dope just to be able to earn a living because so many dope in their given sport, that even truly talented non-dopers can't compete cleanly. doping in sports has killed people and ruined their health. clean athletes should be outraged at any doper or any hint of doping and be the first to line up for testing and the most vocal defenders of testing. and fans should not applaud those who say, "waahhh, don't treat us like criminals," but those who say--"i'm clean, i've got nothing to hide, sign me up."

all jobs have aspects to them that suck--in comparison with the crap that ordinary people have to go through day in and day out just to earn enough not to end up in the street--this is nothing.

Awesome post.

Just awesome. Those fanboys are too naive.

decrepitude
01-30-2009, 06:54 PM
Edited out double post. I wondered why there were so many double posts recently - now I know, it tells you the server is too busy, try later, then you come on after posting again and find they are both there. . .

decrepitude
01-30-2009, 06:56 PM
surely thats very easy to get round, i mean they have to sleep, so just say from like 2.30 til 3 in the morning they will be in bed, simple

Unless they are scheduled for a night match at the Australian Open. Then they could at that time be on court/in the massage room/in the press conference, etc. :)

wilmar
01-31-2009, 02:21 AM
Yeah, but you're being vocal because you're a fan of a player under suspicion. ;)

Here is proof that you are slandering Nadal.

You are saying he is under suspicion based on the fact that he voiced his displeasure about the new methods.

A player is not under suspicion just because he has to do a doping check. These checks are random.

WADA has never alleged that Nadal is under suspicion. Nadal simply falls under their routine checking system.

If WADA hasn't been able to find any defaming evidence, it is not in your place to be their spokesperson.

And please stop being a broken record, and in the end making me sound like one too.

Once and for all.

This ain't about Nadal.

It's about the new WADA checking method.

It's not like Nadull is a big influence on headlines anywhere. Real tennis fans don't care much about what he says.

Thank god! You've finally admitted you're not a real tennis fan!

He OBVIOUSLY has a big influence on you to have you bother your time and grey matter to comment on his every match and every move.

Basic rights? :haha: :haha: So winning millions of dollars every year is inhumane? Give me a freaking break.

Your sense of logical world view is sadly distorted and myopic.

True, a beggar obviously needs more social welfare and financial assistance than a millionaire.

However, it does not work the opposite way. A millionaire is entitled as much human rights as the beggar next to him.

It doesn't mean that just because you're rich it's ok for your personal rights to be taken for granted.

He's not a leader of the players. I doubt most of them would vote for him to be their leader. He's just a top player and as the ATP only cares about them, he's there. I'm sure the #200 of the ranking doesn't feel represented at all by this egotist moonballer who does only complain and whine about the schedule when he's being paid millions by tournaments just to show up. .

He is not THE leader of the players, but he is certainly one of their representatives.

You probably have been kept in the dark. But Nadal has been elected (together with Federer and Djokovic) by your "most of them" players into the ATP players council.

I can sense your fury at the Rich & Famous, but desperately trying to justify a drugs-checking method by linking it to money earned is senseless. They have NO direct correlation. Personal taxes will take care of that.

Maybe you need to resolve within yourself this envy of others' social and financial status... Don't Hate Me Just Because I'm Rich.

35? He should be checked way more than that..

So should Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Tsonga, Davydenko, Roddick etc.

I agree that a top player has to be checked more frequently than others.

Nadal understands that well too.
It's the methodology that has to be planned in a more sensible way.

Are you one of those persons who has some kind of shame of another man looking at you? You have never used a public toilet or locker room, right? Strange people in MTF... .

Yes, strange indeed.
Like you who dumps all the "WHAT" as one and makes no finer distinction between the "HOW"s.
Life is boring as ONE BIG LUMP.

My other half looking at my penis.
A stranger looking at my penis over the urinal.
A WADA official looking directly at my penis for my urine sample.

They are ALL looking at my penis.
But they are done under different premises.
And they surely invoke different biological and emotional responses from me.

Which concurs with my main issue.

You think doping is illegal, but makes NO distinction between the different ways to carry them out. You lump them as one and to you they are all the same.

I too think doping is against the law, but I do think some methods are more sensible and effective than others. And WADA has to find the best possible one.

No, I didn't say he is guilty. Can you read? I doubt it. I said he's a SUSPECT (and he's a suspect exactly because he's against the measures of control). He should be tested everyday, as most other suspects. You're very naive. VERY. .

I can read very well. We don't have to go far.

How may times have you mentioned "GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT"?

By your own definition Nadal is already guilty in your eyes, and by inference a drugs offender.

And any judge would agree, being vocally against any measures of control does not automatically make someone a suspect.

Tell that to me ONLY when Nadal refuses to take a drugs test.

Do you work as a lawyer? If you do, I'm surprised you're not living under a bridge right now. Your comprehension of law is very weak. :shrug: .

I am not obliged to disclose my profession to you.

Don't worry, I'm not, won't want to have you as a neighbour.

As for my comprehension of the law, it may be weak, but still way rounded than yours.

foolish pleasure
01-31-2009, 11:34 PM
I think that the rules have changed, it used to be that you had to give contact information about where you werre going to be and the atheletes just had to make sure they would get there in time when there was an doping official. But now athletes have to give one hour between 6.00 am and 11.00 am every day for the next three months and give their exact whereabouts for that hour. If the whereabout form says they're going to be at home, they're not even allowed to go over to their neighbours house to borrow a cup of sugar during that time.

it really isn't as onerous as you and nadal are making it out to be, here's the text:

The Athlete shall also specify in his whereabouts filing, for each day in the forthcoming quarter, one
specific 60-minute time slot between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m. where he will be available and accessible for
Testing at a specified location. This does not limit in any way the Athlete’s obligation to be available for
Testing at any time and place. Nor does it limit his obligation to provide the information as to his
whereabouts outside of that 60-minute time slot.
93.

to meet this requirement all you would need to do is to look at the tournaments you plan to play over the next three months, something you would already know anyway, and then submit that you will be availble at 9am in the locker room at tournaments x, y, z (including the geographic location of the tournament). for the space of time between tournaments, you also already have some idea where you will be (your home or your training location most likely), and you submit the address and give a time that is pretty likely you will be there, 6am for instance.

would this really be that hard for you personally to do now? for me it is pretty likely that i will be at home most nights at 9pm, so that is what i would submit, then as plans change, i'd send an email update; not unlike i already do, if say i need off for work for a doctor's appointment or to pick my friends up at the airport or something tomorrow.

and here's the text on how do that:


It is the Athlete’s responsibility to ensure (including by updates, where necessary) that the whereabouts
information provided in his whereabouts filings is accurate and sufficient in detail to enable any Anti-
Doping Organisation to locate him for Testing on any given day in the quarter, including but not limited to
during the 60-minute time slot specified for that day in his whereabouts filing. Where any change in
circumstances means that the information previously provided by or on behalf of the Athlete (whether in the
initial whereabouts filing or in any subsequent update) is no longer accurate and complete the Athlete must
update his whereabouts filing so that the information on file is again accurate, complete and sufficient in
detail. He must make such update as soon as possible, and in any event prior to the 60-minute time slot
specified in his filing for that day.

sufficient detail, and maybe this is easier for since i read stuff like this as a lawyer everyday, doesn't mean your exact, pinpoint gps position, it means, your address, your hotel's address, your tournament's address etc--all of which you or your manager certainly have or can easily get.

all you have to do to stay current is to update your location as soon as you know it will change--so if you pull out of a tournament, you send an email saying so and telling them where you will be instead--another tournament, home, next door getting sugar etc.; then you just do what every other person who lives on call, like doctors, has do everyday, you plan so that you don't schdule anything at 6am--if you are smart you pick a time you are least likely to be doing anything anyway, like 6am.

for those times when you are traveling, and stuck in airports etc. you just keep texting them--"stuck in terminal D, gate 10, at LAX"--or better yet, get your well paid manager to do it for you.

if athletes in so many sports hadn't instituted the sport version of the thin blue line type of omerta, by protecting those they knew were cheating so as not to rock the boat and threatening and silencing those who spoke out for rocking the boat, this would never have happened. i have no idea how prevalent doping is in tennis, i always hoped and assumed not very because it never seemed like it would make much difference, like it does in cycling, but who knows? the solution isn't to work against WADA, the solution is to work against the the cheats, work with the ATP and all the tournaments to provide a comfortable place with food and entertainment where players can all show up and hang out for an hour together showing their solidarity for each other and for a clean sport. the solution certainly isn't to sue WADA and cry about the fact that as a grown man your parents don't even always know where you are, as if you were a five year old.

BalkanBoy
02-01-2009, 12:01 AM
:lol:

Nadal is like a fish jumping in the boat before the net is even installed

wildegirl05
02-01-2009, 12:13 AM
it really isn't as onerous as you and nadal are making it out to be, here's the text:



to meet this requirement all you would need to do is to look at the tournaments you plan to play over the next three months, something you would already know anyway, and then submit that you will be availble at 9am in the locker room at tournaments x, y, z (including the geographic location of the tournament). for the space of time between tournaments, you also already have some idea where you will be (your home or your training location most likely), and you submit the address and give a time that is pretty likely you will be there, 6am for instance.

would this really be that hard for you personally to do now? for me it is pretty likely that i will be at home most nights at 9pm, so that is what i would submit, then as plans change, i'd send an email update; not unlike i already do, if say i need off for work for a doctor's appointment or to pick my friends up at the airport or something tomorrow.

and here's the text on how do that:



sufficient detail, and maybe this is easier for since i read stuff like this as a lawyer everyday, doesn't mean your exact, pinpoint gps position, it means, your address, your hotel's address, your tournament's address etc--all of which you or your manager certainly have or can easily get.

all you have to do to stay current is to update your location as soon as you know it will change--so if you pull out of a tournament, you send an email saying so and telling them where you will be instead--another tournament, home, next door getting sugar etc.; then you just do what every other person who lives on call, like doctors, has do everyday, you plan so that you don't schdule anything at 6am--if you are smart you pick a time you are least likely to be doing anything anyway, like 6am.

for those times when you are traveling, and stuck in airports etc. you just keep texting them--"stuck in terminal D, gate 10, at LAX"--or better yet, get your well paid manager to do it for you.

if athletes in so many sports hadn't instituted the sport version of the thin blue line type of omerta, by protecting those they knew were cheating so as not to rock the boat and threatening and silencing those who spoke out for rocking the boat, this would never have happened. i have no idea how prevalent doping is in tennis, i always hoped and assumed not very because it never seemed like it would make much difference, like it does in cycling, but who knows? the solution isn't to work against WADA, the solution is to work against the the cheats, work with the ATP and all the tournaments to provide a comfortable place with food and entertainment where players can all show up and hang out for an hour together showing their solidarity for each other and for a clean sport. the solution certainly isn't to sue WADA and cry about the fact that as a grown man your parents don't even always know where you are, as if you were a five year old.


i think there's a couple of points you're failing to address:

a) you can't extrapolate from the fact that your life is scheduled enough to know you're home at 9 p.m. to that of elite athletes. i presume one of the reasons they have so many people on staff is to manage the chaos that is their life.

b) letting them know where you are is not restricted to just the one hour you pick. the line above the one you bolded says they need to be available at all times.

specifically, this:

It is the Athlete’s responsibility to ensure (including by updates, where necessary) that the whereabouts information provided in his whereabouts filings is accurate and sufficient in detail to enable any Anti-Doping Organisation to locate him for Testing on any given day in the quarter, including but not limited to during the 60-minute time slot specified for that day in his whereabouts filing.


this seems overly broad and unduly restrictive. reading these rules, it seems to me that what the WADA is really signalling is that they have no idea how to control the problem and are just going on a method that is overreaching.

i would be curious to see how this holds up in court.

GlennMirnyi
02-01-2009, 01:11 AM
Here is proof that you are slandering Nadal.

You are saying he is under suspicion based on the fact that he voiced his displeasure about the new methods.

A player is not under suspicion just because he has to do a doping check. These checks are random.

WADA has never alleged that Nadal is under suspicion. Nadal simply falls under their routine checking system.

If WADA hasn't been able to find any defaming evidence, it is not in your place to be their spokesperson.

And please stop being a broken record, and in the end making me sound like one too.

Once and for all.

This ain't about Nadal.

It's about the new WADA checking method.



Thank god! You've finally admitted you're not a real tennis fan!

He OBVIOUSLY has a big influence on you to have you bother your time and grey matter to comment on his every match and every move.



Your sense of logical world view is sadly distorted and myopic.

True, a beggar obviously needs more social welfare and financial assistance than a millionaire.

However, it does not work the opposite way. A millionaire is entitled as much human rights as the beggar next to him.

It doesn't mean that just because you're rich it's ok for your personal rights to be taken for granted.



He is not THE leader of the players, but he is certainly one of their representatives.

You probably have been kept in the dark. But Nadal has been elected (together with Federer and Djokovic) by your "most of them" players into the ATP players council.

I can sense your fury at the Rich & Famous, but desperately trying to justify a drugs-checking method by linking it to money earned is senseless. They have NO direct correlation. Personal taxes will take care of that.

Maybe you need to resolve within yourself this envy of others' social and financial status... Don't Hate Me Just Because I'm Rich.



So should Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Tsonga, Davydenko, Roddick etc.

I agree that a top player has to be checked more frequently than others.

Nadal understands that well too.
It's the methodology that has to be planned in a more sensible way.



Yes, strange indeed.
Like you who dumps all the "WHAT" as one and makes no finer distinction between the "HOW"s.
Life is boring as ONE BIG LUMP.

My other half looking at my penis.
A stranger looking at my penis over the urinal.
A WADA official looking directly at my penis for my urine sample.

They are ALL looking at my penis.
But they are done under different premises.
And they surely invoke different biological and emotional responses from me.

Which concurs with my main issue.

You think doping is illegal, but makes NO distinction between the different ways to carry them out. You lump them as one and to you they are all the same.

I too think doping is against the law, but I do think some methods are more sensible and effective than others. And WADA has to find the best possible one.



I can read very well. We don't have to go far.

How may times have you mentioned "GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT"?

By your own definition Nadal is already guilty in your eyes, and by inference a drugs offender.

And any judge would agree, being vocally against any measures of control does not automatically make someone a suspect.

Tell that to me ONLY when Nadal refuses to take a drugs test.



I am not obliged to disclose my profession to you.

Don't worry, I'm not, won't want to have you as a neighbour.

As for my comprehension of the law, it may be weak, but still way rounded than yours.

Are you Nadull's lawyer? You sure look a hell like so.

I have no problem with rich people. I have a problem with people who have a lot more money than they deserve. I probably have more money than you do, completely okay with it. :) The point is that when you're winning millions without much effort into it and living a freaking jet-set life you can't complain about such a minor thing. It's ridiculous. This is being spoilt and egotistical. Only a fanboy can approve such behaviour.

Man you do write a lot. Of course not with finesse, that's for sure. Again, I'm not saying a judge would consider Nadull guilty because he's being vocal against doping control. Unfortunately the law ain't that good yet. I'm saying is that if you're against control, you're suspicious in my book. Probably in the book of most decent people too. Just so you can take a reality check, this thread IS about Nadull.

So, someone is killed in a strange way and there's DNA evidence. Then someone who's been involved with the person says "I'm against DNA testing". Does that person look absolutely innocent for you? You must the most naive person in the universe.

Do you think any player between 50-200 in the rankings voted for that "council"? Again, you have no idea how that works. I guess some people might have missed how the world works. And you're the last person that can tell me whether I'm a tennis fan or not. I'm sure you aren't. A Nadulltard can't be a real tennis fan.

Methods don't have to be sensible. Criminal investigation ain't sensible. It must WORK. You must be one of those people who defend the "rights" of murderers, thieves and rapists. Looking at it this way, you probably live in a golden cage.

GlennMirnyi
02-01-2009, 01:14 AM
i think there's a couple of points you're failing to address:

a) you can't extrapolate from the fact that your life is scheduled enough to know you're home at 9 p.m. to that of elite athletes. i presume one of the reasons they have so many people on staff is to manage the chaos that is their life.

b) letting them know where you are is not restricted to just the one hour you pick. the line above the one you bolded says they need to be available at all times.

specifically, this:

It is the Athlete’s responsibility to ensure (including by updates, where necessary) that the whereabouts information provided in his whereabouts filings is accurate and sufficient in detail to enable any Anti-Doping Organisation to locate him for Testing on any given day in the quarter, including but not limited to during the 60-minute time slot specified for that day in his whereabouts filing.


this seems overly broad and unduly restrictive. reading these rules, it seems to me that what the WADA is really signalling is that they have no idea how to control the problem and are just going on a method that is overreaching.

i would be curious to see how this holds up in court.

You're another of those fangirls.

"Chaotic life"? Get a freaking clue. A chaotic life is the life of a normal person, who must do everything in his/her life alone, without any help and with limited resources. Squeeze everything in a limited time schedule.

Elite athletes only have to exercise, practice and take planes from one tournament to another. Where, by the way, they have everything ready and settled for them. Hotel, practice courts, means of transportation.

:retard:

wildegirl05
02-01-2009, 01:20 AM
You're another of those fangirls.

"Chaotic life"? Get a freaking clue. A chaotic life is the life of a normal person, who must do everything in his/her life alone, without any help and with limited resources. Squeeze everything in a limited time schedule.

Elite athletes only have to exercise, practice and take planes from one tournament to another. Where, by the way, they have everything ready and settled for them. Hotel, practice courts, means of transportation.

:retard:

thanks, gu. you certainly told me off :)

cmurray
02-01-2009, 01:27 AM
You're another of those fangirls.

"Chaotic life"? Get a freaking clue. A chaotic life is the life of a normal person, who must do everything in his/her life alone, without any help and with limited resources. Squeeze everything in a limited time schedule.

Elite athletes only have to exercise, practice and take planes from one tournament to another. Where, by the way, they have everything ready and settled for them. Hotel, practice courts, means of transportation.

:retard:

Good Lord. :spit: :haha:

That might just be the silliest thing you've ever said. :silly: Seriously, man. :rolls:

wilmar
02-01-2009, 01:30 AM
i think there's a couple of points you're failing to address:

a) you can't extrapolate from the fact that your life is scheduled enough to know you're home at 9 p.m. to that of elite athletes. i presume one of the reasons they have so many people on staff is to manage the chaos that is their life.

b) letting them know where you are is not restricted to just the one hour you pick. the line above the one you bolded says they need to be available at all times.

specifically, this:

It is the Athlete’s responsibility to ensure (including by updates, where necessary) that the whereabouts information provided in his whereabouts filings is accurate and sufficient in detail to enable any Anti-Doping Organisation to locate him for Testing on any given day in the quarter, including but not limited to during the 60-minute time slot specified for that day in his whereabouts filing.

this seems overly broad and unduly restrictive. reading these rules, it seems to me that what the WADA is really signalling is that they have no idea how to control the problem and are just going on a method that is overreaching.

i would be curious to see how this holds up in court.

Indeed!

To point (a)

I like to further add, not all players have the luxury of a manager, agent or PA. So they themselves would have to manage their schedules themselves, and they may end up even more disadvantaged than the top players with this new method.

And to point (b)

Indeed, they have to be precise with their daily one hour report. So they have to be at their reported location A at least 1 minute before that hour, and can't even think of leaving that location at the 59th minute of the hour.

In addition, let's not forget the time difference for these jet-setters. There'll bound to be some mix-up pertaining to this aspect for sure.


It seems that with this new ruling, the WADA agency is leaving the entire responsibility on the shoulders of the player. And then conveniently penalise them should any failure to report accurately arises. This failure may be of guilt, but it also may arise from the logistics of this method.

During the tennis season, I think WADA can use a player's tournament schedule as a rough guide, and go from there. Tournament location, schedule etc are fixed. Players are obliged for doping checks, but WADA needs to play a more pro-active part in this checking process.

They can adopt their more "George Owell" method during the off season or when players are on injury break. (Even though I think some more fine tuning needs to be done) Players won't be distracted by tournaments, and would have a little more time on their hands. Only down is any free time won't be as carefree.

GlennMirnyi
02-01-2009, 01:31 AM
Good Lord. :spit: :haha:

That might just be the silliest thing you've ever said. :silly: Seriously, man. :rolls:

Ah, there comes the other fangirl.

I'm sure a top athlete lives a very chaotic life. :lol: So many things to worry... tending their children, their family, paying bills, taking care of their cars, their houses, dealing with their boss, their co-workers. Oh, wait! They don't have to do those things! :o

You people must live in another world.

cmurray
02-01-2009, 01:40 AM
Ah, there comes the other fangirl.

I'm sure a top athlete lives a very chaotic life. :lol: So many things to worry... tending their children, their family, paying bills, taking care of their cars, their houses, dealing with their boss, their co-workers. Oh, wait! They don't have to do those things! :o

You people must live in another world.

OMG! :bigcry: You called me a fangirl. :sobbing: You can do better than that. :D

You're talking out of your butt. They might get compensated handsomely for it, but their time is by and large not their own. Tournament people, the ATP, journalists, ballkids, fans, their sponsors and every major publication that happens to be covering the tournament has their hand out for time from them.

wilmar
02-01-2009, 01:54 AM
I have a problem with people who have a lot more money than they deserve. I probably have more money than you do, completely okay with it. :)

Then you should have a problem with yourself.

The point is that when you're winning millions without much effort into it and living a freaking jet-set life you can't complain about such a minor thing. It's ridiculous. This is being spoilt and egotistical.

The last I check no one appointed you GOD.

Who are you to decide when is effort put in and when is effort not; when is money made deserved and when is money made not.
If that's not elitism and egoism, nothing is.

Again, I'm not saying a judge would consider Nadull guilty because he's being vocal against doping control. Unfortunately the law ain't that good yet. I'm saying is that if you're against control, you're suspicious in my book.

"GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT" You have conveniently failed to address your previous point.

I'm not saying a judge would consider Nadal guilty. I'm saying you've already considered Nadal guilty.

Maybe a mathematical equation of your allegation makes more sense to you.

GlennMirnyi --->>> Nadal of doping - scientific proof = libel + slander + defamation

So, someone is killed in a strange way and there's DNA evidence. Then someone who's been involved with the person says "I'm against DNA testing". Does that person look absolutely innocent for you? You must the most naive person in the universe.

Huh? You must have watched too much CSI.

Aaah, but your argument is flawed. Referring to your parallel, Nadal did not say he is against "DNA testing" he is saying he is unhappy with the WAY the "DNA testing" is to be carried out.

And Nadal never failed to take any required "DNA testing" and has passed with flying colours.

So NO, Nadal does not look like a suspect to me.

Do you think any player between 50-200 in the rankings voted for that "council"? Again, you have no idea how that works. I guess some people might have missed how the world works. And you're the last person that can tell me whether I'm a tennis fan or not. I'm sure you aren't. A Nadulltard can't be a real tennis fan..

Baseless sweeping statements alert!

I am basing whether you are a real tennis fan by your own definition. So it is you yourself telling you that. Not me.

As for how many players voted for that council, it is a matter of numbers.

True, a bigger voting pool would better reflect the general consensus.
But at least, it is not a dictatorship regime.
And there's more than one player chosen as the voice of the players.

Methods don't have to be sensible. Criminal investigation ain't sensible. It must WORK. You must be one of those people who defend the "rights" of murderers, thieves and rapists. Looking at it this way, you probably live in a golden cage.

If I live in a golden cage, you must be living in a golden cave. Simply based on your claim that you make more money than I do.

Criminal investigation ain't sensible? Oh yes, I forgot that you're still stuck in 1984.

GlennMirnyi
02-01-2009, 02:01 AM
Then you should have a problem with yourself.

Nah.

Money acquired with brains, studying and working isn't undeserved. :wavey:

GlennMirnyi
02-01-2009, 02:03 AM
OMG! :bigcry: You called me a fangirl. :sobbing: You can do better than that. :D

You're talking out of your butt. They might get compensated handsomely for it, but their time is by and large not their own. Tournament people, the ATP, journalists, ballkids, fans, their sponsors and every major publication that happens to be covering the tournament has their hand out for time from them.

Wow, what a hard life.

This is the same bullshit than saying that rockstars live a hard life because of the fans.

I bet 98% of the world would change their life as it is right now to life such a "chaotic and difficult life". :lol:

As if answering a few questions, giving a few autographs and taking some pictures is hard...

Bunch of blind people.

ugotlobbed
02-01-2009, 04:29 AM
uncle tony couldnt get to rafa in time

hilluis
02-01-2009, 05:17 AM
This is a normal requirement in sport these days. Even regional rugby team players in NZ are tested more frequently than this and have to nominate time and place. If you want the sport to be clean, then complying with the rules is sensible. Roger said as much, Rafa was perhaps foolish to voice his displeasure with it.

meihaditalab
02-01-2009, 05:23 AM
Nadal is 100% right. this is actually ridiculous

alfonsojose
02-01-2009, 12:45 PM
What was that creamy liquid Pocahontas was drinking? Do ... do .. don't know :shrug:

gentenaire
02-01-2009, 02:20 PM
Foolish pleasure is spot on.

It's thanks to these kind of regulations that Rasmussen got caught. It's easy to say there are hardly any positive doping tests in tennis when they aren't as strict as in some other sports.
Half of the cyclists that got caught, didn't get caught by a positive doping test. They're all clever enough to know how to evade them. Marion Jones never failed a drugs test, neither did Rasmussen. If you want to be serious about catching drug cheats, you have to do more than mere drug tests.
And I think tennis is definitely a sport where blood doping and EPO could help a lot! I can't think of many sports where the athlete has to perform for more than 3 hours, sometimes 5 hours. Cycling is one, tennis is another. To think that tennis is a drug free sport would be pretty naive, especially considering so much money is involved.
It seems some people still think of steroids when talking about doping, but that was 20 years ago. It's EPO, CERA, blood doping that's happening the most and you won't catch those cheats by taking a urine sample every now and then.

Chair Umpire
02-02-2009, 03:46 PM
Looks like Rafa isn't alone in this one:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/olympics/wires/01/27/2080.ap.oly.wada.challenge/

WADA faces court challenge in Belgium


BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) -A group of Belgian athletes is mounting a legal challenge against the whereabouts rule for out-of-competition drug testing, a move that could undermine the work of the World Anti-Doping Agency.

The athletes claim the rule, which requires them to notify testers of their whereabouts up to three months in advance so they can be located for doping controls, is an invasion of privacy.

If the case is successful in Belgium, it could be used as a precedent to challenge the ruling in other courts around the world.

"It could mobilize others to do the same,'' lawyer Kristof De Saedeleer said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

He represents a group of 65 football and volleyball players and cyclists and has filed the case with Belgium's Council of State high court, which could take up to six months to issue a ruling.

Out-of-competition doping tests have become essential to catch cheats since many illegal substances can become untraceable by the time the competition starts. To perform such tests, WADA needs to know at all times where and when athletes can be traced.

Under the latest WADA code, athletes must specify one hour each day when and where they can be located for testing.

"It gives WADA a pass to invade the privacy of athletes,'' De Saedeleer said.

Under the rules, three missed tests or three warnings for failing to file whereabouts information within an 18-month period constitute a doping violation and can lead to athletes being banned.

The Belgian challenge uses privacy provisions within the Belgian constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of the Council of Europe to challenge the system.

Although the athletes stress they do not object to out-of-competition doping, they claim the current system is far too invasive, forcing them even to pinpoint when they go to the movies.

WADA maintains the changes were made to make it easier for athletes to abide by the provisions, including limiting the mandatory location specification to one hour a day. WADA spokesman Frederic Donze said athletes can even update this through an e-mail message.

De Saedeleer said the rule makes non-elite athletes, such as provincial volleyball club players in Belgium, as much a target as the biggest stars.

"They force it onto sports where there is a minimal history of doping, or none at all,'' he said. "It is not because there is one criminal in the village, that the whole village has to be jailed.''

Donze said it was up to international sporting organizations to cast the testing net as wide as they deemed necessary and up to national anti-doping organizations to set up a specific testing pool.

jcreback
02-02-2009, 03:54 PM
This is absurd. I'd rather them drug test every player before every tournament than this stuff. At least the players wouldn't be bothered in their personal lives.

GlennMirnyi
02-02-2009, 04:01 PM
Belgian cyclists?

:lol:

Anyone against doping regulation is a suspect.

gentenaire
02-02-2009, 06:56 PM
This is absurd. I'd rather them drug test every player before every tournament than this stuff. At least the players wouldn't be bothered in their personal lives.

So you'd rather drug cheats don't get caught then?

It's in their personal lives, it's out of season, that cheaters take the drugs, not before a tournament. Only amateurs and really stupid athletes will take something right before or during competition. You're not going to catch the big doping offenders simply by testing right before and during tournaments.

A common technique is to take EPO out of season, then have their blood withdrawn. Then during competition, they pump their own EPO spiked blood back in their bodies. There's no trace of EPO in the urine as no EPO was taken at the time. But they do have the performance enhancing effect of EPO. This is blood doping. This is what the whole Fuentes case was about (Spanish doctor who helped many athletes, a lot of them cyclists but also tennis players and football players. The football and tennis federations insist no football or tennis players were on the Fuentes list- Dr. Fuentes himself says otherwise)

Corey Feldman
02-02-2009, 07:00 PM
so classy this Nadal

jcreback
02-02-2009, 07:44 PM
So you'd rather drug cheats don't get caught then?

It's in their personal lives, it's out of season, that cheaters take the drugs, not before a tournament. Only amateurs and really stupid athletes will take something right before or during competition. You're not going to catch the big doping offenders simply by testing right before and during tournaments.

A common technique is to take EPO out of season, then have their blood withdrawn. Then during competition, they pump their own EPO spiked blood back in their bodies. There's no trace of EPO in the urine as no EPO was taken at the time. But they do have the performance enhancing effect of EPO. This is blood doping. This is what the whole Fuentes case was about (Spanish doctor who helped many athletes, a lot of them cyclists but also tennis players and football players. The football and tennis federations insist no football or tennis players were on the Fuentes list- Dr. Fuentes himself says otherwise)

In theory I agree with you, but the problem is that this system punishes the innocent, which is wrong.

Deboogle!.
02-02-2009, 07:48 PM
For a different perspective from someone who appears to have been affected somewhat by the new rule....
----------------------------
Q. Could you talk about the challenges of the new drug testing regime.

BOB BRYAN: Yeah, it's pretty strict. We got tested a few times when we were home. The tough thing is you got to be worried to go to breakfast at 8 in the morning. You got to wait it out and stay until 9. If you're clear, you can go eat breakfast. You always got to kind of be on‑call. I guess it's the responsibility of a professional athlete.

It's a little bit brutal. They can't call you. I guess that's the rule now. We have one or two missed tests, so we got to be really aware of what we're doing and make sure.

MIKE BRYAN: Yeah, you got to communicate with whoever it is, the ITF, where you're going to be at all times. They even want to know when you're flying in, the day you arrive, if you're going to be at the hotel for an hour.

We missed a couple. Just weren't thinking. Just down in L.A. One time I got a flat tire. But, yeah, you just got to be ready for anything.

Q. They just knock on the door?

MIKE BRYAN: Yeah, they just knock on the door.

BOB BRYAN: Knock on the door. If you're not there... They used to call you, and you have one hour. That's usually enough time to get to the house. But now they don't call you.

Mike missed a test. He was just at breakfast. Just had an extra long breakfast.

MIKE BRYAN: Every time we're home, they're usually there, one of the days. I think we got tested 15 to 20 times last year. It's either USADA or the ITF. Yeah, you just got to be home.

Q. Can you not miss another test?

MIKE BRYAN: I think I have ‑‑ April ‑‑

BOB BRYAN: Until April he's got to be clean.

MIKE BRYAN: But I'm sure I can appeal because this body doesn't look like a 'roided‑out body.

Q. Rafa described it in Spanish as intolerable harassment, and Roger says it's a necessary evil. Where do you come down on that?

BOB BRYAN: I don't know. I think once someone gets banned for missing a few tests, then you hear the stories and they're kind of ridiculous stories, then I think we'll probably have a problem with it. If it's one of our friends that goes out, if Mike gets banned...

MIKE BRYAN: I think it has to be done, though. It's fair across the board. You don't want doping in tennis. The fans definitely don't want anyone playing that's ‑‑

BOB BRYAN: ‑‑ cheating.

MIKE BRYAN: It's good. I think we just got to get used to the strictness.

BOB BRYAN: The strictness.

Q. Was it really a flat tire?

MIKE BRYAN: I missed a couple. One of them, I think I got a flat tire. I was trying to make my way back up from L.A. One I decided to take my girlfriend to San Francisco for a day. I wasn't thinking. I didn't call my agent or the ITF.

GlennMirnyi
02-02-2009, 07:48 PM
In theory I agree with you, but the problem is that this system punishes the innocent, which is wrong.

How are you punish an innocent? Innocents won't be caught...

jcreback
02-02-2009, 07:51 PM
How are you punish an innocent? Innocents won't be caught...

Read the post above yours. Their lives are changed. They can't live in complete freedom if they are on-call all the time. Can't easily go eat, can't easily go on vacation, etc. It isn't right because innocent players aren't given the benefit of the doubt.

GlennMirnyi
02-02-2009, 07:52 PM
MIKE BRYAN: I think it has to be done, though. It's fair across the board. You don't want doping in tennis. The fans definitely don't want anyone playing that's ‑‑

BOB BRYAN: ‑‑ cheating.

MIKE BRYAN: It's good. I think we just got to get used to the strictness.

BOB BRYAN: The strictness.

:worship:

That's how it works.

MalwareDie
02-02-2009, 07:53 PM
I don't watch doubles but the Bryan brothers sound like interesting guys.

gentenaire
02-02-2009, 08:58 PM
Read the post above yours. Their lives are changed. They can't live in complete freedom if they are on-call all the time. Can't easily go eat, can't easily go on vacation, etc. It isn't right because innocent players aren't given the benefit of the doubt.

What's worse? Being on call all the time, or losing important titles and prize money to cheaters?

A lot of normal hard working people have to plan their holidays long in advance because others have to cover for them while they're gone. Doctors or nurses on call can't just change their plan at the last minute when they feel like it. That's part of the job.

Aliciasace
02-02-2009, 09:13 PM
ha, this is really stupid - no wonder nadal disagrees

jcreback
02-02-2009, 09:16 PM
What's worse? Being on call all the time, or losing important titles and prize money to cheaters?

A lot of normal hard working people have to plan their holidays long in advance because others have to cover for them while they're gone. Doctors or nurses on call can't just change their plan at the last minute when they feel like it. That's part of the job.

There needs to be a balance between the two.

And don't compare tennis to doctors. They are on call to possibly save people's lives, not play a sport.

wilmar
02-03-2009, 02:48 AM
In theory I agree with you, but the problem is that this system punishes the innocent, which is wrong.

Exactly! I made an earlier point that Two Wrongs Don't Make One Right.

Read the post above yours. Their lives are changed. They can't live in complete freedom if they are on-call all the time. Can't easily go eat, can't easily go on vacation, etc. It isn't right because innocent players aren't given the benefit of the doubt.

Jcreback, that's how Glenn is...Kill First Question Later.

Back to your point, if that is not daily stress then I don't know what it.
And to avoid any slip ups on your own part, you need to remember the EXACT report your have presented to WADA, having to remember what time you're on waiting call and what place you have to be and what activity you are supposed to be doing, of every day of every year.

And with all this hassle and seemingly "strict" method, it is jarringly non-foolproof!

Each athlete is given three chances for slip-ups. So if I'm a guilty offender, I can still practice my cheating at least twice a year. I will just cook up some excuse and miss the first two checks. I will only need to pull up my socks and make sure I am clean after that second offence, and make it for the third check. So after all that invasion, it remains an unworkable plan.

For those who are bent to cheat, they will still find a way no matter what newer or stricter measures WADA adopt. So they cannot penalised the innocent that same way.

Fiberlight1
05-29-2009, 08:24 PM
PARIS -- Rafael Nadal accused anti-doping controllers of "harassing" tennis players on Friday and defended his suspended friend Richard Gasquet.

Gasquet, of France, confirmed almost three weeks ago that he had tested positive for cocaine during last month's Miami event and is provisionally banned as he tries to clear his name.

"I support him. I'm certain that he's not taking anything," Nadal said after reaching the fourth round of the French Open.

"He's a good friend of mine and I discussed this with him last week and he's most certainly not taking cocaine. You know what the world is like today. You go to a party ... if you kiss a girl who's taken cocaine, anything can happen. This can destroy your career and this is most unfair," he said.

Nadal again criticized the World Anti-Doping Agency's so-called "whereabouts" rules, under which athletes must tell their national anti-doping authorities where they will be at a chosen hour between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m. each day for a three-month period.

If they change their plans they are obliged to inform the authorities of that change. Athletes who miss three doping tests in an 18-month period face possible suspensions.

Tennis players want more flexibility because their schedules change at the last minute if they are knocked out from a tournament in which they were expecting to do well.

"The International Tennis Federation should take measures," Nadal said. "I don't have the impression that it's good to put so much pressure on us. They harass us.

"If I lose tomorrow, I'll go back to Mallorca and who will know where I am if I have no access to the Internet? Now, if they knock at my door in Mallorca, they're going to give me a warning. It's happened to Carlos [Moya] before. They sent him a warning and this is most unfair," he said.

The ITF had no comment on the issue.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=4215398

What do you think? Has Nadal overstepped his boundaries?

miura
05-29-2009, 08:28 PM
I agree with Rafael. The extremely pushy ITF is getting on the players nerves.

Nice of him to support Richard aswell :hug:

Avon
05-29-2009, 08:29 PM
Gasquet would not take drugs, on top of all that drink.

l_mac
05-29-2009, 08:31 PM
Rafa :rolleyes:

75% of his presser was about this.

StanisKing
05-29-2009, 08:34 PM
C'mon Rafa, it was just one line.......

Garson007
05-29-2009, 08:34 PM
Yes, Gasguet was kissing a girl who had enough coke in her mouth to make him get high. :retard:

Castafiore
05-29-2009, 08:36 PM
75% of his presser was about this.
Because they asked him about it for some reason. 6 out of 8 questions.

He should have said that he's given his opinion on the issue before, let's get some questions about the actual tournament.

l_mac
05-29-2009, 08:37 PM
Because they asked him about it for some reason. 6 out of 8 questions.


Yes, that's where I got the 75% from.

Igaarg
05-29-2009, 08:37 PM
Nadal always so interested in the doping issue:rolleyes:.

I don´t know Gasquet, but the problem here is to find out if Richard had drugs to take advantage in the sport or because he is addicted to cocain or something like this. If is the second choice, I don´t think that 2 years suspended will help him...It´s really sad and difficult to take a decision.

JolánGagó
05-29-2009, 08:37 PM
He's right. The harassment must stop. Everyone has a right to privacy.

Castafiore
05-29-2009, 08:38 PM
Yes, that's where I got the 75% from.
Congratulations.

FedFan_2007
05-29-2009, 08:38 PM
What a lame excuse! I can't believe Rafa is defending that drug user.

l_mac
05-29-2009, 08:40 PM
Congratulations.

Thank you.

Matt01
05-29-2009, 08:41 PM
Nice of Rafa to defend Gasquet.

And I totally agree with him about those "harassments". It's going too far.

born_on_clay
05-29-2009, 08:43 PM
Rafito is right !

justsumma
05-29-2009, 08:46 PM
Gasquet must have kissed Nadull who was on Coke. Thats why he's so sure

q.j.
05-29-2009, 08:51 PM
You go to a party ... if you kiss a girl who's taken cocaine, anything can happen.

instant classic.

JolánGagó
05-29-2009, 08:53 PM
He's true. Here in any party chances are that girl you're kissing is on coke.

q.j.
05-29-2009, 08:56 PM
yes JG but the sentence itself ...:haha:

marcRD
05-29-2009, 08:59 PM
Beeing banned for cocaine is silly, it certanly wont help anyone and I dont see Gasquet or Hingis as heavy drugusers. Maybe the kiss a girl example is over the top but someone could certanly mess with your drink in parties, it happened to a friend of mine when he was 17 (someone was playing a dirty joke on him).

Johnny Groove
05-29-2009, 09:02 PM
He's right, of course. These ITF rules where you need to state where you'll be at all hours is bullshit. As for Richie, I have no clue what happened, but neither does anyone else. At least Nadal is defending his friend instead of jumping ship.

Or Levy
05-29-2009, 09:03 PM
Well, I'm not sure about what Rafa said.

Personally, I believe he's right, I think the ITF is a lot more likely to end up suspending players who hasn't done anything, just forgot to inform of their wearabouts (I think one of the Bryans said he already missed two... ) than players who are actually doping.

Moreover, didn't most of the cyclists who've been caught weren't caught because their tests came out positive, but because their names were on that doping doctor lists? So if the tests can't catch the dopers, what is the point?

As for Gasquet, I think it's just because it is him, you know? I think the players were quite shocked, Santoro said he has a difficult time believing this, and Rafa (who had known him since Jr days) doesn't either, and Roger sounded surprised as well...

And Rafa's not wrong, Coke isn't performance enhencing, and God knows what someone can slip into one's drink.

But I don't know how I feel about him saying that, he's world number 1, somehow taking such a stand against the ITF seems wrong to me.

JolánGagó
05-29-2009, 09:05 PM
Beeing banned for cocaine is silly, it certanly wont help anyone and I dont see Gasquet or Hingis as heavy drugusers. Maybe the kiss a girl example is over the top but someone could certanly mess with your drink in parties, it happened to a friend of mine when he was 17 (someone was playing a dirty joke on him).

Lizz got his drink messed with too.

richie21
05-29-2009, 09:27 PM
Well, I'm not sure about what Rafa said.

Personally, I believe he's right, I think the ITF is a lot more likely to end up suspending players who hasn't done anything, just forgot to inform of their wearabouts (I think one of the Bryans said he already missed two... ) than players who are actually doping.

Moreover, didn't most of the cyclists who've been caught weren't caught because their tests came out positive, but because their names were on that doping doctor lists? So if the tests can't catch the dopers, what is the point?

As for Gasquet, I think it's just because it is him, you know? I think the players were quite shocked, Santoro said he has a difficult time believing this, and Rafa (who had known him since Jr days) doesn't either, and Roger sounded surprised as well...

And Rafa's not wrong, Coke isn't performance enhencing, and God knows what someone can slip into one's drink.

But I don't know how I feel about him saying that, he's world number 1, somehow taking such a stand against the ITF seems wrong to me.

Yep.
I mean,if it had happened to Safin for instance,people would have been surprised but nowhere near as surprised as with Gasquet.
I mean,Gasquet's apparent personnality(shy,calm,polite,etc...) just doesn't fit with someone who is taking drugs for fun(unless he is really feeling bad in his life and then,taking drugs because he suffers).

reggie1
05-29-2009, 09:41 PM
Richard's coach was out with him the night that he is supposed to have "ingested" the drugs so I really don't see Richie having a wild old time in front of his coach, he just does not seem to be that type of person.

Har-Tru
05-29-2009, 09:57 PM
if you kiss a girl who's taken cocaine, anything can happen. This can destroy your career and this is most unfair," he said.

Excellent.

"If I lose tomorrow

Even better.

MacTheKnife
05-29-2009, 10:08 PM
I support testing, but not the process they have in place. Testing should be done right before, or randomly during a tournament. WTF is with this, know where you are at all times crap.

case
05-29-2009, 10:11 PM
good for Nadal and good for tennis. other sports like the NBA who play in the olympics dont use WADA. why does the ITF?

It does sound like harassment and for all the testing they dont seem to catch anyone doing drugs.

does anyone REALLY believe that there is NO drug abuse taking place in the atp? just gasquet with his tiny amount of coke that they found. i dont believe it for a second, whatever WADA is testing for must be pretty lame.

ossie
05-29-2009, 10:25 PM
You know what the world is like today. You go to a party ... if you kiss a girl who's taken cocaine, anything can happen.rafa you sexy beast :devil:

delpiero7
05-29-2009, 10:36 PM
These regulations are absolutely absurd. I can see how it would work in most other sports. For example in team sports, where your schedule is already set out for you, and you know it weeks in adavance.

Tennis is different though. Players never know when they will get knocked out of a tournament - even the best players can have an off day and get knocked out in R1 of a tournament, whilst they had told WADA that they would be in that place for a week. Or vice-versa, a player may have initially decided to have a week off, but then changed their mind and applied for a wildcard for an event the following week. In both instances, the players are obliged under the rules to contact WADA and let them know of the change of plans?

Sorry, but that's total bullshit.

TheBrainiac
05-29-2009, 10:39 PM
http://towleroad.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/12/tsonga_gasquet.jpg
http://towleroad.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/12/gasquet1.jpg
http://epl.theoffside.com/files/2009/01/white-lines.jpg

dodo
05-29-2009, 10:44 PM
Yes, Gasguet was kissing a girl who had enough coke in her mouth to make him get high. :retard:
sounds believable, other than that part...

peribsen
05-29-2009, 10:53 PM
Tomorrow, Nadal will inhale Soderling's ego.
Don't know whether that counts as doping, though.

Ilovetheblues_86
05-29-2009, 10:58 PM
Soderling´s ego is too big for NADULL. :banana:

green25814
05-29-2009, 11:04 PM
I couldnt give a shit if gasguet took cocaine, but i do find it strange how really only nadal seems to constantly speak out against the drug-testing.

peribsen
05-29-2009, 11:05 PM
Soderling´s ego is too big for NADULL. :banana:

Oh, that's why he takes it a bit at a time, a sniff in Rome, another one in RG, maybe the dredges another time. I'd agree too much Soderling taken all at once could be harmful for the lining of the stomach. Always better to keep some dessert for the next meal.

superslam77
05-29-2009, 11:10 PM
Gasquet kissing a girl :tape:

Nadal always against the rules, if he says something it always has to do with his profit :mad:

Hugh Jaas
05-29-2009, 11:11 PM
Why am I not surprised by Nadull defending dopers? :scratch:

WADA THUGS VS NADAL 2009 CHAPTER


If i was Nadal I too would be annoyed if a WADA stranger randomly turns up and stares at my dick when I piss into a cup 20+ times a year. Why does he get targeted repeatedly when challenger and futures level players almost never get targeted?
http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/6817/clipboard03jo5.gif



2006

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=92039

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,20958222-5001023,00.html


WORLD No. 2 Rafael Nadal says athletes are being treated "like criminals" by anti-doping officials and has called for politicians to also be drug tested.

Nadal, who will be travelling to India on December 29 to start the new season at the Chennai Open, revealed he had been drug tested 17 times this year – the last at his Spanish home last Saturday.

"We are being treated like criminals," an angry Nadal said.

"I am simply one sportsman.

"I accept the anti-doping controls but they seem to me to be exaggerated."

Nadal said he would like politicians themselves to be subjected to drug tests.

Certinfy
05-29-2009, 11:17 PM
Im starting to like my former fave player more and more now (Nadal). (Tho currently he's the player i hate the most now tho)

moon language
05-29-2009, 11:35 PM
If you read the post match interview today you see he was asked about the doping, he didn't just start talking about it out of the blue.

I think Nadal is pretty naive to be so convinced that Gasquet would never do coke, but that's in keeping with who he seems to be so not really a surprise.

l_mac
05-29-2009, 11:43 PM
If you read the post match interview today you see he was asked about the doping, he didn't just start talking about it out of the blue.


I think the reason he was asked was that he had made it known he was annoyed about getting dragged out of bed at 7am on his rest day, along with Ferrer and Verdasco, for a test Thursday morning.

Hugh Jaas
05-29-2009, 11:54 PM
I think the reason he was asked was that he had made it known he was annoyed about getting dragged out of bed at 7am on his rest day, along with Ferrer and Verdasco, for a test Thursday morning.

WTF that's crazy. Are the WADA Gestapo Swiss by any chance....

sawan66278
05-30-2009, 12:00 AM
Kudos to Rafa for defending Richard. Glad to see Rafa taking a stand on issues like these...unlike Tiger Woods (the leader in his sport) or Michael Jordan (back in the day)...who did nothing except stump for Nike.

the graduate
05-30-2009, 12:15 AM
good for Nadal and good for tennis. other sports like the NBA who play in the olympics dont use WADA. why does the ITF?

It does sound like harassment and for all the testing they dont seem to catch anyone doing drugs.

does anyone REALLY believe that there is NO drug abuse taking place in the atp? just gasquet with his tiny amount of coke that they found. i dont believe it for a second, whatever WADA is testing for must be pretty lame.I agree with you with all that money I am sure there are cokeheads on the ATP and WTA,who knows why Golovin quit tennis probably to freely do coke plus she was Gasquet s girlfriend at one time.Maria probably smoked a joint or two during her injury time off.
I think Gasquet did cocaine he seems to like strippers , partying and ther are drugs in strip clubs and at parties:p

Avon
05-30-2009, 12:18 AM
These regulations are absolutely absurd. I can see how it would work in most other sports. For example in team sports, where your schedule is already set out for you, and you know it weeks in adavance.

Tennis is different though. Players never know when they will get knocked out of a tournament - even the best players can have an off day and get knocked out in R1 of a tournament, whilst they had told WADA that they would be in that place for a week. Or vice-versa, a player may have initially decided to have a week off, but then changed their mind and applied for a wildcard for an event the following week. In both instances, the players are obliged under the rules to contact WADA and let them know of the change of plans?

Sorry, but that's total bullshit.

I have got a bet on with the world No.11,Players never know when they will get knocked out of a tournament.Do you think I will Win?

star
05-30-2009, 12:29 AM
He's right, of course. These ITF rules where you need to state where you'll be at all hours is bullshit. As for Richie, I have no clue what happened, but neither does anyone else. At least Nadal is defending his friend instead of jumping ship.



It's not really ITF rules. It's what all olympic athletes do and have done for years. If players don't like it they should decide they don't want tennis to be an olympic sport.

And yes, Rafa seems to be very naive about drugs and drug testing if he believes you might test positive because you kissed a girl who had taken cocaine.

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 12:31 AM
Sorry Raf, but you're being very naive and delusional on this matter here.
Keep your trap shut on this matter, please. For your own well-being. :rolleyes:

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 12:32 AM
It's not really ITF rules. It's what all olympic athletes do and have done for years. If players don't like it they should decide they don't want tennis to be an olympic sport.

And yes, Rafa seems to be very naive about drugs and drug testing if he believes you might test positive because you kissed a girl who had taken cocaine.

True. Nonsense of the highest order coming from Rafa here.
It's okay to be 'nice', but he's taking it quite a mite too far on this matter. :help:

I can only hope this is just another :bs: story made up by some journo. :tape:

l_mac
05-30-2009, 12:33 AM
And yes, Rafa seems to be very naive about drugs and drug testing if he believes you might test positive because you kissed a girl who had taken cocaine.

Maybe that's the stories Xisca tells him to keep him faithful :shrug:

star
05-30-2009, 12:39 AM
True. Nonsense of the highest order coming from Rafa here.
It's okay to be 'nice', but he's taking it quite a mite too far on this matter. :help:



I don't think Rafa is just being "nice." I think he's a very loyal guy. He's going to stick up for his friend.

I also think he doesn't know that most drug users are hardened liars.

l_mac
05-30-2009, 12:40 AM
I can only hope this is just another :bs: story made up by some journo. :tape:

It's all in his presser :shrug:

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 12:40 AM
I don't think Rafa is just being "nice." I think he's a very loyal guy. He's going to stick up for his friend.

Either that, or he's being VERY naive indeed. I don't know which is the worst choice eventually. I mean... it's okay to stand up for your friends (MORE than okay) - but this is rightout... silly. IMHO, of course. :o

star
05-30-2009, 01:00 AM
Either that, or he's being VERY naive indeed. I don't know which is the worst choice eventually. I mean... it's okay to stand up for your friends (MORE than okay) - but this is rightout... silly. IMHO, of course. :o

You are entitled to your opinion to be sure. But, Rafa is entitled to his as well -- even if it seems uninformed to others. I don't think he's silly -- just uninformed. Most people don't know much at all about drugs or drug testing and have ideas about it that aren't in line with the actual facts.

Guy Haines
05-30-2009, 01:02 AM
Nadal is only commenting because he was asked about it. :shrug:

And he was asked about it because he and Ferrer and Verdasco were awakened at 7 a.m. the other day for a test. A pop quiz?

Darren Chill mentioned it while calling a match for ESPN. During another match Cahill slipped in a subtle remark that gave the impression he (Cahill) was disillusioned by his little tango with Federer earlier this year.

l_mac
05-30-2009, 01:04 AM
Darren Chill mentioned it while calling a match for ESPN. During another match Cahill slipped in a subtle remark that gave the impression he (Cahill) was disillusioned by his little tango with Federer earlier this year.

Really? What was the quote? Anything I can get a thread out of?

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 01:06 AM
You are entitled to your opinion to be sure. But, Rafa is entitled to his as well -- even if it seems uninformed to others. I don't think he's silly -- just uninformed. Most people don't know much at all about drugs or drug testing and have ideas about it that aren't in line with the actual facts.

Someone who's been on the PROFESSIONAL tennis tour for some six years or so by now... being that naive uninformed? Sorry, not buying it. ;)
Doesn't matter, I love him anyways. I just happen to think it might be better if he keeps his mouth shut on this matter for a bit. :shrug:

l_mac
05-30-2009, 01:08 AM
Someone who's been on the PROFESSIONAL tennis tour for some six years or so by now... being that naive uninformed? Sorry, not buying it. ;)
Doesn't matter, I love him anyways. I just happen to think it might be better if he keeps his mouth shut on this matter for a bit. :shrug:

Are you talking about what he said about Gasquet? Or what the thinks of the new WADA enforced rules about tennis players' availability for testing?

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 01:08 AM
Are you talking about what he said about Gasquet? Or what the thinks of the new WADA enforced rules about tennis players' availability for testing?

Both. :)

Guy Haines
05-30-2009, 01:11 AM
Really? What was the quote? Anything I can get a thread out of?

:lol: Unfortunately I wasn't recording and I was working at the same time so can't quote him verbatim.

It was more tone than choice of words or phrasing. Cahill was so enthusiastic, or vociferous at least, about what he could do for Federer during/after the AO final. Now I'm not getting that from his commentary.

This time, he was referring to someone in the coaching or past-player realm Federer talked with recently, and he said something along the lines of "Maybe he got Roger to listen" or "Maybe he got through to Roger."

Guy Haines
05-30-2009, 01:15 AM
Both. :)

He doesn't seem out of line to me about the testing.

But the Gasquet remarks make him seem like an overly-protected Pollyanna.

Anytime the Gasquet "scandal" is mentioned I see those pics of Gasquet high-kicking like a reject Rockette with those Miami floozies while looking wasted out of his gourd.

Miami is where the test happened.

He was a HOT MESS in those pics.

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 01:26 AM
He doesn't seem out of line to me about the testing.

Not necessarily 'out of line' in my opinion either, but rather naive nontheless. In any high-profile sport, there are folks around 'cheating', or at least not taking enough care to prevent themselves getting into trouble for that matter.
These guys make huge amounts of cash - having themselves getting checked regularly doesn't seem too much of a high price to pay in return for all their bucks and glory. Millions of hard-working people have to get up at six AM every morning just to be in time for their poor-payed job, all of their lives... I wished these highly payed dudes would be able to get a little perspective on the so-called 'harrasments' they have to go through... At least that's my opinion...

But the Gasquet remarks make him seem like an overly-protected Pollyanna.

Anytime the Gasquet "scandal" is mentioned I see those pics of Gasquet high-kicking like a reject Rockette with those Miami floozies while looking wasted out of his gourd.

Miami is where the test happened.

He was a HOT MESS in those pics.

Fully agree with you. Come on, everybody knows that things like this DO happen. Does Rafa really believe his good friend Gasquet is an 'innocent angel'? :help:

Bargearse
05-30-2009, 01:41 AM
I was wondering why Gasquet was having a form slump. It mustn't be easy to get out of bed for a tennis match when you've been up all night doing coke.

case
05-30-2009, 01:55 AM
It's not really ITF rules. It's what all olympic athletes do and have done for years. If players don't like it they should decide they don't want tennis to be an olympic sport.

And yes, Rafa seems to be very naive about drugs and drug testing if he believes you might test positive because you kissed a girl who had taken cocaine.


you are wrong. not all olympic athletes use WADA.
as i said before the NBA, for one, does NOT

gasquet also tested NEGATIVELY for cocaine in his hair sample-a test that is almost 100% accurate.
if he used before the test he is not an addict.

as for the twisted logic that because someone makes a lot of money they should give up their rights is hogwash.
basic human rights and human dignity should NEVER depend on ones' status in life. they are inherent in all human beings.

tennis fans watch the sport for the abilities of the athletes, not to trash or take away the rights of players

Bargearse
05-30-2009, 02:01 AM
you are wrong. not all olympic athletes use WADA.
as i said before the NBA, for one, does NOT

gasquet also tested NEGATIVELY for cocaine in his hair sample-a test that is almost 100% accurate.
if he used before the test he is not an addict.

Almost 100% is kind of an oxymoron. There's that little bit of doubt. He may only be a recreational user, not an addict.

kandygram
05-30-2009, 02:04 AM
I was watching a replay of the Nadal/Hewitt match on ESPN when they brought up the mass Spanish drug test on Thursday morning. It was Dick Enberg and Darren Cahill calling the match. I think it was Darren that said Rafael Nadal, David Ferrer, Fernando Verdasco and Tommy Robredo were woke up at 7:30 a.m. to get drug tested. I wrote down the particulars so to summarize what was said.

David Ferrer had just went to the bathroom prior to their knock at the door and had to wait in the lobby for 2 hours before he could complete his test.

Fernando Verdasco thought he was dreaming.

Toni Nadal was not happy about it.

Tommy Robredo had a match that day.

Black Adam
05-30-2009, 02:08 AM
I like you Nadal, but the Gsagay thingy is hogwash. First of all, I don't see him kisisng a real girl. Secondly, how on earth would you get cocaine from someone's saliva?? Unless he drank her blood........



P.S. A big surprise to Glenn Mirnyi once again very active when it comes to Nadal. :rolleyes: My sig tells it as clearly as possible.

Hugh Jaas
05-30-2009, 02:09 AM
I was watching a replay of the Nadal/Hewitt match on ESPN when they brought up the mass Spanish drug test on Thursday morning. It was Dick Enberg and Darren Cahill calling the match. I think it was Darren that said Rafael Nadal, David Ferrer, Fernando Verdasco and Tommy Robredo were woke up at 7:30 a.m. to get drug tested. I wrote down the particulars so to summarize what was said.

David Ferrer had just went to the bathroom prior to their knock at the door and had to wait in the lobby for 2 hours before he could complete his test.

Fernando Verdasco thought he was dreaming.

Toni Nadal was not happy about it.

Tommy Robredo had a match that day.

Why is WADA targeting Spanish players? Testing is supposed to be random or from tip offs, they must know something we don't..

jcreback
05-30-2009, 03:02 AM
Amazing that a guy that is that brilliant on the court can be so dense off of it.

Cocaine from kissing a girl? Wow.

As for those who say it isn't performance enhancing, it can be short-term. It is a quick upper. Obviously abusing the drug long term does not help tennis, but over one or two times, it actually can.

star
05-30-2009, 03:18 AM
Fully agree with you. Come on, everybody knows that things like this DO happen. Does Rafa really believe his good friend Gasquet is an 'innocent angel'? :help:

I have had drug addicts sit across the table from me and lie about their drug use so convincingly that even though I KNEW the facts, it was hard for me not to believe them. There are no better liars. Well, except politicians.