Utter, utter nonsense. Sorry, but I just don't know where to begin on this. Footballers are now on par with cyclists, tennis players and middle-distance runners in terms of endurance.
Is that not unnatural? Masking the pain is unnatural and allows someone to compete to a higher standard than if they were running around with a bad foot?
But a lot of injury is a bodies response to being pushed too far. That athlete has gone beyond its limits. Masking it is an unnatural chemical fix to allow the athlete to go beyond their physical limitations.
You're being obtuse. If the player didn't have an injury the muscle would work at its peak rate, a painkiller doesn't increase the performance of that muscle beyond that natural peak.
So fat burners are not performance enhancing At worst they're taking away something that is bad for you
I see where Lucas is coming from though. So much of football is in the head. It's not like a weightlifter who is just pure strength and tiny bit technique. If muscle power was the measuring factor then you'd have teams of 6ft 4 players built like brick house. Of of course they help though, strength, speed, stamina are all important parts of a players attributes, but it's maybe not as effective as in other sports like sprinting or cycling where it's more about physical attributes
Not obtuse, just playing devils advocate. It doesn't increase performance of that muscle past its peak, but it allows the player to push that muscle to a higher performance than he would naturally be able to if it was damaged by taking an unnatural aubstence no?
Why are people arguing about this? If he's taken something he shouldn't then he's a cheat. End of argument!
It's all a bit arbitrary though. Pain killers ok despite being a foreign drug. Creatine ok because it's seen in same category as food and to quote the IOC "natural" But training at high altitude and withdrawing highly oxygenated blood only to replace it pre event is not seen as introducing a natural substance despite actually being produced by the athletes body....
No, they're arguing that a paracetamol (exaggeration) could be considered performance enhancing instead
What is the definition of performance enhancing? Do you perform better with a painkiller than in pain? Yes Does it enhance your performance level above that you would have without pain? No So does a fat burner just remove fat in the same way as a painkiller removes pain? Or does it itself increase performance?
It's not arguing whether he has or has not broke the rules G. If he's taken a banned substance he gets punished...simple. like any other rule he's signed up to in order to play sport. I just think it's all a bit arbitrary. By all means if it's based on risk of harm short or long term to the athletes health I see the logic of banning a substance. It's when it's talked of in terms of "performance enhancing" or "cheating" it becomes silly. Talk in terms of "harmful substances" and it makes more sense.
Which is why some are allowed and some not. It's the argument that Shaparova (sp) is trying to use now, but it's not an argument at all. The 'medication' that she was on that slows the heartbeat down (who'd have thought, as Andy Murray dryly put it, that there were be so many top level athletes in tennis with 'heart conditions'?) was allowed, then it wasn't - but all were told of this a long time ago. Any ****wit knows fat-burners are not allowed, or at least take advice on them. Not sure? Don't ****ing take them. Unsure how long cannibis, which isn't performance-enhancing per se, but is a banned recreational drug in most occupations, stays in the blood stream? Just don't smoke it then, or find an occupation where it doesn't matter. A child could navigate themselves around this system. Why on earth do we continually indulge footballers simply because they have the potential to make our 90 minute dreams true, or have I answered my own question there? Sanctimonious and self-righteous, perhaps, but this is multi-million pound industry with fantastic rewards. No tolerance. He's not a ****ing £10k a year cleaner who's turned up for an early shift with a hangover. Bah.
I think everyone knows performance enhancing is referring to a drug that enhances your abilities rather than masking a (injury) problem #logical This discussion is typical Liverpool fan logic. Any player bar a Liverpool one and they get lambasted. Because it's a Liverpool player every possible angle is explored.
It's a banned substance. He's possibly taken it (subject to tampering etc). You don't get much simpler than that.
See above. I'm not arguing that he has an excuse...there's a list..take something on it...get caught get banned. No indulgence at all. What I'm saying is the governing bodies tie themselves in knots justifying why something is or is not on a list. Get rid of the performance enhancing label and just say unsafe practice.
With respect Why talk forwards when we are talking cb taking drugs. As I said that to play 2 a week and recover.... I think just to say talent makes all the difference ignores the henderson, fletchers and make your others of this world who do run miles and make useful contributions. If a guy takes something just to keep up he's cheating
