“Once more” a tick in the column that says you are just confused,ignorant of the facts, stupid and worthless.

It’s almost childish how fanatical schools rugby has continued to be highlighted as vitally important in the South African mentality.

Time to move into the 21st Century chaps. Develop a young man’s basic rugby skills before making him into a wrecking ball before his 19th birthday.

By the way, Fed reached his 35th consecutive slam 1/4 final. The silly American was trying to be funny when he said 137th…

Now in any sport 6 months is a helluva long time for a doping program to be initiated, administered and worked out of the system. By anyones standards.

And the way I see it….is the ‘doping’ gives one an advantage in training and preparation (allowing one to get stronger and fitter faster which indirecty benefits the doper on match day), NOT on match day/game day/race day. This is where the axe needs to fall – and hard. In ALL sporting disciplines.

Strict, regular and mandatory off season/pre season/out of season testing – round the world and round the clock.

@grant10-299: I feel you are 100% correct. Every sport on the planet comes to mind.

Because there is a huge gap in regulation – some of these seemingly innocent, over the counter products can (and sometimes do) contain any number of banned substances. In many (definitely not all) cases, folk are swallowing things they have not researched, and have zero clue as to what it is they are swallowing/mixing etc. I have no doubt quite a few of the positive ‘tests’ come from this category. The supplement industry in SA is a minefield. (I was using a frikking product for recovery that contained a banned substance….obvlivious I was….. Then again, asthma sufferers, those with pneumonia, and even a kid with a cough are all using banned substances…)

Recreational drugs and their ingredients might account for a few results….

But it is the category of young user who actively source the ‘real stuff’ with the financial help and assistance of dad that concerns most. And contrary to what a fella ike ET would have you believe, it is not only those coming from privileged backgrounds who manage to find the ‘cash’ to do this.

Yip some probably were

@i_love_u_bakkiesbotha-295:

Doping is rife in SA schools, it is you who is clueless, the Bokke number 10 tested positive 3 years ago

You admire Mssr Arendse…..yet he bullied folk in a very Armstrong-esque manner.

You admire Mssr Cheeky Watson (as do I, but then again I still dig Armstrong so I ‘may’ admire another less than pure soul, like Watson, without looking like a hypocrite I guess)…….he who employed more than one Armstrong tendency.

You plea for radical transformation in Saffa sport, based on nothing more than ‘your’ ideologies, without putting into some sort of perspective, that just maybe ‘forced quotas’ is just another form of DOPING……….

You rave about various Aussie cricketers….many of whom have been tainted by match fixing allegations at some stage, and some of who have been bust fair and square. Yet this is ok of course

Soccer…… Italy 2006? Any bells ringing? SA, as recently as 2010? Ding dong ding dong.

Think before you INK old fella. And next time you sluk a Grandpa before a badminton game – remember; YOU are Armstrong.

Added to this was the slow drip of testimony against Armstrong – team-mates, staff, journalists, and cycling insiders. They could not ALL be bitter, jealous liars, so soon it became obvious that if you believed in Lance Armstrong, it’s because you wanted to believe. The willful suspension of disbelief among journalists and general followers fuelled the Nike-assembled marketing machine, and an icon was created. But here was more than enough to see the truth a long time ago. Armstrong, and the sport, had a doping problem }}

“it’s because you wanted to believe ” and ” an icon was created” should be ringing in some big ears.

There’s definitely an extra’s role as the lab coffee-boy in the background at USADA…

This translates to “doping can … turn a chump into a champ”

This is laughable in the extreme as the very opposite is exactly true if you are the willing, bullying “chump” and have the most sophisticated bunch of medical cheats willing to help, and take millions from you in the process.

With doping there can never be a level playing field even if all the different cheating teams co-operate as best they can(which is really never) to give every cheating cyclist the same volume and same concentration of the same drug..There are far too many physiological and pharmacological parameters and factors involved. It is a complex multifactorial scenario.
On the simplest level there is body mass, and body fat % and muscle (largely protein) mass and much, much more to consider from one athlete to another. The pharma. factors are more complex. Is the drug carried in the blood bound to a protein or somewhat and somehow dissolved in the water of blood(the plasma), what is the conc. of that binding molecule in one athlete relative to another? How is the drug administered(a number of ways available) but more importantly what are the first pass effects through the liver from one athlete to the next for the administered drug? This is just the tip of the iceberg.

Consider the differences in the acquired know-how of each cheating team of experts.
In the specific case of Lance did his cancer treatment(Rx) change and compromise his physiology. Cancer Rx has the aim of killing cancer cells but what effects might it have had on his normal, healthy or otherwise, body cells?
How did the cancer Rx affect his organs and cells to handle the drugs for cheating? Did the prior steroids usage contribute to his testicular cancer?

So smartarses it is easy to write your garbage above but where ignorance is bliss ’tis folly to be wise. You are creating your own Frankensteins.

As for the gutter advice of “legalise” steroids or any PEDs, the least said , soonest mended.

Drugs affect many physiological systems and organs deleteriously to the point of irreparable damage and often death., moron

Empty vessels make the most noise but it would be advisable to consider silence, for it is golden

Phil Anderson an accomplished Australian cyclist mentored the early Armstrong. He said that Lance did not impress him at all and that he did not deem him to ever perform well in a TDF then as his time trials and mountain cycling was amongst the poorest he had encountered at that stage. This is clearly anecdotal but from a fellow athlete, even competitive, classy cyclist hence the mentoring
Anderson and the Kiwi, Swarts testified in a court case here in the USA years ago against Armstrong.

Now some fools writes above as if they are exquisite experts :

Armstrong was the best Tour de France cyclist of his generation.
Armstrong is a phenomenal athlete
best endurance athletes in the history of sport.
Doping can not turn a chump into a champ.
legalise drugs.

Let me examine these wild shouts. On what are they based, what yardstick , what measurements? How do they stand up to how other fellow competitors say from their experiences relative to our moronic experts.

Take the top three claims. On the day I got back here I was fortunate to see that evening on ESPN2 Armstrong’s performance in his 2nd Xterra world championship(3 events with swimming followed by cycling and running with the latter 2 both off-road)
Lance entered the cycle event out of the top ten and very slowly worked his way to the lead but did not finish first in the event as he crashed into the bush.
He entered the run seemingly in 2nd place but finished the championship in 23rd place which means up to 21 athletes passed him on that run.
How does this performance measure the top three claims of the fools?
How does the lower level Navy Seals event measure up to this world championship as it is presented as a stupendous performance where an “olympion”(sic) any one not the champ or medalist possibly is the cherry on top?

Dare I say that they will probably say with reasonable people they would reason, with humane people they would plead but with tyrants they would not concede and inch. Or maybe not for you are mostly cut from the same clothe as they are. You are ilk.

> Dearest ET..do not think for one minute that the ‘Grandpa’ headache powders you sluk before bellyflopping into a Virgin Active pool, are meaningless

ET’s launching his own “Poopstrong” b.uttplug

It’s all the rage for keepin the brown sharks at bay and out of the pool

A small percentage of the proceeds will go to his Oom Tas Charity for unknown, forgotten Badminton players from the 80′s Bergies league

ET wanted to spill the b.alls on Oprah, but couldn’t reach an amicable agreement.

Oprah wanted him to donate to the “Gail, special friend” charity, a charity providing assistance and batteries to homeless l.esbians but Extraball wouldn’t budge.

He needs the money for the upcoming “Badminton for the Homeless” tournament in Taiwan.

He already dreams about lifting the Chiang Kai-sheck trophy