Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dallas Mavericks' Josh Howard admitted pot use, denied need

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Dallas Mavericks' Josh Howard admitted pot use, denied need

    Originally posted by dallasnews.com
    Dallas Mavericks' Josh Howard admitted pot use, denied need

    01:23 AM CDT on Saturday, April 19, 2008

    By BRAD TOWNSEND / The Dallas Morning News
    btownsend@dallasnews.com


    During his five NBA seasons, Josh Howard has been candid with The Dallas Morning News and other media outlets about using marijuana.

    Entering last season's playoffs, the ESPN.com blog TrueHoop asked Howard whether he slipped to No. 29 in the 2003 NBA draft because teams were concerned that he had a marijuana problem.

    Howard responded that "a lot of people have that problem" and speculated that players selected ahead of him also smoked pot. He said it shouldn't have affected his draft status....

    Full article
    Crazy, isn't it? He admits the use of marijuana just before a crucial game of his team - and doesn't even have to fear a punishment. Players can not be tested during the offseason and only 4 times throughout a season? And even if he was cought the first two offenses wouldn't lead to a ban? That must be only possible in the NBA, absolutely crazy...

  • #2
    Old news...

    Old public secret...

    Many players in NBA use steroids and drugs...

    NBA is more a circus, then it is a basketball...
    sigpic
    ACB league
    Scola & Ginobili 4 life
    TAU & Lakers supporter
    need4sheed.com

    Comment


    • #3
      Well, imo there's still a difference between old news or an old public secret and a player admitting it openly during a playoff series without facing a punishment / consequences.
      This is a major statement by the NBA officials, a statement that they don't care about the use of drugs, other illegal substances in their league, or even things like the WADA code. By letting a player get away just like this they confirm the old rumours, and admit that they don't give a damn...

      But already the rule that players can't be tested during the offseason is a major joke

      Comment


      • #5
        Originally posted by Trifilli
        Crazy, isn't it? He admits the use of marijuana just before a crucial game of his team - and doesn't even have to fear a punishment. Players can not be tested during the offseason and only 4 times throughout a season? And even if he was cought the first two offenses wouldn't lead to a ban? That must be only possible in the NBA, absolutely crazy...
        Give it a rest Triff.
        1st. Could you tell me one positive effect of smoking dope -and thats from a basketball standpoint mind you!
        2nd. Id also like to see a poll about how may of the forum members that has smoked dope (I dare say its more than half).
        3rd. Could you tell me how many times a player in the respective domestic legue is tested on average throughout the year? (I have a VERY strong suspicion its less than four)
        and finally,
        4th. We have had this discussion about players using "dopping" and steroids and I believe it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that NBA does not endorse nor look away from drug use. I strongly suggest removing any claims to the contrary on this forum as it is pure BS (probabaly from someone who has in fact been down with the dragon for too long).
        Unicajism (or Unicajian Performance Fluctuation Syndrome: UPFS) in all its glory

        Comment


        • #6
          Originally posted by Billy
          Give it a rest Triff.
          Why should I? In my eyes this is just not right.

          1st. Could you tell me one positive effect of smoking dope -and thats from a basketball standpoint mind you!
          It is a drug. You don't really want to tell me that drugs have a place in sport, do you? An athlete also has a responsibility as a role model imho - of course there are enough kids out there who smoke weed/pot, but there are also enough who don't. I'm absolutely in favour of supporting those, who're preventing the latter group of kids from taking drugs - and therefore I also agree with THC being on the WADA prohibited list.

          2nd. Id also like to see a poll about how may of the forum members that has smoked dope (I dare say its more than half).
          Is something wrong suddenly right, just because others did it as well? Dangerous point of view imo. Even if it was a majority - the majority is not always right by definition.

          3rd. Could you tell me how many times a player in the respective domestic legue is tested on average throughout the year? (I have a VERY strong suspicion its less than four)
          Hold on for a second, please - the 4 tests during a season are a restricition. There are no more than 4 tests allowed, and no tests during the offseason. This is really nothing to be proud of. Stating the suspicion that in other leagues players are being tested even less is no argument to me. If this was the case, it'd be as wrong as the NBA stance on things, and would not justify what the NBA is doing at all. This very incident happened in the NBA though, with a player stating that he uses drugs, and not in some random domestic league. If the same happens in another league I'm gonna be all by your side, asking for a player ban there as well.
          Furthermore, there are no such restrictions in leagues which applied the WADA code. You can be tested as often as possible, anytime (also during the offseason), anywhere. And if you get caught having used a substance from the prohibited list (like THC), then you get banned - with the first offense. Just like it happened a few weeks ago in the german BBL with Nate Fox and Ermen Reyes-Napoles.
          I don't say that this system is waterproof and there are more than enough loopholes for sure, but there is a difference between loopholes and creating test restrictions rightaway / not banning players for admitting drug use.

          and finally,
          4th. We have had this discussion about players using "dopping" and steroids and I believe it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that NBA does not endorse nor look away from drug use. I strongly suggest removing any claims to the contrary on this forum as it is pure BS (probabaly from someone who has in fact been down with the dragon for too long).
          Looking at the NBA rules for testing (4 test restriction, no testing in the offseason) and at Sterns comments about the WADA in the past, I can't come to the same conclusion as you do. Not banning a player, who uses drugs and admits so openly, is looking away from drug use for me. For me there's only one possible reaction to such a confession: the athlete needs to be suspended immediately and has to stand trial in front of the respective USADA court. Putting him into a drug program should be an additional measure, not the only one. Oh, and calling such an opinion BS doesn't really prove your point, the only thing it does is making you look rude and offensive.
          Luckily the USOC has a different stance than the NBA on this issue, and accepted the WADA code, so athletes on US Olympic Teams do get tested under WADA conditions (I think that you had an argument about that with somebody in the past).

          Comment


          • #7
            Originally posted by Trifilli
            You don't really want to tell me that drugs have a place in sport, do you? An athlete also has a responsibility as a role model imho
            Ok now IMHO that's some major B******T, I really don't understand who thinks that athletes must be role models, they're not ruling over countries or something.. They should be role models only regarding sportsmanship(not sure about the spelling ) respecting the opponent and passion. What they do in they're free time should be of no interest to fans, just watch the friggin' game!
            "Fearlessly the idiot faced the crowd, smiling."

            Comment


            • #8
              Originally posted by Fearless
              Ok now IMHO that's some major B******T, I really don't understand who thinks that athletes must be role models, they're not ruling over countries or something.. They should be role model only regarding sportsmanship(not sure about the spelling ) respect of the the opponent and passion. What they do in they're free time should be of no interest to fans, just watch the friggin' game!
              Wow, another person who calls a different opinion BS. I'm always surprised by people like you, who ask for tolerance of all kind of different things (in this case tolerance towards a players drug use), but can't even accept a different opinion without getting offensive - what kind of a tolerant stance...

              Imo players are persons of public interest and therefore can't do whatever they like in their free time, at least not if it is illegal. People should be aware of how much influence these players have on kids, this doesn't stop with buying their jerseys or copying their moves. Copying their music, style and habits obviously is a part of it as well in many cases.

              Comment


              • #9
                Originally posted by Fearless
                Ok now IMHO that's some major B******T, I really don't understand who thinks that athletes must be role models, they're not ruling over countries or something.. They should be role models only regarding sportsmanship(not sure about the spelling ) respecting the opponent and passion. What they do in they're free time should be of no interest to fans, just watch the friggin' game!
                I doesn't really matter what you think should be, it matters what is. And private life of sports stars is very much in the spotlight of the media and thus the public. Do you seriously want to question that? They are adored by a lot of people, they are being watched on and off the court. Hence, they are role models.

                If I'm not totally mistaken, there is one test after each regular season game for a randomly chosen player of each of the two teams in the German BBL. If you're very, very lucky, you might get though a season without being tested. But if you violated the rules, you must fear after every game not to be chosen. Some are still stupid enough though. Is this enough? Nothing is enough. Additionally, there are the aforementioned unannounced controls that might occur whenever, wherever. I don't know any numbers about that though.

                I read about a year ago about NBA players being tested only once a year - in the preseason. The four is indeed the maximum possible number of tests. I don't have the article anymore, but I'll take a look if I can find it. But I'm sure that'll be downplayed here to. I mean, we all know nobody in professional sports uses performance enhancing drugs.

                Don't really want to point a finger at someone, as drugs are over all of European sports too, but what NBA is doing there is simply dead wrong. I'll leave it at that.

                Comment


                • #10
                  god same old same old. we all know the majority of those athletes in the NBA are doing something bad hell i could easily say that about the NCAA also. its only a matter of time before they slip up and admit to it by accident or for whatever reason tell the truth.

                  i mean look at marbury, he didnt admit he was on crack/whatever it was; but after seeing this wouldn't u be skeptical?

                  "A nationality that easily feels wronged is an insecure one, and one that will be difficult to progress."-Anonymous

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    Why should I? In my eyes this is just not right.
                    That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    It is a drug. You don't really want to tell me that drugs have a place in sport, do you?
                    What is your definition of a drug?

                    When I was still actively competing I had a list of all things to stay away from nailed to my door and it was a shitload quite frankly. Among them were caffeine, thein and for certain sports (not mine) alcohol was forbidden.
                    Anyways:

                    Here is the current list.

                    None of them (caffeine, thein and alcohol) mentioned are currently on the list so things change. Often.

                    This in itself makes it harder to deem what is morally wrong to use and what is ok. Should medals given out in the past be taken back when a substance then not being considered illegal is at any given later time?

                    You will notice that insulin, testosterone, nicotine, certain cortizones and albumin is on that list as is having too high oxygen level in the blood.

                    Some of them are existing normally in the body and are heightened in some athletic super specimen (I have a friend who has been caught six times just for being extremely physically gifted).
                    Albumin exists in anti hair loss potions and has caused atleast a turkish and a swedish basketball player to be suspended.
                    In football it is very common to inject red blodcells inte damaged muscles to heal faster. Say that Ballack, Papaloukas or any other of your favourite player went down and the only thing that could help them recover or to ever play again would be a gene treatment or injection of red bloodcells into a damaged part. Should that be considered OK?
                    It is not according to Dick Pound and the WADA framework btw.

                    I believe we are entering a moral and legal minefield here.

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    An athlete also has a responsibility as a role model imho - of course there are enough kids out there who smoke weed/pot, but there are also enough who don't. I'm absolutely in favour of supporting those, who're preventing the latter group of kids from taking drugs - and therefore I also agree with THC being on the WADA prohibited list.
                    Originally posted by robbe
                    I doesn't really matter what you think should be, it matters what is. And private life of sports stars is very much in the spotlight of the media and thus the public. Do you seriously want to question that? They are adored by a lot of people, they are being watched on and off the court. Hence, they are role models.
                    Well, in this day and age where everyone has access to youtube or whatever other media to instantly reach millions of people, are we not all potential role models? Some of us are parents, some of us are moderators on forums while others are simply basketball players or coaching pee-wee league. We are all role models to others whether we like it or not.
                    There is this idea about holding athletes to higher moral values but is that really how things should be? When do you start and stop being a public figure and thereby someones rolemodel?

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    Is something wrong suddenly right, just because others did it as well? Dangerous point of view imo. Even if it was a majority - the majority is not always right by definition.
                    No, atleast not on some philosophical level but it does matter what we consider legal and the legal framework is what we must all live by. How far off was it illegal to perform an abortion in Germany? In Ireland? In Iran? When did we stop consider caffeine and alcohol illegal and when was it considered a substance to enhance performance?

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    Hold on for a second, please - the 4 tests during a season are a restricition. There are no more than 4 tests allowed, and no tests during the offseason.
                    I know quite a bit of people who has played in high level leagues in Europe. Together they have about 20 years of play and only one of them has been tested -once, and that test was not performed out of season. Atleast the NBA does in fact test the players four times a year.

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    This is really nothing to be proud of. Stating the suspicion that in other leagues players are being tested even less is no argument to me. If this was the case, it'd be as wrong as the NBA stance on things, and would not justify what the NBA is doing at all.
                    But some countries just do not preform tests on a regular basis. I think that is really, really looking away.

                    But its not just the NBA. The NBA has a public policy out there and it has to negotiate around US and Canadian law on how to deal with suspensions so as not to hinder someone from making a livelyhood. Other countries also has overturned standard WADA rulings (Edgar Davids in Italian football for example (nandrolon I believe)).

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    This very incident happened in the NBA though, with a player stating that he uses drugs, and not in some random domestic league. If the same happens in another league I'm gonna be all by your side, asking for a player ban there as well.
                    Furthermore, there are no such restrictions in leagues which applied the WADA code. You can be tested as often as possible, anytime (also during the offseason), anywhere. And if you get caught having used a substance from the prohibited list (like THC), then you get banned - with the first offense. Just like it happened a few weeks ago in the german BBL with Nate Fox and Ermen Reyes-Napoles.
                    But THC is not a performance enhancing drug, it is placed there strictly on moral grounds! Unless ofcourse you consider someone having the munchies and eating to recoup faster, a performance enhancer.

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    Looking at the NBA rules for testing (4 test restriction, no testing in the offseason) and at Sterns comments about the WADA in the past, I can't come to the same conclusion as you do. Not banning a player, who uses drugs and admits so openly, is looking away from drug use for me.
                    Look, the NBA actually suspends players immediately if they are caught with anything heavier than pot (article XXXIII, section 4 paragraph g).

                    a positive test for a Drug of Abuse or a positive test under Section 4(c)(iii), (iv) or (v) above, the player shall be immediately be dismissed and disqualified from any association with the NBA or its Teams in accordance with the provisions of Section 11(a)
                    Its almost the exact same procedure as any other sports federation.
                    The difference is that the NBA has realized that pot and the narcotic substances in it is not performance enhancing. You might think that is wrong, I believe that is thinking ahead.

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    For me there's only one possible reaction to such a confession: the athlete needs to be suspended immediately and has to stand trial in front of the respective USADA court. Putting him into a drug program should be an additional measure, not the only one.
                    I call it giving someone a chance to change without taking away someones livelyhood.

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    Oh, and calling such an opinion BS doesn't really prove your point, the only thing it does is making you look rude and offensive.
                    I said:
                    4th. We have had this discussion about players using "dopping" and steroids and I believe it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that NBA does not endorse nor look away from drug use. I strongly suggest removing any claims to the contrary on this forum as it is pure BS
                    I maintain that it is pure BS to say that the NBA endorse and/or look away from drug use. What they do have, imo, is a more pragmatic and more human approach to (light)drug use (if you would like to call an herb a drug).

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    Luckily the USOC has a different stance than the NBA on this issue, and accepted the WADA code, so athletes on US Olympic Teams do get tested under WADA conditions.
                    Everyone in the NBA gets tested under wada conditions, its in the statutes that the lab needs to be up to par with wada standard.

                    (b) All tests conducted pursuant to this Article XXXIII shall be analyzed by laboratories selected by the NBA and the Players Association, approved by the Medical Director, and certified by the World Anti-Doping Agency, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), or the International Olympic Committee.
                    Article XXXIII, section 4 paragraph b.

                    What the NBA does, however, is have another lab test the b sample if the a sample is positive. Something WADA should implement in all sports they oversee without further notice. There has been victims in the past of messing up the tests and that has caused people to loose money/ability to compete.

                    Originally posted by Trifilli
                    I think that you had an argument about that with somebody in the past.
                    Yes I did. Yet the same stupid conversation about NBA players not being tested/being rampant drug users without fear of being punished has now surfaced for a third time. And yes, that makes me slightly cranky.

                    If you want to bash the NBA, do it for the lack of team play, the poor ball movement and whatever else game related (lord knows I loath quite a few things about the way the game is played in the NBA) but dont use unsubstantiated rumours (BS)about something you have no clue about (and this is not directed at you specifically Trifilli).
                    Last edited by Billy; 04-26-2008, 09:18 PM.
                    Unicajism (or Unicajian Performance Fluctuation Syndrome: UPFS) in all its glory

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      Originally posted by Billy
                      That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
                      Thanks, then don't ask me to give it a rest, please.

                      What is your definition of a drug?

                      When I was still actively competing I had a list of all things to stay away from nailed to my door and it was a shitload quite frankly. Among them were caffeine, thein and for certain sports (not mine) alcohol was forbidden.
                      Anyways:

                      Here is the current list.

                      None of them (caffeine, thein and alcohol) mentioned are currently on the list so things change. Often.
                      A lot of things change in life and one has to adjust to them, this list makes no difference. If there are new scientific results the list has to be changed of course, as it happened with caffeine in 2004, a step that is still not being agreed with by all scientists.
                      However there's one difference between things like alcohol, caffeine and pot: the latter is illegal, also by law (except in the Netherlands, where you can get it in a controlled way, but where it is banned in sports as well). And unlike many pot smokers happen to state over and over again there's a good reason for that. It has proven psychoactive and physiological effects, it makes most consumers lethargic, it certainly is nothing kids should consume - I hope that we agree on that?
                      But hey, when we're at it: alcohol isn't for kids either.

                      This in itself makes it harder to deem what is morally wrong to use and what is ok. Should medals given out in the past be taken back when a substance then not being considered illegal is at any given later time?

                      You will notice that insulin, testosterone, nicotine, certain cortizones and albumin is on that list as is having too high oxygen level in the blood.

                      Some of them are existing normally in the body and are heightened in some athletic super specimen (I have a friend who has been caught six times just for being extremely physically gifted).
                      Albumin exists in anti hair loss potions and has caused atleast a turkish and a swedish basketball player to be suspended.
                      In football it is very common to inject red blodcells inte damaged muscles to heal faster. Say that Ballack, Papaloukas or any other of your favourite player went down and the only thing that could help them recover or to ever play again would be a gene treatment or injection of red bloodcells into a damaged part. Should that be considered OK?
                      It is not according to Dick Pound and the WADA framework btw.
                      First of all: where is the connection with my fav. player here? Do you actually believe that I brought up this discussion because I don't like the NBA or Josh Howard? I'd rate a Papaloukas or Ballack case no different (and Ballack certainly is none of my fav. players, as he's a football player).
                      What you describe there though is a medical treatment. There's nothing wrong with that as long as you declare that before, giving a prove that you need it. Then you're allowed to consume substances on the prohibited list as well.
                      Take former Alba Berlin player Michael Wright for example: he claimed to have the ADD (attention deficit disorder), thus having to take a medication that contains amphetamines. Too bad that he said so after the positive test. If he had declared the need of the use before to the anti-doping agency, things would've been much different - the ban still wasn't that long though.
                      So the question is not: medication or sport career, like you put it - both at the same time is possible, as long as you prove the need.
                      The anti hair loss story is a different one. The swedish basketballer you're talking about is Chris Anrin, he was banned in the BBL as well - because the anti hair loss product had ingredients which can be masking. He should've known about that, as it was on the prohibited list. Still he was only banned for 6 months...

                      I believe we are entering a moral and legal minefield here.
                      Of course it is also a question of morale, but why minefield?

                      Well, in this day and age where everyone has access to youtube or whatever other media to instantly reach millions of people, are we not all potential role models? Some of us are parents, some of us are moderators on forums while others are simply basketball players or coaching pee-wee league. We are all role models to others whether we like it or not.
                      There is this idea about holding athletes to higher moral values but is that really how things should be? When do you start and stop being a public figure and thereby someones rolemodel?
                      You are a person of public interest when you're a NBA player, because of the media attention you receive. This doesn't compare to some random youtube video, and as a NBA player you should be aware about that. Kids all around the world look up to you, cheer for you and try to copy you (at least in Germany I'd say that the NBA is more popular than the BBL, but alone in the USA there's enough media attention to see it that way).
                      But I agree that we're all potential role models, especially if we're playing in some kind of ballclubs.
                      Let me give you an example from my own club: we used to drink a beer together after our home games, chatting, while some of us still had to do work like scorekeeping another game, etc... there were always kids from the youth teams around as well, watching the games. Suddenly one 15-year old brought beer to one of the youth team home games as well - of course he was sent back, but he did it, because he thought that it was ok, judging our behaviour after our games. So our team got together and we decided to stop it - if we want to have a beer, we can still go to a bar lateron. And ever since no more youth player brought beer to a game. So yes, we're role models as well, especially if we have contact with kids that often.
                      Call me oldfashioned there, but that's my opinion on this.

                      No, atleast not on some philosophical level but it does matter what we consider legal and the legal framework is what we must all live by. How far off was it illegal to perform an abortion in Germany? In Ireland? In Iran? When did we stop consider caffeine and alcohol illegal and when was it considered a substance to enhance performance?
                      Are you trying to downplay the harm of a drug like pot can do here by comparing it to other substances / actions which were forbidden and later legalized? Or is your point that the majority only isn't right all the time on some philosophical level, while in reality the majority makes the laws? The latter would be a too easy stance imo, but that's a whole different topic, as we're talking about an incident which happened in a country where the substance is illegal, banned and banned from sports.

                      I know quite a bit of people who has played in high level leagues in Europe. Together they have about 20 years of play and only one of them has been tested -once, and that test was not performed out of season. Atleast the NBA does in fact test the players four times a year.

                      But some countries just do not preform tests on a regular basis. I think that is really, really looking away.
                      I really can't follow your logic, which doesn't condemn a test restriction, because elsewhere people are being tested less (like it unfortunately happened with your friends). The cases you mentioned just shouldn't happen and are bad as well, but that doesn't change the stance that test restrictions are bad. There should be a system without test restrictions everywhere.
                      And let me assure you that not all players are tested as seldom as your friends. A friend of mine works in the german anti-doping agency and they really test a lot.
                      Just recently the german Ice-hockey player Busch denied a test, because he claimed to have no time and it'd have been his 7th test of the year - the ice-hockey federation first only put up a money fine because he appeared to the test a few ours later, but the NADA immediately intervened, asking for a ban of the player. German ice hockey might even lose a lionpart of the state support money because of this incident, and the players team might even lose the championship, as the player appeared in the finals after the denied test.
                      The same situation is not possible in the NBA, because nobody can be tested more than 4 times. There wouldn't have been a 7th test. As I said before: there are certainly loopholes in other countries (like for your friends), but this doesn't make a 4-test restriction good.

                      But its not just the NBA. The NBA has a public policy out there and it has to negotiate around US and Canadian law on how to deal with suspensions so as not to hinder someone from making a livelyhood. Other countries also has overturned standard WADA rulings (Edgar Davids in Italian football for example (nandrolon I believe)).
                      Banning somebody for drug abuse is not hinderhing him to make a livelyhood - these substances are illegal in the USA and Canada and you can even go to jail there if you get caught with them. So why would it be that difficult for the NBA to be stricter on them in basketball? I don't see a legal problem there. Since the substance is illegal in both countries no player can go to court, claiming that the NBA is hindering his livelyhood by suspending him rightaway for smoking pot.

                      But THC is not a performance enhancing drug, it is placed there strictly on moral grounds! Unless ofcourse you consider someone having the munchies and eating to recoup faster, a performance enhancer.
                      It is of course placed on moral, but also and medical grounds. There's a reason why this drug is banned in most countries, I've explained that before.

                      Look, the NBA actually suspends players immediately if they are caught with anything heavier than pot (article XXXIII, section 4 paragraph g).
                      Again the question: are you trying to downplay drug abuse here? A NBA player also should be suspended immediately if he's caught with pot, not only if he's being caught with something heavier than pot.

                      Its almost the exact same procedure as any other sports federation.
                      The difference is that the NBA has realized that pot and the narcotic substances in it is not performance enhancing. You might think that is wrong, I believe that is thinking ahead.

                      I call it giving someone a chance to change without taking away someones livelyhood.
                      First of all: it is not almost the exact same procedure as in any other sports federation, as you do get banned there for drug use rightaway.
                      And what about that NBA stance is thinking ahead or a chance to change without taking away someones livelyhood? Do you really think that these athletes can't have a livelyhood without taking drugs? You solely seem to care about performance enhancing susbtances. Aren't NBA players role models to you? Wouldn't you say as a former athlete that there's no place for drugs in sports? I really don't get that.

                      I said:

                      I maintain that it is pure BS to say that the NBA endorse and/or look away from drug use. What they do have, imo, is a more pragmatic and more human approach to (light)drug use (if you would like to call an herb a drug).
                      Yes, and this attitude begins to be annoying. You have a different opinion - fine. But don't call an opinion different from yours BS, because it makes you look ignorant, clinging on a point of view that much, that you can't accept somebody to have a different stance on this.
                      Pot is a drug, I guess we don't have to argue about that, do we? For me there's no place at all for drugs in sports, which includes basketball and the NBA. So by not suspending an athlete for the confession of drug abuse the NBA is looking away from drug use imo. And I don't see a more pragmatic or more human approach in this, I see a weakness to adress a problem. A human approach would be to accompany the athlete during the period of his suspension, to work with him on that issue. As I said before: the NBA drug program is a good solution, but it really can't be the only and single measure.


                      Everyone in the NBA gets tested under wada conditions, its in the statutes that the lab needs to be up to par with wada standard.

                      Article XXXIII, section 4 paragraph b.

                      What the NBA does, however, is have another lab test the b sample if the a sample is positive. Something WADA should implement in all sports they oversee without further notice. There has been victims in the past of messing up the tests and that has caused people to loose money/ability to compete.
                      No, not everyone in the NBA gets tested under WADA conditions, this is just not the case. WADA conditions to not include a test restriction. And NBA athletes are not getting suspended for the first positive test on THC, like the WADA expects.
                      The test lab change for the b sample would indeed be a logical step, and this is something were the NBA has a better stance on things than the WADA imo. However even within the WADA procedures the b sample will only be opened if the a sample is positive. The athlete has the right to be there when the sample gets openend, and if there's a problem with the b sample it can't be used. This happened with Tyler Hamilton, who was already tested positive in the Athens 04 Olympics, but the b sample was not useable. He was allowed to keep his Olympic Gold, but was caught a few months later again, this time on both samples. And additional tests of the b sample in different labs are possible, if the respective agency thinks this is neccessary.
                      I know that Floyd Landis is running a big campaign in the United States to convince people that WADA is dead wrong in what it is doing. And there was indeed one formal mistake beeing made in the process of the labeling of the b sample. But the USADA sent in the b sample to several other labs to make sure that Landis accusations were wrong - something he tried to stop, he didn't want a new test of his b sample, he wanted to have the b sample labelled as unuseable, hence getting away without a suspension - and he was tested positive in all of these samples as well.
                      So to sum it up: if the b sample is not useable, the athlete won't be convicted, nor suspended. And if there's a concern by a national agency that a useable sample was not properly analyzed or that there are formal mistakes, they can send the sample to other labs, to get more results.
                      Many doping athletes try to meet this tight net of controls with conspiracy theories when being caught, like former german runner Dieter Baumann, who even claimed that the substance was injected into his toothpaste. Of course he was proven wrong by a scientific research in the end.

                      Yes I did. Yet the same stupid conversation about NBA players not being tested/being rampant drug users without fear of being punished has now surfaced for a third time. And yes, that makes me slightly cranky.

                      If you want to bash the NBA, do it for the lack of team play, the poor ball movement and whatever else game related (lord knows I loath quite a few things about the way the game is played in the NBA) but dont use unsubstantiated rumours (BS)about something you have no clue about (and this is not directed at you specifically Trifilli).
                      Wow, so you really believe that everybody who's not happy with the NBA rules and stance on pot use is a NBA hater, who believes that NBA players are rampant drug users? Wow, that's what I call a prejduge. I for myself don't believe that all NBA players are rampant drug users, I don't believe that pot use is a problem of black athletes (in case you thought that way), and I for myself believe in the principles of the state of law not to condemn anybody until proven otherwise - but in this case the player admitted the use of drugs, and sorry, I'm not happy with the NBAs reaction to it. There's no unsubstantiated rumour in this, he confessed. The 4-test restriction is no unsubstantiated rumour either, it is an official NBA rule. And I really can't see why you come to the believe that everybody who's not happy with that rule would think that NBA players are not getting tested.
                      Obviously you saw this thread, and thought "oh, the same discussion again", judging from your statement about this discussion coming up for the 3rd time.
                      This has to lead me to the conclusion that you didn't even care what this topic is about. The last discussion you had was about US-athletes not getting tested for the Olympics, which is a completely different topic, and a discussion in which I didn't participate.
                      In this discussion however the topic is the confession of an active NBA-athlete that he's taking drugs.

                      Sorry dude, but my stance on this has nothing, really nothing to do with the way the game is being played in the NBA, with what I believe other NBA players are doing, etc. This also is no "Europe is better than America" discussion. And your general assumption that people who speak about this do so because of the NBAs game, some silly rumours or because they simply have no clue makes ME slightly cranky this time. I simply don't like the NBAs (and Dallas Mavericks) reaction to this, and the rules which restrict tests.
                      You say that this is not directed at me specifically, Billy, but you didn't exclude me from it either - in case you really think that way about me I must say that I really didn't expect that from you.

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        Originally posted by Trifilli
                        Again the question: are you trying to downplay drug abuse here? A NBA player also should be suspended immediately if he's caught with pot, not only if he's being caught with something heavier than pot.
                        Then they would need to ban around 3/4 of players in the NBA (if they would test them in off-season). As It was said, around 3/4 of NBA players and also most of Americans playing in Europe smoke weed in their off-season.

                        If they don't get caught it's just fine with me. There is no need to test them also in the off-season. If Howard admitted smoking weed in off-season, that's nothing new and it's fine with me.

                        I don't consider weed as performance enhancement drug. Did you see anyone getting killed due to weed overdose?! Even alchocol is more dangerous than weed.
                        Last edited by elaj; 04-27-2008, 12:04 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          Originally posted by Billy
                          Give it a rest Triff.
                          1st. Could you tell me one positive effect of smoking dope -and thats from a basketball standpoint mind you!
                          if you're used to playing like that, marijuana can improve your concentration to a great degree... you just get into the game that bad, that nothing else except basketball matters at that moment and in most cases it actually does improves the performance, although it's very easy to screw everthing up in the first 4-5 minutes on court when you're not as focused yet. It's a mental and not physical thing, but it's existant.

                          otherwise, I don't care if he wants to smoke it, it's jus that pro-athletes aren't supposed to be doing that... back to you Stern....
                          Originally posted by Jon_Koncak
                          That's funny shit.I cant believe there are sports fans thinking like it.It's like Federer losing to random Japanese player in round 1 of French Open but tournament director stepping in and saying "hey it was a fluke win who wants to watch a random Japanese guy in next round,Federer qualifies"

                          Comment


                          • #15
                            Originally posted by elaj
                            Then they would need to ban around 3/4 of players in the NBA (if they would test them in off-season). As It was said, around 3/4 of NBA players and also most of Americans playing in Europe smoke weed in their off-season.
                            Any source for that number? I'd ban any athlete who was tested positive though, no matter how big the overall number would be. But I don't see this as a specific american problem - for example in the german BBL 3 out of the 5 last cases (Trent, Moten, Fox) were US-americans, while the other two were germans (Schaffartzik, Reyes-Napoles).

                            If they don't get caught it's just fine with me. There is no need to test them also in the off-season. If Howard admitted smoking weed in off-season, that's nothing new and it's fine with me.
                            Well, ok, that's your opinion, one that I cannot really understand though. Why is there no need to test in the offseason? It's an invitation to the athletes to do illegal things imho. Why do we still talk about clean sports, when we give athletes the certainty that they won't be tested for months?
                            The BBL also usually only tests german internationals in the offseason btw, because of the 10-month contracts most players have, something that I really hate. There should be more cooperation between the different national agencies on that issue imo.

                            I don't consider weed as performance enhancement drug. Did you see anyone getting killed due to weed overdose?! Even alchocol is more dangerous than weed.
                            It is not a great performance enhancing drug, but it is a drug. And THC sure might help you to focus more on the game, if being consumed in a correct dosis (sometimes too much, that's why it is labeled as potentially dangerous to your co-players) and can also have the effect of a pain-reducer, hence improving your stamina (remember that it doesn't need to be smoked, if for doping purposes it can also be consumed in other ways in a correct dosis, you can still claim that you smoked it lateron).
                            The alcohol argument is one of the most beloved in the pro-THC argumentation. A drug is not harmless however, only because you don't die by consuming it. Massive alcohol consume and abuse is harmful as well and can lead up to the death - both alcohol and THC consume can lead to addiction. However already minor THC consume has proven psychoactive and physiological effects, it generally has more effects on the body and brain than occasional alcohol consume. Misuse of both will harm your health, but THC is forbidden in most countries because it already can have a major effect on you with an occasional consume.
                            I still think that a pro athlete is not supposed to consume THC, and is also not supposed to consume alcohol on a frequent basis.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X

                            Debug Information