RIO Announcement Today?

Someone has to be first.

I think it's been fairly clear since that new bloke took over at the FA that they'd be clamping down on things like this.

I agree with you that it had to change BUT ONLY once a NEW clear publication of the rules had been issued, which they havent.

Lets take your place of work...

everyone is sending around private emails and the boss doesnt like it....he keeps dragging people in the office warning them that its against company policy but nothing else. Then 1 day out of the blue he drags you in and sacks you on the spot. Dont you think your union will be saying hang on a minute....

Clear that the FA have had to aquiesce to Blatter's demands. He asked for heads on plates and he's been humoured, in my opinion, by an English FA bullied by the grossly overpaid, undertalented Gordon Taylor into finding a middle ground.
At the risk of having the whole of the "professional" elite in our sport from spitting out the dummy over the lucrative Christmas period they've opted for the middle ground where the sacrificial lamb is nothing more than some bint with a foreign sounding name.

[GETT1NLOTS]

Balders says

everyone is sending around private emails and the boss doesn’t like it....he keeps dragging people in the office warning them that its against company policy but nothing else. Then 1 day out of the blue he drags you in and sacks you on the spot. Don’t you think your union will be saying hang on a minute....

And I think he is correct. (Balders that is - not the fictitious Boss)

HowayTheLads is also correct in that missing the test should be punished in exactly the same way as failing the test.

The only thing you are disagreeing on is if it is fair to impose harsh sanctions retrospectively.

I think Balders example is an apt one and as such, as much as I think Rio is a dimwit I think the ban too harsh.

Now stop quarrelling you two...

You're both giving me a good name

finally football has gotten real on drugs testing, hopefully after his appeal the ban will be rightfully extended

united- "this savage and unprecedented sentence which makes an appeal inevitable". WAKE UP

OK Notty we do agree in 1 way

id like to finish off on this subject with what ive been trying to say all around and anothrspacecat simply said for me

finally football has gotten real on drugs testing

exactly my point. wait until a man united player comes along to make an example. palios was just waiting to make a name for himself. no doubt he will be off soon for some higher position after firmly putting himself in the limelight. if he wanted to get tough on drugs why didnt he publish something sooner rather than wait to make a scapegoat of someone. anyway not wanting to sound like a broken record ill let it go now....i promise :x

As I read through this thread again I see how easily we're persuaded by our club affinities.
However, trying to argue this case objectively, I think the European\World stance taken is the right one and the fact that Ferdinand has been "first man caught" is more his bad luck than anything else.
In athletics, for example, drug abuse was, and is, a difficult subject. But here we have the pinnacle acheivements of man against the bar, the clock or the tapemeasure where a level playing field is essential if we're to gauge our progress. I think it was essential that it was brought under control there but it's now time to bring it under control here too.
Kids don't need the kind of role model that's willing to steal the extra yard or the precious tenth of a second.


It may seem like I've presupposed Ferdinand's guilt here. Only insofar as he failed to turn up for the test!

An interesting thread and just thought I would add my tuppence worth

First off, Ferdinand misses a drugs test = 8 month ban.

In Europe

Davids, fails one = 4 month ban.
Couto, fails one = 4 month ban.
Stam, fails one = 5 month ban,
F De Boer, fails one in March, 1 year ban imposed in June, appeals in July, back playing in September - yes he was banned for the close season

Innocent until proven guilty is it not? Seems its better to be proved guilty as your sentence will be then be less than missing a test.

In summary, no consistancy whatsoever, FIFA need to get their fingers out and make a ruling now to state the exact penalties for both missing and failing drugs tests - and its imposed in EVERY country.

Secondly, the Man City player missed his test, £2k fine - reason - he was taking his mum to the airport and got caught in traffic. Ridiculous excuse, I mean, he would have been just as well coming up with something like "I was moving house". Again, consistancy needed.

Lastly, I feel Ferdinand has been hung out to dry by the FA twice, once over the Turkey game and secondly over the length of this ban. Going on that basis, how much desire will he have to play for England knowing he is playing for the same people who shafted him twice already.

wait until a man united player comes along to make an example.

What is this all about, then? You think there's some kind of conspiracy against man utd??? What total bollocks. The fact is, if Ferdinand had attended the drug test, like hundreds of other footballers manage with no problem, there wouldn't have been a problem today. Do you not get that, mate?

If you think that the FA has it in for Man Utd you should look no further than the attitude of the club to have caused that. This is a serious charge yet the club has tried very hard to make it appear trivial. That is sheer arrogance on the part of man utd.

I firmly believe that on the charge as it stands, Ferdinand should have been treated as though he failed a drug test and penalised accordingly. He got off lightly.

Crowie

Secondly, the Man City player missed his test, £2k fine - reason - he was taking his mum to the airport and got caught in traffic. Ridiculous excuse, I mean, he would have been just as well coming up with something like "I was moving house".

Total rubbish. Even under those circumstances, it was said that the testers AGREED he could leave the ground to take his mother to the airport. He was then on time to return to take the test as decreed by the testers but was caught up in a CONFIRMED traffic accident. He was apparently in contact with the club and testers during the period he was caught in this accident and everyone was aware of his situation. Are you seriously telling everybody this is the same as Ferdinand just @#%$ off cos he was deliberately trying to avoid the test?

Lastly, I feel Ferdinand has been hung out to dry by the FA twice, once over the Turkey game and secondly over the length of this ban. Going on that basis, how much desire will he have to play for England knowing he is playing for the same people who shafted him twice already.

Bloody hell, are you pissed, mate? If Ferdinand had played against Turkey what do you think would have happened the moment Ferdinand was given a ban for this offence? Leaving him out of the Turkey match was a no-brainer for the FA. Anything else and we'd be facing a disqualification, I don't think we'd have been forced to replay the match, the Euro twats will do anything to kick England out of a competition and this would have been a brilliant excuse.

HTL,

Are you seriously telling everybody this is the same as Ferdinand just @#%$ off cos he was deliberately trying to avoid the test?

Are you telling me that you are really Rio Ferdinand because unless you are you cannot say for sure that he deliberately missed this test? Its your opinion that he missed it on purpose, I just think he was a dozy minded idiot.

And as for the Turkey game, you have to remember that his "offence" is actually missing a test, not failing one. Have UEFA laid down rules and regulations that say a team would be disqualified because someone has not taken a test? I don't think so, so again, unless you are the actual UEFA rule maker then you are making assumptions based on your own opinion.

Finally,

You say to Balders

What is this all about, then? You think there's some kind of conspiracy against man utd??? What total bollocks

and then to me

the Euro twats will do anything to kick England out of a competition and this would have been a brilliant excuse.

so I will say - What is all this about then, you think there is some kind of conspiracy against England? What total bollocks! -

Finally, again, innocent until proven guilty, not guilty because of a mistake.

Crowie

And as for the Turkey game, you have to remember that his "offence" is actually missing a test, not failing one.

Err, aye. Thanks for reminding me, like. Why exactly have you enclosed the word offence in quotations? Do you think failing to turn up for a test is not an offence?

Have UEFA laid down rules and regulations that say a team would be disqualified because someone has not taken a test?

Try to see the bigger picture if you can. What do you think Turkey would have done had Ferdinand played in that match and, as has happened, has now been found guilty of a very serious offence that happened before the international match subsequently receiving a fairly lengthy ban?

I don't think so, so again, unless you are the actual UEFA rule maker then you are making assumptions based on your own opinion.

This is a pathetic position to take. Are you another one who takes the view that unless someone is 'on the inside' they can't have an opinion, at least you take that view if that opinion doesn't concur with your own? I think it is a fair assumption that Turkey would now be dripping like hell if Ferdinand had played given that he has now received a fairly lengthy ban for an offence that took place before the international match. They would say Ferdinand should not have played and Uefa would surprise nobody at all if they then took some kind of action against England.

Finally, You say to Balders....blah blah blah

Uefa have proven over a period of time that where there are similar incidents involving supporters of various nations, they are very quick to clamp down on England, or threaten action against England, while taking no action, or not threatening any action, against other associations. There is nothing anywhere in history to suggest the FA has it in for man utd. The arrogance of the club and their supporters is such that when they aren't treated as a special case they believe they are being treated badly.

Finally, again, innocent until proven guilty, not guilty because of a mistake.

This gets worse. What total rubbish. Are you saying that Ferdinand is not guilty of missing a drug test? That was the charge and he admitted it, didn't he? Or do I once again have to have inside knowledge, or be Ferdinand, to say he admitted it. Imo he admitted he missed the test because he claimed he 'forgot' to take it. As I have a fair control over the English language, I should tell you that if someone says they "forgot to take a drug test", that means they didn't take the drug test, which means they are GUILTY of the charge of not taking a drug test.

Or are you claiming that because he missed the drug test by mistake, that he actually didn't miss it, that he did take the test although nobody saw him take it and he doesn't claim he took it. Is that what you're claiming?

HTL,

Your welcome to your opinion on this subject, as I am mine. Your opinion is that UEFA would have kicked out England, mines is they wouldn't. We will have to agree to disagree.

However please try and keep your opinions seperate from comments such as "We would have been kicked out" as if you are commenting on facts. Your not, as UEFA have neither confirmed or denied what action would have been taken. Besides were now talking about a hypothetical situation as he didn't actually play.

Finally, on Ferdinand again, what I was trying to get to in my original post, and has obviously been missed or is just not clear, is that he has received a lengthier ban for committing the offence of missing a test (yes I do agree its an offence) than previous players have actually received for actually failing the test.

And surely thats the situation that has to be addressed by FIFA/UEFA and whoever? There should be clear guidelines on what the exact penalties will be rather taking it on a case by case basis. It is crazy that he is going to be out for longer then players like Stam, Davids etc.

Again its just my opinion that actually failing a test is the more serious of the two offences. Innocent until proven guilty was obviously not the correct phrase in this context as I was referring to his innocence in not actually haven failed the test, not the case of actual missing the test. IMO he has been treated as if he failed it.

Anyway, they are all just my opinions, whether right or wrong. But please try and not describe them as pathetic or total rubbish. I respect your opinions and therefore maybe you could at least respect mine, or my right to have one, even if it differs differently from yours.

Thanks.

Your opinion is that UEFA would have kicked out England, mines is they wouldn't. We will have to agree to disagree.

It's hypothetical because the FA acted correctly and didn't give Turkey the chance to lodge a complaint. A good decision imo.

I may be guilty of exaggeration, it's hard to tell. Can you honestly tell me that, had this scenario actually happened, you would have been surprised by Uefa taking action against England?

....he has received a lengthier ban for committing the offence of missing a test (yes I do agree its an offence) than previous players have actually received for actually failing the test.

He just happens to be the first player to be guilty of this offence since a new regime took charge at the FA. The earlier people in charge at the FA had it wrong and it's been obvious since the new bloke took over that things would change. In point of fact, I don't see it as a bad thing that someone should get a longer ban for skipping a test than failing one. There has to be no loop-hole through which potential cheats can escape. Do you not agree with that?

Anyway, they are all just my opinions, whether right or wrong. But please try and not describe them as pathetic or total rubbish.

Fair enough. I won't describe them as anything anymore, I'll just comment on what you post. It is my opinion that the way you see things would allow players to get away with drug taking.

And surely thats the situation that has to be addressed by FIFA/UEFA and whoever? There should be clear guidelines on what the exact penalties will be rather taking it on a case by case basis.

I agree with that. So, given that every other sport follows the same guidelines except football, my suggestion would be that FIFA join in with every other sport. This would mean that people like Ferdinand would now be banned for 2 years because in every other sport missing a drugs test is taken seriously.

HTL,

Regarding UEFA and England, I would have been surprised if they had been kicked out to be honest.

Bar Yugoslavia and the 1992 Euro's, which was obviously a different scenario (not actually sure if they were kicked out by UEFA or if FIFA were involved) UEFA have never made any mention of kicking any nation out of a tournament over the actions, or in this case inactions, of a single player and the FA. There have been other cases of players failing drugs test, practically the whole Dutch national side it seems and no hint of recriminations from UEFA such as being excluded from tournaments.

To punish England for it would have been mightily severe IMO.

Also, there is no link, that I can see, between this situation and Englands fan behaviour which UEFA were getting narky about. Linking the two together and then saying "Your out", would have been ridiculous IMO.

Yes, I agree there should be no loop holes but there should also be consistancy where possible, not just in the UK but globally on this issue. And that probably needs to come from FIFA who make sure that EVERY nations FA hands out the same punishments for the same offences. As I mentioned in my first post, some of the bans for actual failing a test have been a joke, F De Boer's in particular.

Whether that means following the IOC guidelines as you mention and making it 2 years then I am not sure - but to be honest I can't come up with ideal guidelines, if I could I would be working for someone like FIFA right now

Just one further question though - do you think the fact that Ferdinand realised he had missed the test, phoned and offered to come back to take it is in anyway relevant to his case? Is there at least not some similarity between him and the Man City player in this case in that both have made contact when they realised they were going to/have actually missed their tests?

Just one further question though - do you think the fact that Ferdinand realised he had missed the test, phoned and offered to come back to take it is in anyway relevant to his case? Is there at least not some similarity between him and the Man City player in this case in that both have made contact when they realised they were going to/have actually missed their tests?

Not really relevant in my view. As you pointed out earlier, we don't know all the facts, but if what we have been led to believe is true the Man City player informed the testers BEFORE he left and was given permission by them to leave. Ferdinand just did a runner.

I really don't know how someone in the game can 'forget' to take a drugs test and that is what he claimed.

The point I'm making about Turkey and the possibility that England might be booted out isn't really to do with what Ferdinand actually did. It's to do with what might have happened had Turkey later claimed we fielded a player who should have been ineligible. There may well be a precedent for some kind of action when a country fields a player who shouldn't be playing. Whether that be a replay, disqualification...I don't know. I do think Uefa would have taken some action if they'd received such a complaint though.

[GETT1NLOTS]

Interesting reading guys.

Crowie you ask,

Just one further question though - do you think the fact that Ferdinand realised he had missed the test, phoned and offered to come back to take it is in anyway relevant to his case? Is there at least not some similarity between him and the Man City player in this case in that both have made contact when they realised they were going to/have actually missed their tests?

This is just my opinion and pure conjecture BTW - correct me (anyone) if facts have been revealed or otherwise.

I think that Rio got an 8 month ban because his phone records PROBABLY showed he hadn't made enough (or any) of a reasonable attempt to get the test done? Just conjecture as I say..... :rolleyes

[PompeyPunt]

Whatever were the main reasons, we are likely to see soon, as Man U have now asked for the full report into the ban from the FA in writing, hopefully this might make things clearer, and Man Utd will let the public know where exactly they and Rio stand, and all the factors that contributed to his ban.

But Gettin, from what i have managed to grasp from all the information flying around, is that is was Rio's mobile phone records that landed him right in the sh1te.

[GETT1NLOTS]

I got that impression too.

He took ages supplying his phone records - that I know.

I just imagine it went like this (just conjecture like I say...)

RF 'I tried to ring honest'

TESTER 'From where'

RF ' Ermmmm from my mobey'

TESTER 'Prove it'

RF 'OK' (Thinks 'oooooooooh fcuk...')

[PompeyPunt]

Your probably right, and the fact that the bloke is obviously so stupid he tried something like that, is the reason he's been banned for so long, and yes a ban for being a clown like that is fair, but not 8 months.

Interestingly, today did see the ban of the two world cup under 20's players, both for the same offence, failed drugs test. Now one got 7 months the other 14months.

Now not only is their inconsistency with Rio's ban (a month less for a failed drugs test, AFTER the whole rio thing), but there is also inconsistency with the same offence.

The whole thing is fast becoming a farce i'm afraid.