Friday's rant

[Grumpy Old Man]

Here's a philosophical question. Why are some forms of cheating acceptable and others aren't? Why is a special opprobrium reserved for a drug cheat - who is mainly harming himself - as against, say, someone done for gouging?

[johng]

Here's a philosophical question. Why are some forms of cheating acceptable and others aren't? Why is a special opprobrium reserved for a drug cheat - who is mainly harming himself - as against, say, someone done for gouging?

Harming all the people who gave it their best shot but came up just short also.

[Lar]

I think you'll find that someone injecting steroids does not regard themselves as self harming. They are doing it to grow muscle they wouldn't otherwise be able to develop. And from what I read once you use the steroids to bulk up it is easy enough to retain the muscle mass through training so arguably having doped and served his time the player in question is still benefiting from the cheating even after stopping taking the steroids.

[blockhead]

Here's a philosophical question. Why are some forms of cheating acceptable and others aren't? Why is a special opprobrium reserved for a drug cheat - who is mainly harming himself - as against, say, someone done for gouging?

Take a look at the state of Athletics. That's Why special opprobrium is reserved for a drug cheat. It will destroy the sport itself.

[RoboProp]

Here's a philosophical question. Why are some forms of cheating acceptable and others aren't? Why is a special opprobrium reserved for a drug cheat - who is mainly harming himself - as against, say, someone done for gouging?

Neither are very sporting. The gouger is easier to spot than the doper (most of the time)
I think there's the feeling of being cheated and being let down by the doper. We admire athletes we place them on pedestals above other mere mortals, and later when it transpires they doped we feel the sheen disappear. A gouger is always evidently dirty so they never had that great fall from grace.

As addendum I got talking to some old boys in the club after a match, I was telling them about protein shakes, creatine monohydrate, CLA and pre-trainers all of which I had taken or was taking. I told them I was cycling my creatine, they looked at me like I had impaled Bambi. I explained they were all legal supplements. They didn't approve and branded me a cheat. Some never spoke to me again afterwards. In my eyes I did nothing wrong as it was all approved and legal, to them I had taken a shortcut and was dishonest. As far as they were concerned I was no better than Ben Johnson.

[Oldschoolsocks]

Here's a philosophical question. Why are some forms of cheating acceptable and others aren't? Why is a special opprobrium reserved for a drug cheat - who is mainly harming himself - as against, say, someone done for gouging?

it's a funny one

0n one hand I find gouging or staring on a prone players head or sensitive bits to be a lot worse than doping. I would really think twice about a grown man who would knowingly inflict damage like that on an opponent - yet traditionally this was seen as "what happens on field stays on the field". Whereas with doping the player is merely taking a synthetic derivative of a natural hormone (or mix of) in order to gain a physical strength and or weight advantage and decrease recovery time.

then on the other hand if athletes are getting bigger, faster and stronger it actually leads to the "legal" collisions in the sport being potentially a lot more harmful for all athletes involved - so from a duty of care perspective the harm due to steroid use may in fact be more dangerous to the general playing population.

so while I see gouging as a reprehensible act legally and morally, and I see the use of PEDs as just a legal issue both in there own way are a failure in the duty of care for all players on the pitch.

just on a side note - Munster are obviously getting beaten up because of the "Munster by the Grace of god" brand, and their fans willingness to get upset and raise to the bait on twitter etc., I doubt the same story would have the same legs if the subject province was Leinster, Ulster or Connacht.

[kermischocolate]

Here's a philosophical question. Why are some forms of cheating acceptable and others aren't? Why is a special opprobrium reserved for a drug cheat - who is mainly harming himself - as against, say, someone done for gouging?

Neither are very sporting. The gouger is easier to spot than the doper (most of the time)
I think there's the feeling of being cheated and being let down by the doper. We admire athletes we place them on pedestals above other mere mortals, and later when it transpires they doped we feel the sheen disappear. A gouger is always evidently dirty so they never had that great fall from grace.

As addendum I got talking to some old boys in the club after a match, I was telling them about protein shakes, creatine monohydrate, CLA and pre-trainers all of which I had taken or was taking. I told them I was cycling my creatine, they looked at me like I had impaled Bambi. I explained they were all legal supplements. They didn't approve and branded me a cheat. Some never spoke to me again afterwards. In my eyes I did nothing wrong as it was all approved and legal, to them I had taken a shortcut and was dishonest. As far as they were concerned I was no better than Ben Johnson.

Not having a go at you but there's a fine line where perfectly harmless and legal supplements become performing enhancing and doping.

After all, isn't the point to ultimately enhance performance?

[blockhead]

Speaking to Matt Cooper on Today FM's The Last Word, Kimmage believes that Browne finds himself in a position where resigning from his role as CEO of the IRFU may be the only solution

It really is just about self promotion now with this gobsh*te.

[FLIP]

For the most part gouging etc are acts of passion, in the spur of the moment, without prior thought to it.

Doping is a cold, calculated, cynical choice that isn't just made in the heat of the moment.

[CiaranIrl]

Speaking to Matt Cooper on Today FM's The Last Word, Kimmage believes that Browne finds himself in a position where resigning from his role as CEO of the IRFU may be the only solution

It really is just about self promotion now with this gobsh*te.

Kimmage is such a tw@t.

[ronk]

Here's a philosophical question. Why are some forms of cheating acceptable and others aren't? Why is a special opprobrium reserved for a drug cheat - who is mainly harming himself - as against, say, someone done for gouging?

There are 2 maybe 3 forms of cheating that undermine any sport, even to the point of it being considered a sport.

Match fixing for players/officials is top, drugs are 2nd. I’d argue that deliberately attempting to harm others is 3rd.

What value would those 3 stars have if they weren’t really real?

[RoboProp]

Here's a philosophical question. Why are some forms of cheating acceptable and others aren't? Why is a special opprobrium reserved for a drug cheat - who is mainly harming himself - as against, say, someone done for gouging?

Neither are very sporting. The gouger is easier to spot than the doper (most of the time)
I think there's the feeling of being cheated and being let down by the doper. We admire athletes we place them on pedestals above other mere mortals, and later when it transpires they doped we feel the sheen disappear. A gouger is always evidently dirty so they never had that great fall from grace.

As addendum I got talking to some old boys in the club after a match, I was telling them about protein shakes, creatine monohydrate, CLA and pre-trainers all of which I had taken or was taking. I told them I was cycling my creatine, they looked at me like I had impaled Bambi. I explained they were all legal supplements. They didn't approve and branded me a cheat. Some never spoke to me again afterwards. In my eyes I did nothing wrong as it was all approved and legal, to them I had taken a shortcut and was dishonest. As far as they were concerned I was no better than Ben Johnson.

Not having a go at you but there's a fine line where perfectly harmless and legal supplements become performing enhancing and doping.

After all, isn't the point to ultimately enhance performance?

It's been a while since my playing days, 12 years since my last match. Creatine, protein and pretrainers were not really the norm back then, I think lads playing SCT take them now. Most pro and club players certainly take a variant of any of the aforementioned. To the best of my knowledge anything I took was safe, and most definitely legal. Did they enhance my performance? Strength wise most definitely. I would have been strong without them, but I was noticeably stronger, and my fitness levels definitely increased as a result because of them

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Kimmage didn't stop there...

"If it is not a resigning matter then what does it say about their anti-doping policy? How seriously am I to take to take their promotional ads? I'll give you an example of one, the famous Aldi one where the kid is reciting the great Paul O'Connell speech and he arrives at the dressing room and Paul takes the ball off him and says 'I'll take it from here, kid'.

"The message there is clear. You send us your kids and we will take care of them. A key part of that is that we are not going to send them out against behemoths who are juiced to the gills. We are going to do our best to protect your kid in a clean sport and in a safe way and that is why we are asking you to send us your kids."


Am I alone in seeing that Aldi ad and not thinking that the IRFU are protecting kids from being battered by dopers?

He's a gobshite, sounds like a complete lunatic these days.

[jimbobjoe]

Kimmage didn't stop there...

"If it is not a resigning matter then what does it say about their anti-doping policy? How seriously am I to take to take their promotional ads? I'll give you an example of one, the famous Aldi one where the kid is reciting the great Paul O'Connell speech and he arrives at the dressing room and Paul takes the ball off him and says 'I'll take it from here, kid'.

"The message there is clear. You send us your kids and we will take care of them. A key part of that is that we are not going to send them out against behemoths who are juiced to the gills. We are going to do our best to protect your kid in a clean sport and in a safe way and that is why we are asking you to send us your kids."


Am I alone in seeing that Aldi ad and not thinking that the IRFU are protecting kids from being battered by dopers?

He's a gobshite, sounds like a complete lunatic these days.

It's weird, Kimmage gets no attention unless his mouth if full of anti-PED froth. He has nothing else to talk about so he fires up at any opportunity. He's an embarrassing parody of his Armstong-outing self and desperately needs to find a new shtick.

Show Spoiler:

and yes Paul.. we know you're reading

[TerenureJim]

Kimmage didn't stop there...

"If it is not a resigning matter then what does it say about their anti-doping policy? How seriously am I to take to take their promotional ads? I'll give you an example of one, the famous Aldi one where the kid is reciting the great Paul O'Connell speech and he arrives at the dressing room and Paul takes the ball off him and says 'I'll take it from here, kid'.

"The message there is clear. You send us your kids and we will take care of them. A key part of that is that we are not going to send them out against behemoths who are juiced to the gills. We are going to do our best to protect your kid in a clean sport and in a safe way and that is why we are asking you to send us your kids."


Am I alone in seeing that Aldi ad and not thinking that the IRFU are protecting kids from being battered by dopers?

He's a gobshite, sounds like a complete lunatic these days.

Is that Aldi ad even an IRFU thing? Kimmage very much going off the deep end, this is one chap who served his ban coming in as most likely a stop gap measure for the position at Munster. Does it leave a bad taste? Yes. Do we know the full story of how this chap was on PED? No. Does he deserve a second chance? Probably, there are no absolutes in life. Is it the IRFU who make the PED regulations? No, all they can do is abide by laws set by the international body, if Kimmage wants to start a campaign fine let him away at World Rugby

[paddyor]

Here's a philosophical question. Why are some forms of cheating acceptable and others aren't? Why is a special opprobrium reserved for a drug cheat - who is mainly harming himself - as against, say, someone done for gouging?

Because it's a premeditated attempt to up end the rules of the game.

Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk

[Peg Leg]

A physical act of foul play is in the moment and targeted at 1 player.
Doping is premeditated cheating in every game and training session. It is on the books as being one of the most serious offences (see ban periods) and to actively pursue the course of doping is a choice made everyday not just in the moment.
That and it is cheating on your team mates who will be hurt most by your actions.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Is that Aldi ad even an IRFU thing? Kimmage very much going off the deep end, this is one chap who served his ban coming in as most likely a stop gap measure for the position at Munster. Does it leave a bad taste? Yes. Do we know the full story of how this chap was on PED? No. Does he deserve a second chance? Probably, there are no absolutes in life. Is it the IRFU who make the PED regulations? No, all they can do is abide by laws set by the international body, if Kimmage wants to start a campaign fine let him away at World Rugby

Yeah that's pretty much how I see it. I don't like it myself and have no idea if I'd have signed him or not if I worked for Munster/the IRFU, but think backlash has been a bit much.

The argument that it encourages young players to dope doesn't stack up for me. I'd have thought that seeing a guy miss two years and then have less negotiating power would outweigh potential gains they would make if they doped and weren't caught. Plus if he doped and never played again then people wouldn't know about him, his name would have just disappeared. The fact that his story has been highlighted will hopefully serve as a warning to other players.

Personally I think that recreational drug use is going to be a much bigger issue soon. It's in every part of society, the RFU had a couple of cases where players tested positive for cocaine and were fined and "rehabilitated" but remained anonymous and could still play again, there's been high profile cases with James O'Connor, Ali Williams, Karmichael Hunt, and even going all the way back to Justin Harrison and Wendell Sailor. Anecdotally I've heard of it being prevalent in clubs here too. Someone doing cocaine isn't looking to gain an edge on the field, but when that problem explodes into the public eye then it'll be interesting to see how people want the users to be treated.

[paddyor]

Is that Aldi ad even an IRFU thing? Kimmage very much going off the deep end, this is one chap who served his ban coming in as most likely a stop gap measure for the position at Munster. Does it leave a bad taste? Yes. Do we know the full story of how this chap was on PED? No. Does he deserve a second chance? Probably, there are no absolutes in life. Is it the IRFU who make the PED regulations? No, all they can do is abide by laws set by the international body, if Kimmage wants to start a campaign fine let him away at World Rugby

Yeah that's pretty much how I see it. I don't like it myself and have no idea if I'd have signed him or not if I worked for Munster/the IRFU, but think backlash has been a bit much.

The argument that it encourages young players to dope doesn't stack up for me. I'd have thought that seeing a guy miss two years and then have less negotiating power would outweigh potential gains they would make if they doped and weren't caught. Plus if he doped and never played again then people wouldn't know about him, his name would have just disappeared. The fact that his story has been highlighted will hopefully serve as a warning to other players.

Personally I think that recreational drug use is going to be a much bigger issue soon. It's in every part of society, the RFU had a couple of cases where players tested positive for cocaine and were fined and "rehabilitated" but remained anonymous and could still play again, there's been high profile cases with James O'Connor, Ali Williams, Karmichael Hunt, and even going all the way back to Justin Harrison and Wendell Sailor. Anecdotally I've heard of it being prevalent in clubs here too. Someone doing cocaine isn't looking to gain an edge on the field, but when that problem explodes into the public eye then it'll be interesting to see how people want the users to be treated.

A few of them you mention weren't caught by testing either. I don't think it will "explode" because the drug leaves your system after a day or 2 depending on how high you dose. So unless you're an addict the odds are you get away with it.

[Oldschool]

A physical act of foul play is in the moment and targeted at 1 player.
Doping is premeditated cheating in every game and training session. It is on the books as being one of the most serious offences (see ban periods) and to actively pursue the course of doping is a choice made everyday not just in the moment.
That and it is cheating on your team mates who will be hurt most by your actions.

I have a vague recollection of a professional soccer player having his leg broken and career ended by a well known ex Irish international.
Lack of intent is not ruled out in violent acts either.
While acting within the laws Murray was targeted last season by Scottish players targeting his non kicking leg and putting his physical health at risk.
Your Intent (in the moment) argument is not really valid.
Chopper Harris Norman bite your legs