Matt Stevens get 2 year ban

[scouse tiger]

2 years is the par for the course for this offence - Wendell Sailor was banned for 2 years a few years ago for a similar offence.

Also I think one of the Pacific Islanders got a 2 year ban for coke use - can't rmeber his name (or cant spell it anyway !)

[madoqua]

And you all have never sailed close to the wind or broken a rule at work???

I never knew that so many people on here were perfect angels.

Role model for kids....Piffle, we all are, or at least should be.

It's amazing how sanctimonious people can be until they are found out.

They then whine and squeal like stuck pigs. This chap didn't.

Kinoulton, I bow to you.

[G.K]

Of course we have but if we get found out we take the punishment, that's the deal. I would have thought that as an ex cop you would have accepted that. Or maybe you were one of the new breed that spends more time trying to be politically correct rather than catching villans? If so then it's probably best that you've retired.

[Bill W]

As I have previously commented, I am not without sin.

To be stoned to death for committing adultery is somewhat severe. What was the likelihood of being caught?

A 2 year ban for drug use is a little harsh. What was the probability of being caught?

Risk benefit analysis??????

[Bill W]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_u ... 915732.stm

Excellent!!! Good news!!!

[G.K]

Unless it's like one of those 'cafes' you can find in Amsterdam.

[madoqua]

Barson, Your post is offensive in the extreme.

Have you gone out with a gun at 0300, supervised a 32 car crash with 5 dead then seen a man beheaded as he watched what we were doing in freezing fog on the A1 cos he looked at us rather than the road ahead.

Have you told a mother that her son and husband are dead?

Have you tried to rescue 10 souls from the Kegworth air crash, done cpr on 3 and lost them all?

Were you in the riots of 1981 or the miners strike of 84?

I've dealt with REAL garbage who receive a slap on the wrist form the courts.

This man has taken a recreational drug (millions do) and has lost his livlihood for two years.

Put in perspective it is arcaic.

You hide behind your desk or PC and fire off stupid opinions...You should be ashamed.

[Tigerbeat]

This man has taken a recreational drug (millions do) and has lost his livlihood for two years.

Stevens has taken a recreational drug and in his position as a top Rugby player, who represented his country, knew that it was a banned substance.

He took the risk and got caught and is accepting the punishment. If he truly valued his livelihood in rugby, he would have not taken the drug in the first place.

He knew that the RFU had signed up to WADA.

[G.K]

No I have not been involved in any of those incidents and trying to link these things together is just pathetic, IMO.

No I'm not hiding behind my PC either, any more than you are, and would be saying the same to you f2f if such a situation arose.

The bottom line is that I am entitled to my opinion, regardless of what you think, and I think the sanction is fair.

[Bill W]

And I wish his cafe enteprise well and him all success in his rehabilitation and subsequent return to world class rugby.

Older, certainly and hopefully a little wiser.

[dailywaffle]

Barson, Your post is offensive in the extreme.

Have you gone out with a gun at 0300, supervised a 32 car crash with 5 dead then seen a man beheaded as he watched what we were doing in freezing fog on the A1 cos he looked at us rather than the road ahead.

Have you told a mother that her son and husband are dead?

Have you tried to rescue 10 souls from the Kegworth air crash, done cpr on 3 and lost them all?

Were you in the riots of 1981 or the miners strike of 84?

I've dealt with REAL garbage who receive a slap on the wrist form the courts.

This man has taken a recreational drug (millions do) and has lost his livlihood for two years.

Put in perspective it is arcaic.

You hide behind your desk or PC and fire off stupid opinions...You should be ashamed.

Hmm, a pretty obvious attempt at claiming the morale high ground.

Your argument is with WADA, not those who support the exercising of a sanction that is very clearly written into the WADA protocols.

[madoqua]

Barson,
You attacked my professional status.
You avoid this in your response.
A person of substance would apologise for that.
I 'linked' nothing.
I merely countered your insults, Quote, 'You are better off retired', by pointing out that I was actually O.K.
I to am entitled to my opinion. I think to ban is OTT to please the 'holier than thou' in society.

[dailywaffle]

I think to ban is OTT to please the 'holier than thou' in society.

No, the ban is (pretty much) automatic due to us being signed up to WADA. It is not a matter of opinion.

I repeat myself, but your argument is with WADA.

[madoqua]

Daily,

In my clumsy way I am trying to put this in macro perspective.

Yes I am annoyed about the attack on my professional ability but compared to so much that we hear and read about these days sport does seem to go OTT in my opinion.

[dailywaffle]

Oh, there's a fair enough debate as to whether the sporting authorities have got their protocols right. But, rightly or wrongly, they (largely) adopt a zero tolerance policy on such matters. Possibly because they see any other approach as leading to the proverbial flood-gates being opened.

I just don't think there is any mileage in comparing 'sporting' offences with civil or criminal cases.