Lipman & Crockett

[madoqua]

Take a substance on a night out and it's the crime of the century.

Try to gouge out someones eye or propel them head first into the turf..minor sanctions.

Perspective??????????

[drc_007]

Take the test, fail, apologise and seek help and get a 2 year ban.
Refuse the test, get a lawyer, get a 9 month ban.

What kind of signal does that send?

[Bruce Hornby-Trainset]

Take the test, fail, apologise and seek help and get a 2 year ban.
Refuse the test, get a lawyer, get a 9 month ban.

What kind of signal does that send?

drc - quite simply, you've hit the nail right on the head. Why do they not have the same approach as to drink driving, where the penalties for a positive breath test and a refusal to take the test are broadly similar

[westy154]

Innocent until proven guilty and, unfortunately, no matter what it looks like, we can't prove they're guilty without a positive test result. You can't prove they're guilty, ergo, they're innocent.

Very true, and however dubious the results seem, there was really very little else that could have been done by the disciplinary panel IMO. They are innocent in the eyes of the law because there is no evidence, and an absence of evidence cannot be used as evidence in it's own right. What they can and have been "got" for, is their conduct surrounding the reasons why there is no evidence. In a way it is almost like getting Al Capone for Tax Evasion rather than the fact he was a vicious gang lord. (Not that I would consider their "crimes" on a par with his of course )

Basically, it comes down to whether they're contractually obliged to take a drugs test out of season.

As I said in my original post, I would be genuinely surprised if any modern sporting contract, in a sport which is signed up to anti-doping/drugs policies, wouldn't make provision for drug tests to be taken at any point in the year.

Personally, I can't believe that anyone who was clean would argue about contractual obligations to prove themselves innocent of career-threatening accusations when such a simple test is readily available.

And therein lies the crux of the issue.

[known as eric at work]

Personally, I can't believe that anyone who was clean would argue about contractual obligations to prove themselves innocent of career-threatening accusations when such a simple test is readily available.

And therein lies the crux of the issue.[/quote]


They could still have test to prove innocence or guilt in taking drugs. Assuming that none off them have been scalped. Talking to a good friend at the probation services, taking a sample of hair is an accurate enough measure of substances (though I've put down head hair, any will do) that have entered the body over the previous 3 - 6 months. This I am lead to believe, is common practice with persons who have a condition of their parole licence to be drug free.

I suspect that the refusal, had more to do with the feeling that someone was "holding a gun to their heads", so a game of Russian roulette with their playing careers.

The issue brought up about Christine Ohurugo is different. In athletics you have to give exact places that you are to be in 12 months in advance. As she used School playing fields that where under a changeable timetable, she missed 3 (2 are allowable) in a 12 month span, as the testers turned up, and she was elsewhere. The testers are not under any obligation to then find out where you are, it goes as a missed test, and they can then go home early.

[Richard]

as they have not been charged on taking drugs.....I would like to see Lipman, who is a class player, being looked at by the Tigers as a potential for the 2010/11 season.

[Bill W]

as they have not been charged on taking drugs.....I would like to see Lipman, who is a class player, being looked at by the Tigers as a potential for the 2010/11 season.

You do not think Mr. Brownsword will have had "a word" with Mr. Tom et al?

Lipman will not play for an English Premiership Club - ever!

[bluntiger]

as they have not been charged on taking drugs.....I would like to see Lipman, who is a class player, being looked at by the Tigers as a potential for the 2010/11 season.

Are you for real?

I don't want Tigers to touch them with a bargepoll. And IMO it would tarnish our reputation if we did. They are very much damaged goods and you would be struggling to find someone who believes they are innocent.

They have not been charged with drug-taking only because they refused to take the test. And why would that be? Because they would have failed the test and they knew that which makes the punishment all the more overly-lenient.

Harrison co-operates, admits guilt and gets 8 months, these three deny all allogations (but refuse to take a drugs test) and get only 9 months? What message is that giving out?

[g]

I would not like to see Lipman anywhere near the Tigers squad. Although drug charges were dropped the mere fact he refused to provide samples in my eyes suggests he did something. As many have said if he was innocent he would have taken the test, the fact he didn't suggests to me that he did something untoward. He has been done for misconduct which is another reason tigers shouldn't touch him with a barge pole he could be a disruptive influence.


I will be surprised if any premiership teams sign any of them up but I suppose stranger things have happened.

[Hull Fan]

I think the presence of any of the 3 players in any squad, especially a GP squad would have an unsettling influence on the said squad. Any unrest would have a negative effect on the squad, so this is also areason they won't be touched. IMHO

[kingol22]

if any of them came to tigers then the players would surely be outraged that these players could tarnish the clubs and each individual players reputation also i dont think that any of those 3 will be able to earn the respect of any players in any team which would upset the team chemistry.

[Kinoulton]

There are well known instances of sportsmen getting into drink or drugs and it ending their careers (usually footballers like Greaves, Best, Gascoine etc), but there are far MORE instances of players being found out, getting the proverbial kick up the backside and going on to have highly successful sporting careers, both as players and managers, having never touched substances or drink ever again.

I think people deserve a second chance.

[Bill W]

They had a second chance after Stevens.

They tried to obfuscate.

[Kinoulton]

Well that had me reaching for the dictionary.

I make a habit of learning one new word per day, and you've just provided it.