Thomas Minns Drug Test fail

[Denton Rovers RLFC]

12 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

It's a different generation where drug taking is a lot more commonplace. If he'd just drunk himself into an alcoholic stupor everyone would be happy. There was a thread recently about how prevalent drug taking is on the game. He will be banned, but he is still a young man and still a human being who has made a mistake.

it's no less in other sports, the numbers from soccer directly from players as to who takes, who thinks others are taking (both recreational and performance enhancing) is IIRC a bit higher than RL. I'll see if I can dig the BBC article out.

Using the death of a relative is a mickey poor and frankly disgusting excuse,  sure you will be extremely upset but how do you know how to get hold of cocaine, it's not like you can ring 0800 'I need a line'. like others, not just in RL, he's a user and got caught then tried to mitigate it.

Oh and the mental health aspect, okay, get him some help, so he can help himself, sure, we all deserve a chance to turn things around, but too many aren't prepared to change their ways, they can choose to do x, or choose to y. That's on them and them alone. Having being under the mental health team myself some years back, managed to sort my life out whilst dealing with a debilitating chronic illness that nearly killed me, the mistakes I made I didn't try to cover them up, they were down to ME and me alone, I made those choices, I got punished, I took it on the chin, I say I made this mistake, judge me for what I am now, not for the mistakes I made then, it's within everyone's capacity to change, no matter how difficult your journey is ... if you want to!

 

[londonrlfan]

On 1/9/2019 at 3:05 PM, Oliver Clothesoff said:

If you really think he was a one time offender who just happened to get unlucky, I sympathise. 

I don't know him personally, so I can't say. My point is the hypocrisy behind it all. Why are some people given 2 year bans while others are only given a slap on the wrist? If it's so serious and performance enhancing, it should be the same punishment for all. 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

17 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

I don't know him personally, so I can't say. My point is the hypocrisy behind it all. Why are some people given 2 year bans while others are only given a slap on the wrist? If it's so serious and performance enhancing, it should be the same punishment for all. 

So who's had 'a slap on the wrist' for a positive 'in competition' test for cocaine?

[bobbruce]

18 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

I don't know him personally, so I can't say. My point is the hypocrisy behind it all. Why are some people given 2 year bans while others are only given a slap on the wrist? If it's so serious and performance enhancing, it should be the same punishment for all. 

Because it isn’t a banned substance when taken out of competition. 

[Wellsy4HullFC]

There should be no mitigating circumstances for this. You open up excuses if you do that and everyone can then really bring something that "depresses them" as a reason they did it. (I'm not saying what he's going through isn't depressing, I'm saying others will just trot something out if they get caught doing it recreationally).

The kid is probably going through a hard time. I get that. He may have made a stupid choice because if it. I get that too. He may have just done it anyway. But regardless, he must face the consequences of his choice: that being a full ban. Not a bit of it because he was having a hard time. He needs to own this. Once his ban is over, that's it - fresh start. Consequence done. Paid the Piper.

The only time people seem to regret taking drugs is when they're caught. If you truly regret it, you wouldn't be seeking mitigating circumstances. And to be honest, like I've mentioned in the past, if you truly regret it or have slipped up, there should be an avenue where you can own up to it and receive a lesser consequence and then support whilst out. You'd get a lot more respect that way I guarantee.

[ckn]

I removed a paragraph of a post about Terry Newton as it was just not needed.  Come on, be a bit sensitive, especially when this is a core rugby league site where friends & family of players read on what should be a community site.  Rugby league is a fairly close family, let’s keep it that way.

Just because you CAN say something doesn’t mean you SHOULD.

[The Future is League]

On 4/19/2018 at 2:59 AM, stevereed100 said:

Announced tonight explains withdrawal from Warrington game last weekend.

Test fail at Huddersfield away.

Ex Leeds West Riding based ex teammate of Hardaker, need say no more.

Must be sacked and forgotten about. No sympathy....goodbye good riddance.

I have no sympathy for anybody in life who uses recreational drugs or Peds when they get caught or otherwise

[The Future is League]

9 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Recreational drugs are not PEDs and vice versa.

We can moralise all we want about how bad/stupid/whatever people who take recreational drugs are but it doesn't solve anything and largely only makes things worse.

 

I never said they was.

If you are going to quote, quote me correctly

[The Future is League]

5 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

No but you lumped them in together and the difference between them is vast and important. 

I'm fully aware of that. Don't try a points scoring exercise with me.

[The Future is League]

Just now, scotchy1 said:

Settle down. You didn't draw that distinction in your post. It is important. 

Don't you understand English. "Don't try a points scoring exercise with me"

[The Future is League]

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

It's really odd that you think I'm trying to score points because we agree on something. 

That distinction wasn't clear in your post. I made that distinction. You agreed it exists and is important. For some reason this has angered you. 

Go away

[Dave T]

14 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

What a strange and angry agreement. 

Any way. Bans for recreational drugs end up pretty arbitrary, a little pointless and we can be as unsympathetic as we like and come up with more and more draconian attitudes towards drug users like a weird version of 'the aristocrats' but it doesn't help anything.

I must admit I am coming round to this way of thinking, although not wiping out bans completely. I think the serious bans should be for drugs cheats looking to gain a sporting advantage. 

Somebody doing cocaine on a social basis shouldn't be treated the same. I'd prefer relatively minor punishments, education, and tbh, clubs to make their own decisions as to whether they want their employees to be on drugs when they are expected to keep their body in prime condition.

[Denton Rovers RLFC]

14 hours ago, ckn said:

I removed a paragraph of a post about Terry Newton as it was just not needed.  Come on, be a bit sensitive, especially when this is a core rugby league site where friends & family of players read on what should be a community site.  Rugby league is a fairly close family, let’s keep it that way.

Just because you CAN say something doesn’t mean you SHOULD.

So hiding away the truth about a subject matter and/or someone's opinion because some notional person/s might be offended, where does that end?

It wasn't directed at TN as an individual, it was directed at all which was clear. A close community, nor society as a whole should not be afraid to voice and listen to opinion and truths, even if that might seem to dig/hurt, because avoiding the whole issue and the reality of these matters helps absolutely no-one. 

Your site, your rules, but I disagree with your censorship.

 

Oh and to add, I'm happy if players who do illegal drugs that are subsequently caught get a significant ban, it's a criminal offence, that makes the offender a criminal in the eyes of the law, even if the law does nothing (common these day)

Buying these drugs funds so many particularly nasty people, people who prey and destroy others lives (quite literally) whilst gaining massively and people getting killed/lives wrecked. The very least that we can do as a sport is send a message to our sportspersons that criminal activity in or out of competition will not be tolerated, or maybe some of you think a slap on the wrist is ok for breaking the law by taking drugs? When the youngsters/young teens see how laughable a punishment might be IF you get caught, they'll also think it's worth the risk.

We know this is the case because you see it youngsters in all walks of life- from doing drugs to motoring offences, copying what others are doing knowing they will probably get away with it and the punishment is simply a slap on the wrist IF they do get caught!.

 

[ckn]

1 minute ago, Denton Rovers RLFC said:

So hiding away the truth about a subject matter and/or someone's opinion because some notional person/s might be offended, where does that end?

It wasn't directed at TN as an individual, it was directed at all which was clear. A close community, nor society as a whole should not be afraid to voice and listen to opinion and truths, even if that might seem to dig/hurt, because avoiding the whole issue and the reality of these matters helps absolutely no-one. 

Your site, your rules, but I disagree with your censorship.

You specifically named Newton then you made a disparaging comment about him, how could I not take that as directed at him as an individual?  There's also an ethical decision over your point that I decided was inappropriate for this forum.

I simply removed it as stepping over the line but without malice or wilful intention.

Also, we do have quite a few players and their families reading this forum. It's what makes this forum better than most that everyone from the amateur team fans to the club chairmen can come and shoot the breeze about their sport.  Your comment was irrelevant to the topic at hand and showed a very 1970s style attitude to mental health emergencies, so, as I mentioned, just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you should voice it on an emotive subject.

[Denton Rovers RLFC]

4 minutes ago, ckn said:

You specifically named Newton then you made a disparaging comment about him, how could I not take that as directed at him as an individual?  There's also an ethical decision over your point that I decided was inappropriate for this forum.

I simply removed it as stepping over the line but without malice or wilful intention.

Also, we do have quite a few players and their families reading this forum. It's what makes this forum better than most that everyone from the amateur team fans to the club chairmen can come and shoot the breeze about their sport.  Your comment was irrelevant to the topic at hand and showed a very 1970s style attitude to mental health emergencies, so, as I mentioned, just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you should voice it on an emotive subject.

It was on the matter regarding Newton, that being suicide, as someone had already mentioned his name. I don't see any ethical point at all, hiding away a discussion and opinion even on so called 'family forums' just doesn't work out. Hiding people away from reality and discussing/reading about subject matters doesn't work for anyone's benefit.

You're also guessing as to if anyone is offended by the discussion/opinion. As I said, it's your rules but you haven't made a good reason (in my eyes) as to removing that part that I wrote when it was clearly not directed at Terry Newton as an individual. Someone else brought his name up regarding his situation, I merely made an opinion based on that subject matter.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

If it's a criminal offence (which it isn't but that's by the by) let the judicial system deal with it. Why do we require the RFL to act some extra quasi-judiciary? 

What good does it really do?

Are you saying the RFL shouldn't ban them?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

1 hour ago, Denton Rovers RLFC said:

It was on the matter regarding Newton, that being suicide, as someone had already mentioned his name. I don't see any ethical point at all, hiding away a discussion and opinion even on so called 'family forums' just doesn't work out. Hiding people away from reality and discussing/reading about subject matters doesn't work for anyone's benefit.

You're also guessing as to if anyone is offended by the discussion/opinion. As I said, it's your rules but you haven't made a good reason (in my eyes) as to removing that part that I wrote when it was clearly not directed at Terry Newton as an individual. Someone else brought his name up regarding his situation, I merely made an opinion based on that subject matter.

It doesn't take a genius to work out that someone closely connected to a suicide victim would find it upsetting and distressing to go on to a rugby league forum and read someone saying they think they're cowards. Your judgement is not needed, necessary or helpful to anyone in that instance, so why voice it?

The only thing it showed was a lack of understanding into mental health.

[bobbruce]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

If it's a criminal offence (which it isn't but that's by the by) let the judicial system deal with it. Why do we require the RFL to act some extra quasi-judiciary? 

What good does it really do?

It is also a banned substance under WADA when taken in competition so it can’t just be ignored. The grey area comes when players use it out of competition and it either gets hushed up or they get a club or league ban like Barba. 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

It would appear that we have some posters on this forum who are not only experts in sports administration but also in pharmacology.........

[Wellsy4HullFC]

12 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Yes. I'm saying the sport of the silk cut challenge cup, regal trophy, Kingstone press championship, stones bitter championship, Ladbrokes challenge cup and betfred super league are not in a position to act as quasi-judicial vice police. Nor is it any way shape or form necessary for them to act in that way. 

We don't ban players for drink driving, domestic violence, drinking, smoking or gambling. Why when it comes to drugs do we need to pretend to be some kind of moral arbiter?

So we should go against WADA?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

WADA are an international joke which cares more about protecting its own position and interest than those of athletes.

You didn't answer the question.

[Rupert Prince]

21 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

I agree with that. It's not just the sporting advantage bit but in a collision sport like ours players going beyond their natural ranges can be incredibly dangerous for the opposition. 

Players using recreational drugs is obviously a different matter. That should largely be left to their employers with a governing bodies role left to education and help. 

Frankly it's a little ludicrous that Hardaker misses a year for taking cocaine but nothing for drink driving. 

Yes.   I think your last point is valid.  And players are not tested in competition for alcohol which is recreational. 

[Wellsy4HullFC]

59 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I think the answer is clearly implied. WADA is a joke of an organisation and not one we should be proud to be under

Have any other sports gone against WADA?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

5 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

NFL

Would you want the RFL to take the same route of drug policy as the NFL?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

7 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

NFL

I'm not trying to lead you here by the way, in pretty open to have my mind changed on this.