Conner Duthie 2 year ban

[Anthony Soprano]

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/conner-duthie-former-hibs-youngster-banned-sport-two-years-over-drug-offences-1393137

Tested positive for cannabis therefore has been banned from all sport for 2 years.

Harsh imo, not as if it's a performance enhancer, I understand footballers need to be held to certain standards but it's only a bit green ffs, a lesser punishment would of been more suitable.

Drug laws in this country need looked at.

[Vault Boy]

A stupidly disproportionate punishment for a completely benign offence. Absolutely absurd.

[Hermit Crab]

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/conner-duthie-former-hibs-youngster-banned-sport-two-years-over-drug-offences-1393137

Tested positive for cannabis therefore has been banned from all sport for 2 years.

Harsh imo, not as if it's a performance enhancer, I understand footballers need to be held to certain standards but it's only a bit green ffs, a lesser punishment would of been more suitable.

Drug laws in this country need looked at.


Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.

[Hibbyradge]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.

That's a bit unsympathetic.

Is he related to Lewis Stevenson or something? 😜

[Vault Boy]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.

The law doesn't need to be looked at, because it's illegal? That makes absolutely zero sense.

When something which is less damaging to a person's health than alcohol, cigarettes, sugar and red meat is illegal, there's clearly questions to be asked.

Passively accepting something as righteously true just because it's currently enshrined in law would have us still living in a country where only landlords could vote.

The guy has fallen victim to a deeply unfair element of our justice system. 2 year ban is unbelievably harsh.

[Peevemor]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.

I agree. The majority of the population get by without taking cannabis - I've no sympathy for someone who knows the potential consequences but decides to take it anyway.

[Hermit Crab]

That's a bit unsympathetic.

Is he related to Lewis Stevenson or something? 😜


Ok, maybe a tad. In my line of work we get random med screens for drugs and alcohol and if you're caught with illegal drugs in your system its instant dismissal, thats drummed into us from the first day. Same for footballers, pilots armed forces etc. If you do it, you take the chance of losing your career and sadly he's been caught out.

[Anthony Soprano]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.

Awwwwww mon now

Alcohol and tobacco are both drugs that kill thousands up and down this country every year, both are completely legal and readily available from shops.

Cannabis has never killed anyone. Yet is illegal in this country.

Had Conner been caught drunk smoking a 20 deck of L&B, he might of got the sack but he wouldn't of been banned.

Regardless of your personal opinion on recreational drug use, you can't seriously tell me that's not ridiculous.

[Hermit Crab]

The law doesn't need to be looked at, because it's illegal? That makes absolutely zero sense.

When something which is less damaging to a person's health than alcohol, cigarettes, sugar and red meat is illegal, there's clearly questions to be asked.

Passively accepting something as righteously true just because it's the currently enshrined in law would have us still living in a country where only landlords could vote.

The guy has fallen victim to a deeply unfair element of our justice system. 2 year ban is unbelievably harsh.


Legalising cannabis wouldn't help him though would it. Footballers would still be banned from taking it. As would anyone in a safety critical position at their work.

[calumhibee1]

Not surprised at this news in the slightest. Guys a bit of a tit from my admittedly limited experience of meeting him. Him and all his pals were blazed then as well.

[KingPat4]

Harsh

Its 2020, not 1970.

[Pretty Boy]

Random testing is few and far between in Scottish football. I wonder if someone had grassed him (if you'll pardon the pun).

The legal status of cannabis will change before the decade is out. Of course, much like alcohol, it will still be prohibited in some workplaces. It seems a totally over the top ban for something that will have little positive impact on performance.

[The 90+2]

2 year ban is outrageous. They’ve basically ended his footballing career.

[Hermit Crab]

Awwwwww mon now

Alcohol and tobacco are both drugs that kill thousands up and down this country every year, both are completely legal and readily available from shops.

Cannabis has never killed anyone. Yet is illegal in this country.

Had Conner been caught drunk smoking a 20 deck of L&B, he might of got the sack but he wouldn't of been banned.

Regardless of your personal opinion on recreational drug use, you can't seriously tell me that's not ridiculous.


No but there has been deaths caused by drivers under the influence on Cannabis.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7931697/Lorry-driver-30-got-high-cannabis-cocaine-kills-cyclist.html

[Vault Boy]

Legalising cannabis wouldn't help him though would it. Footballers would still be banned from taking it. As would anyone in a safety critical position at their work.

You said the law doesn't need to be looked at though.

I don't know how you're certain about footballers being banned from it either. It'd be discouraged for athletes to engage in recreational drug use, but they don't get banned for drinking or smoking, so why would they be banned for cannabis if that was legal too? It's not like he rocked up on a match day blazed off his nut.

[Vault Boy]

No but there has been deaths caused by drivers under the influence on Cannabis.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7931697/Lorry-driver-30-got-high-cannabis-cocaine-kills-cyclist.html

You link to a daily mail article in which somebody who was also on cocaine tragically killed somebody.

Sleep deprived drivers kill more people than people high on weed, this is a nothing point.

[Hermit Crab]

You said the law doesn't need to be looked at though.

I don't know how you're certain about footballers being banned from it either. It'd be discouraged for athletes to engage in recreational drug use, but they don't get banned for drinking or smoking, so why would they be banned for cannabis if that was legal too? It's not like he rocked up on a match day blazed off his nut.


If it was allowed and footballers were to use it regularly it would influence the results of games imo, reactions become slower and make you tired and hungry. :greengrin

[Peevemor]

The ruling can be read here.

https://www.ukad.org.uk/sites/default/files/2020-02/Conner%20Duthie%20-%20UKAD%20Issued%20Decision.pdf

The rules state 2 years minimum.

Sorry, but he knew the risk.

[MrRobot]

Ok, maybe a tad. In my line of work we get random med screens for drugs and alcohol and if you're caught with illegal drugs in your system its instant dismissal, thats drummed into us from the first day. Same for footballers, pilots armed forces etc. If you do it, you take the chance of losing your career and sadly he's been caught out.

Weed is known to take longer to get out of your system than other drugs (up to 28 days), what would be the position if you had taken a recent trip to say Amsterdam, where the consumption is legal, and then returned only to be tested?

2 years for smoking is extremely harsh IMO; Adrian Mutu only got 9 months for taking coke and that is far worse.

[Vault Boy]

If it was allowed and footballers were to use it regularly it would influence the results of games imo, reactions become slower and make you tired and hungry. :greengrin

HC the same could be said of footballers who drink, smoke or overeat regularly too. I think you're way off the mark here. Duthie's ban is a red flag for a much wider problem with our criminalisation of cannabis. It's an extremely disproportionate ban.

[Smartie]

On the face of it this is ridiculous, but cannabis metabolites stay in the body for ages and that has been known for some time.

He'll have known about the potential consequences of his actions and how long he'd be likely to run the risk of getting caught out with something in his system.

I have less sympathy for someone who knows about the consequences of an action - however benign that action is - who goes on to suffer the consequences than an entirely innocent party.

Having said that, I know some people who are in quite ridiculously responsible positions who you would not want to have impaired judgment who happily use cannabis regularly without any negative impact (they would argue it has a positive impact).

[The 90+2]

The ruling can be read here.

https://www.ukad.org.uk/sites/default/files/2020-02/Conner%20Duthie%20-%20UKAD%20Issued%20Decision.pdf

The rules state 2 years minimum.

Sorry, but he knew the risk.

How did Berahino only get 8 weeks for taking MDMA?

[Peevemor]

Weed is known to take longer to get out of your system once inhaled (up to 28 day), what would be the position if you had taken a recent trip to say Amsterdam, where the consumption is legal, and then returned only to be tested?

2 years for smoking is extremely harsh IMO; Adrian Mutu only got 9 months for taking coke and that is far worse.

There's no problem with taking it outwith the sport, only if it's still in your system when tested after a match.

[1 8 7 5]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.

Its a bit of weed ffs!

[lord bunberry]

I’ve never understood these bans from sport. I understand if something is enhancing performance, but what’s the point in banning someone from sport if they’ve not cheated. I get that it’s illegal in this country, but in many countries it’s not.

[Hibee87]

Weed is known to take longer to get out of your system than other drugs (up to 28 days), what would be the position if you had taken a recent trip to say Amsterdam, where the consumption is legal, and then returned only to be tested?

2 years for smoking is extremely harsh IMO; Adrian Mutu only got 9 months for taking coke and that is far worse.

You would still get the sack as far as I'm aware.
When testing was brought in at my place of work, that was asked and response was doesn't matter, it is illegal here. Also it's not technically legal in Amsterdam, bit if a grey area of the law wording but it's pretty much tolerated/accepted but illegal to produce or somthing, go figure eh.

[MrRobot]

There's no problem with taking it outwith the sport, only if it's still in your system when tested after a match.

Seems crazy considering you could take coke quite regularly and have it out your system by match day, whereas weed lingers for longer and would have absolutely no impact on your performance weeks later.

[Northernhibee]

Same length of ban as Jamie Insall. The prescident is there, he can't have not known that it's not an illegal drug.

He took the risk and it's already been established that it would lead to a 2yr ban if caught.

Severe, but certainly not unfair.

[bingo70]

What ban did Rio Ferdinand get when he refused to do a drug test?

[Groathillgrump]

A two year ban does seem really over the top but, as others have said, he must've known the rules. Silly laddie.

[Vault Boy]

I don't think anybody is saying that he didn't take a risk or that he won't have known the rules.

The point is this clearly demonstrates a systemic problem with a blanketed approach to 'illegal drugs,' and whether or not it's written in law doesn't inherently make this punishment 'fair.'

It's a complete *******isation of true justice and fairness.

[Oscar T Grouch]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.

Being gay was illegal in Scotland until the 1980s, we should always update laws to tie in with how society moves forward, if that wasn't the case we'd still be hanging people for stealing a loaf of bread.

edit, gay sex was illegal, not 'being gay' as such

[cameronw-hfc]

These bans are stupid. If it's no performance enhancing, then it shouldn't be tested for imo. I get it in jobs where you work heavy machinery ect, but sports stars should only ever be tested for PEDs.

[Groathillgrump]

What ban did Rio Ferdinand get when he refused to do a drug test?

8 month ban and a £50,000 fine.

[Anthony Soprano]

Same length of ban as Jamie Insall. The prescident is there, he can't have not known that it's not an illegal drug.

He took the risk and it's already been established that it would lead to a 2yr ban if caught.

Severe, but certainly not unfair.

He would of been aware of the rules so it's absolutely his own fault he's been banned but that doesn't mean drug laws in this country aren't outdated.

IMO cannabis should be legal, if alcohol and tobacco which are both far worse for your health are legal then why not weed?

If that was the case then we wouldn't see lengthy bans handed out for such minor offences.

[Northernhibee]

He would of been aware of the rules so it's absolutely his own fault he's been banned but that doesn't mean drug laws in this country aren't outdated.

IMO cannabis should be legal, if alcohol and tobacco which are both far worse for your health are legal then why not weed?

If that was the case then we wouldn't see lengthy bans handed out for such minor offences.

Whether or not your opinion on it, the law is the law and as I say, I don't disagree that the penalty is severe but it's consistent.

He can't have any complaints IMO.

[Hibbyradge]

Ok, maybe a tad. In my line of work we get random med screens for drugs and alcohol and if you're caught with illegal drugs in your system its instant dismissal, thats drummed into us from the first day. Same for footballers, pilots armed forces etc. If you do it, you take the chance of losing your career and sadly he's been caught out.

Yes, I know your drug rules are strict, but that's because public safety is at stake.

A young footballer sharing a spliff is hardly crime of the century and I'm absolutely certain more senior players have been caught with drugs in their systems but blind eyes have been turned or it's been covered up.

2 years ban for cannabis is excessive, and in my opinion, he's being unfairly used as an example.

[Anthony Soprano]

Whether or not your opinion on it, the law is the law and as I say, I don't disagree that the penalty is severe but it's consistent.

He can't have any complaints IMO.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm highlighting this country's draconian view on cannabis.

[Billy Whizz]

I remember Connor mostly from the development team a few years
He also made a 1st team appearance as a sub

[Northernhibee]

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm highlighting this country's draconian view on cannabis.

I don't disagree with you on that either tbh, but I've worked in jobs with random drug tests. Sadly the only sensible precaution is abstinence in this case.

Things like cocaine, heroin etc. I'm all for harsh sentencing for - that stuff destroys lives. Cannabis, it'd be tough to argue that it's the same.

[WhileTheChief..]

Who was the lad that we had playing in the first time years ago that was caught with weed in his system?

Barry Lafferty maybe? Don't think he got punished so severely but it was yonks ago so can't really remember.

[CMurdoch]

What ban did Rio Ferdinand get when he refused to do a drug test?


8 month ban and a £50,000 fine.

Connor will prefer his 2 year ban.
A £50k fine would have killed him given he last played for Stenhousemuir!
:wink:

[CMurdoch]

Who was the lad that we had playing in the first time years ago that was caught with weed in his system?

Barry Lafferty maybe? Don't think he got punished so severely but it was yonks ago so can't really remember.

Kyle's brother :wink:





Think the name you are looking for is Lavety

[JimBHibees]

Ludicrous punishment

[-Jonesy-]

I agree. The majority of the population get by without taking cannabis - I've no sympathy for someone who knows the potential consequences but decides to take it anyway.

Can you please tell me what the potential consequences are because I fostered a mean stoner lifestyle for 15 years and I seem to have gotten away with it..

[Hibbyradge]

Can you please tell me what the potential consequences are because I fostered a mean stoner lifestyle for 15 years and I seem to have gotten away with it..

I'll answer for him.

The consequences are a 2 year ban from football.

Too heavy a punishment, imo, but those are the current consequences.

[Fuzzywuzzy]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/anthonywitrado/2019/12/16/mlbs-new-marijuana-policy-could-spark-change-in-nfl-and-nba-policy/amp/

[stuart-farquhar]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.
Its legal loads of places. Barely policed anymore at user level.

[H113EE5]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.

Exactly

[Greenbeard]

I’ve never understood these bans from sport. I understand if something is enhancing performance, but what’s the point in banning someone from sport if they’ve not cheated. I get that it’s illegal in this country, but in many countries it’s not.
Substances are banned not just because they can enhance performance. The other factors are whether it is an actual or potential health risk, and whether it is against the "spirit of sport". High heid yins in doping have been arguing for years re whether cannabinoids should be on the list or not. One thing they did do several years ago was to introduce a reporting threshhold so that one-off consumption a good while before being tested, or even passive ingestion close to being tested, does not get reported as a positive test. Duthie says he smoked cannabis twice the day before the match at which he was tested. Two spliffs the day before a match. Irresponsible, or maybe dependent. If the latter, who's to say he has not been taking to the field under the influence and being a health risk not only to himself but potentially to others on the field. But you'd hope he has been offered help and not just discarded.

[calumhibee1]

Can you please tell me what the potential consequences are because I fostered a mean stoner lifestyle for 15 years and I seem to have gotten away with it..

The majority of folk I know that smoke it have also got away with it in that it hasn't had any noticeable long term effects. That's absolutely 100% not the case for everyone though as I've seen a couple of people completely change from smoking it - and certainly not for the better.

[shetlandhibee]

Weed is known to take longer to get out of your system than other drugs (up to 28 days), what would be the position if you had taken a recent trip to say Amsterdam, where the consumption is legal, and then returned only to be tested?

2 years for smoking is extremely harsh IMO; Adrian Mutu only got 9 months for taking coke and that is far worse.:top marksusain bolt didnt even hardly get any rap at all for(pictures)of him smoking bongs at a party after he,d won was his sixth olympic gold medal ,,:agree:

[Hi Heid Yin]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.

My thoughts exactly.

Cannabis can be a precursor to more heavy illegal drug use - with all the devastating consequences associated with it.

[calumhibee1]

Substances are banned not just because they can enhance performance. The other factors are whether it is an actual or potential health risk, and whether it is against the "spirit of sport". High heid yins in doping have been arguing for years re whether cannabinoids should be on the list or not. One thing they did do several years ago was to introduce a reporting threshhold so that one-off consumption a good while before being tested, or even passive ingestion close to being tested, does not get reported as a positive test. Duthie says he smoked cannabis twice the day before the match at which he was tested. Two spliffs the day before a match. Irresponsible, or maybe dependent. If the latter, who's to say he has not been taking to the field under the influence and being a health risk not only to himself but potentially to others on the field. But you'd hope he has been offered help and not just discarded.

Now I know the argument here is about weed and not drink, but I got a fairly serious injury a couple of years ago playing Saturday morning amateurs when someone broke my leg with a very late tackle. The guy had been out the night before and was clearly still under the influence of bevvy. Whether that lead to his tackle being as late as it was, I suppose nobody would ever know. But the same argument could be put forward for Duthie and getting blazed. If it could potentially put others at risk by being in your system, whether that makes your response time slower or what not, then it has to be considered dangerous for the player to take to the field, no matter how much or little it effects him personally.

[Hibbyradge]

My thoughts exactly.

Cannabis can be a precursor to more heavy illegal drug use - with all the devastating consequences associated with it.

So can alcohol.

[Vault Boy]

So can alcohol.

Exactly, the gateway drug myth has been debunked countless times. The only thing cannabis is a direct gateway to is the excessive eating of cereal.

There's actually a lot of evidence to suggest that cannabis is quite an affective 'exitway' drug, helping addicts of more harmful substances contain their withdrawals.

Just wish people would actually reason with research on their side, rather than knee jerk soundbites.

[Sir David Gray]

Presumably he knew the consequences of having such a substance in his system prior to taking it. Not only is it a banned substance for athletes to have in their system, it is also illegal except for certain medicinal use.

Not much sympathy to be honest.

[Peevemor]

Exactly, the gateway drug myth has been debunked countless times. The only thing cannabis is a direct gateway to is the excessive eating of cereal.

There's actually a lot of evidence to suggest that cannabis is quite an affective 'exitway' drug, helping addicts of more harmful substances contain their withdrawals.

Just wish people would actually reason with research on their side, rather than knee jerk soundbites.

Surely the various sports' governing bodies base their rules and associated sanctions on scientific advice/research.

Players will be well informed about what they can and can't use, including both legal and illegal drugs.

Nobody in good health needs to use cannabis. Any sportsman doing so knows the risk and potential punishment.

No sympathy from me whatsoever.

[Cataplana]

That is outrageous and is nothing more than a moral judgement. It's hardly a performance enhancing drug, so it has nothing to do with sport.

Given that the drug is legally available throughout the world, including the majority of US states, it does seem a bit OTT. If they have concern for the guy and his welfare, how does putting him out of the game help?

[Vault Boy]

Surely the various sports' governing bodies base their rules and associated sanctions on scientific advice/research.

Players will be well informed about what they can and can't use, including both legal and illegal drugs.

Nobody in good health needs to use cannabis. Any sportsman doing so knows the risk and potential punishment.

No sympathy from me whatsoever.

No. If they did, cannabis would hardly warrant the same punishment as coke, would it? They base it on legality.

I'll say it again, nobody was saying that Conner didn't take a risk, he clearly knew he could get caught out by it. He misjudged the likelyhood of it and he'll be living with that until March 2021.

Nobody in good health 'needs' to use pillows, but if it brings them comfort, relief to certain mental or physical issues or generally makes life more enjoyable without harming others, there's no issue, is there? Having a purely legalistic approach to morality is a very dangerous game IMO.

You've said he's got no sympathy from you, we get it, a staunch defender of regressive drug policy.

[Sir David Gray]

No. If they did, cannabis would hardly warrant the same punishment as coke, would it? They base it on legality.

I'll say it again, nobody was saying that Conner didn't take a risk, he clearly knew he could get caught out by it. He misjudged the likelyhood of it and he'll be living with that until March 2021.

Nobody in good health 'needs' to use pillows, but if it brings them comfort, relief to certain mental or physical issues or generally makes life more enjoyable without harming others, there's no issue.

You've said he's got no sympathy from you, we get it, a staunch defender of regressive drug policy.

Comparing pillows with cannabis is rather odd. :confused:

[Vault Boy]

Comparing pillows with cannabis is rather odd. :confused:

Saying no healthy person needs to smoke cannabis is rather odd logic. To demonstrate that I applied the same thinking to pillows.

Yes, it is odd, that's the point. No healthy person 'needs' pillows either.

They both serve a harmless utility.

[-Jonesy-]

Comparing pillows with cannabis is rather odd. :confused:

You’ve just not got the right dealer my friend

[Vault Boy]

You’ve just not got the right dealer my friend

My pillow dealer has a great batch of Dreams goose feathers in right now.

[Hermit Crab]

Its legal loads of places. Barely policed anymore at user level.


Where about in the uk is it legal or is it still classed as a class B drug here? :confused: :dunno:

[blackpoolhibs]

This is for me the reason we have so many druggies running around the place, its not so bad, its just a spliff.

Any drug takers should get 10 years even for this, 2nd offenders should have their hands cut off and given life.

Folk will now say drink causes more damage, well that's not really fair because i like a drink.

[Hi Heid Yin]

So can alcohol.

Alcohol related deaths, disease and social breakdown is the scourge of Scotland and dwarfs any statistics related to cannabis use, but that does not equate to there being no sinister/damaging repercussions or consequences of illegal drug use.

[-Jonesy-]

Alcohol related deaths, disease and social breakdown is the scourge of Scotland and dwarfs any statistics related to cannabis use, but that does not equate to there being no sinister/damaging repercussions or consequences of illegal drug use.

Illegal drug use yes, but what about just drug use?

Czech Republic and Portugal effectively legalised all drugs to a degree and have seen huge drops in the cost to health and society in general as a result.

[Sir David Gray]

Saying no healthy person needs to smoke cannabis is rather odd logic. To demonstrate that I applied the same thinking to pillows.

Yes, it is odd, that's the point. No healthy person 'needs' pillows either.

They both serve a harmless utility.

I got the point you were trying to make, sort of, although the "without harming others" comparison is a contentious one considering the effects that cannabis use can have on someone's behaviour.

I would not say that cannabis is always as harmless as you are making it out to be.

[Hibbyradge]

Exactly, the gateway drug myth has been debunked countless times. The only thing cannabis is a direct gateway to is the excessive eating of cereal.



Lightweight.

Peanut butter with banana on toast is the king of munchies.

Three different textures, including one which was gloopy and sticks to the top of your mouth and 2 complimentary flavours.

I haven't had a toke for 10 years maybe, but I can still remember those snacks! :drool:

[Wilson]

My pillow dealer has a great batch of Dreams goose feathers in right now.

Careful mate. That's a gateway pillow to the Hungarian goose down.

[Peevemor]

No. If they did, cannabis would hardly warrant the same punishment as coke, would it? They base it on legality.

I'll say it again, nobody was saying that Conner didn't take a risk, he clearly knew he could get caught out by it. He misjudged the likelyhood of it and he'll be living with that until March 2021.

Nobody in good health 'needs' to use pillows, but if it brings them comfort, relief to certain mental or physical issues or generally makes life more enjoyable without harming others, there's no issue, is there? Having a purely legalistic approach to morality is a very dangerous game IMO.

You've said he's got no sympathy from you, we get it, a staunch defender of regressive drug policy.

I've plenty of pals who use cannabis. I have done so in the past, although it's not something I ever specifically looked to do - I just joined in. It's probably about 5-6 years since I did so, I'm just not that fussed.

To be honest I don't take much interest in drug policies - regressive or not. I don't "do" illegal drugs so I'm not directly affected. There are other causes which I take more to heart.

In saying that, I'm aware that cannabis has therapeutic benefits for people with certain conditions. That's why I said that no 'healthy' person needs to use cannabis.

Your pillow analogy doesn't work at all. Alcohol would have been better.

I like alcohol. I'm having a beer as I type. I might have another as Madame won't be in for another hour or so, so we're eating late.

I know I won't be driving again tonight so a couple of beers is fine. If I was driving I wouldn't have bothered with the beers - I don't need to drink them.

[Frankhfc]

I got the point you were trying to make, sort of, although the "without harming others" comparison is a contentious one considering the effects that cannabis use can have on someone's behaviour.

I would not say that cannabis is always as harmless as you are making it out to be.

It isn't.

It not only alters the state of mind and body when under the influence but it can also lead to long term brain damage. Drugs are a curse on not only users but on society in general just as continous misuse of alcohol is.

I'd advise anyone that asked to steer well clear of cannibis or any other drug for that matter.

[Hi Heid Yin]

Illegal drug use yes, but what about just drug use?

Czech Republic and Portugal effectively legalised all drugs to a degree and have seen huge drops in the cost to health and society in general as a result.

By that logic, if we legalize robbery, burglary, theft, murder and rape, society would enjoy vastly decreased police costs.

Statistics are there to be manipulated by all and sundry, and are open to intepretation/misinterpretation, and are at the end of the day, always agenda-driven.

On these notes I'm off to focus on other, more Hibs-related threads.
Over and out!

[Max_Shah]

A stupidly disproportionate punishment for a completely benign offence. Absolutely absurd.

LOL Wut...

There is no conspiracy going on here.

The legal whataboutery can be reduced thus:

Play stupid games. Win stupid prizes.

The "ban" will almost certainly be reduced on appeal.

Plz no ban :na na:

[Vault Boy]

I got the point you were trying to make, sort of, although the "without harming others" comparison is a contentious one considering the effects that cannabis use can have on someone's behaviour.

I would not say that cannabis is always as harmless as you are making it out to be.

The fact that it's less harmful than sugar, peace lilies and carlsberg is enough for me to be honest. I don't see the value in giving credence to the idea that it's harmful, because for a recreational drug it basically isn't, it certainly shouldn't be criminalised.

That's not to say there wouldn't be long term consequences for its excessive use, but rather that those consequences are no more signifant than for the excessive use of anything, be it paracetamol, beer, orange juice or serloin steak.

FWIW I don't even smoke, I just think this prohibition is really, really stupid.

[jgl07]

Sleep deprived drivers kill more people than people high on weed, this is a nothing point.

Sober drivers kill more people than drunk ones. That doesn’t mean that people would be safer drivers if they were drunk.

[TelaStella]

Ok, maybe a tad. In my line of work we get random med screens for drugs and alcohol and if you're caught with illegal drugs in your system its instant dismissal, thats drummed into us from the first day. Same for footballers, pilots armed forces etc. If you do it, you take the chance of losing your career and sadly he's been caught out.

Finally, I knew it. You’re in the polis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CraigHibee]

Does seem harsh but rules are there to be adhered to

[Vault Boy]

I've plenty of pals who use cannabis. I have done so in the past, although it's not something I ever specifically looked to do - I just joined in. It's probably about 5-6 years since I did so, I'm just not that fussed.

To be honest I don't take much interest in drug policies - regressive or not. I don't "do" illegal drugs so I'm not directly affected. There are other causes which I take more to heart.

In saying that, I'm aware that cannabis has therapeutic benefits for people with certain conditions. That's why I said that no 'healthy' person needs to use cannabis.

Your pillow analogy doesn't work at all. Alcohol would have been better.

I like alcohol. I'm having a beer as I type. I might have another as Madame won't be in for another hour or so, so we're eating late.

I know I won't be driving again tonight so a couple of beers is fine. If I was driving I wouldn't have bothered with the beers - I don't need to drink them.

The alcohol analogy is a great point but it's been done to death. I wanted to show that your point about no healthy person needing to do cannabis could be applied to absolutely anything. If you'd have said no healthy person should want to do cannabis, it'd have been a different response, don't get me wrong. Semantics and aw that.

The rest of what you've said I can't take issue with because it's mostly about you smoking some weed and drinking a beer. :greengrin

[Vault Boy]

Sober drivers kill more people than drunk ones. That doesn’t mean that people would be safer drivers if they were drunk.

Well yeah, people shouldn't drive under the influence. My point was that response really had nothing to do with the crux of the debate.

[Vault Boy]

LOL Wut...

There is no conspiracy going on here.

The legal whataboutery can be reduced thus:

Play stupid games. Win stupid prizes.

The "ban" will almost certainly be reduced on appeal.

Plz no ban :na na:

I didn't say there was a conspiracy. The point of my OP is that the prize is much, much stupider than the game.

[#2 Double Tap]

This is for me the reason we have so many druggies running around the place, its not so bad, its just a spliff.

Any drug takers should get 10 years even for this, 2nd offenders should have their hands cut off and given life.

Folk will now say drink causes more damage, well that's not really fair because i like a drink.

you reminded me of this >>>


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZrrQoME56U

[tamig]

That's a bit unsympathetic.

Is he related to Lewis Stevenson or something? 😜

Why should there be any sympathy? The boy’s been daft and deserves his punishment. All professional sportsmen and women know the score.

[blackpoolhibs]

you reminded me of this >>>


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZrrQoME56U

All joking aside, do we need another legal drug?

Would that not be the start of other drugs being legal, do we really need more of these drugs freely available, should we not be trying to reduce the intake of all drugs, legal and illegal?

[Hermit Crab]

Finally, I knew it. You’re in the polis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Completely wrong.



https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcQ-XcSG-TLEkQwiKXyadHDxRMFO8PiFH3sSqnIzxbd2kDN_BMY9

[#2 Double Tap]

The fact that it's less harmful than sugar, peace lilies and carlsberg is enough for me to be honest. I don't see the value in giving credence to the idea that it's harmful, because for a recreational drug it basically isn't, it certainly shouldn't be criminalised.

That's not to say there wouldn't be long term consequences for its excessive use, but rather that those consequences are no more signifant than for the excessive use of anything, be it paracetamol, beer, orange juice or serloin steak.

FWIW I don't even smoke, I just think this prohibition is really, really stupid.


tell that to the mother who's son has just been admitted to the psychiatric ward with psychosis caused directly from his weed smoking, or another mum who's daughter is now refusing to leave the house because of anxiety and paranoia brought on from smoking too many bongs.:greengrin:greengrin

[basehibby]

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/conner-duthie-former-hibs-youngster-banned-sport-two-years-over-drug-offences-1393137

Tested positive for cannabis therefore has been banned from all sport for 2 years.

Harsh imo, not as if it's a performance enhancer, I understand footballers need to be held to certain standards but it's only a bit green ffs, a lesser punishment would of been more suitable.

Drug laws in this country need looked at.


Totally agree - that is an idiotic reaction born of total ignorance.

1) Cannabis is definitely not a performance enhancing drug for athletes so he was certainly not attempting to cheat in any way.

2) What is the end result of banning this lad from ALL sport - all it means is he's FAR more likely to get into more bad habits having been cut off from the positive influence of sport.

A sensible punishment would have been a much shorter ban (eg - 6 weeks?) with a longer one suspended in addition to some kind of training or counseling. A two year ban is likely to mean he is lost to all competitive sport for life.

Whoever made this decision needs a lifetime ban from positions of influence.

[Vault Boy]

tell that to the mother who's son has just been admitted to the psychiatric ward with psychosis caused directly from his weed smoking, or another mum who's daughter is now refusing to leave the house because of anxiety and paranoia brought on from smoking too many bongs.:greengrin:greengrin

I can't tell if this serious or not because of the smilies, but either way it is a potent example of exactly why prohibition doesn't work.

[#2 Double Tap]

All joking aside, do we need another legal drug?

Would that not be the start of other drugs being legal, do we really need more of these drugs freely available, should we not be trying to reduce the intake of all drugs, legal and illegal?

my opinion is we should legalise every drug, so they can be controlled more effectively, but I do see merit in your point of view and respect it.

[basehibby]

All joking aside, do we need another legal drug?

Would that not be the start of other drugs being legal, do we really need more of these drugs freely available, should we not be trying to reduce the intake of all drugs, legal and illegal?

I think the point is that locking people up or even just giving them a criminal record for minor drug offences is counter productive. It tends to send folk on a downward spiral - likely leading to more drug use rather than less.

[Dashing Bob S]

String ‘em all up I say.

[Cataplana]

There is a major prize for the first person to mention drug dealers on street corners. Honestly some of the views on here are straight out of Reefer Madness, or the Man With the Golden Arm.

What.Harm.Did.The.Lad.Do?

[Hibbyradge]

This is for me the reason we have so many druggies running around the place, its not so bad, its just a spliff.

Any drug takers should get 10 years even for this, 2nd offenders should have their hands cut off and given life.

Folk will now say drink causes more damage, well that's not really fair because i like a drink.

:faf:

Tell it how it is! :aok:

[Hibbyradge]

Alcohol related deaths, disease and social breakdown is the scourge of Scotland and dwarfs any statistics related to cannabis use, but that does not equate to there being no sinister/damaging repercussions or consequences of illegal drug use.

I never said it did.

I said alcohol had the same repercussions and consequences.

Quite probably more.

[Scouse Hibee]

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/conner-duthie-former-hibs-youngster-banned-sport-two-years-over-drug-offences-1393137

Tested positive for cannabis therefore has been banned from all sport for 2 years.

Harsh imo, not as if it's a performance enhancer, I understand footballers need to be held to certain standards but it's only a bit green ffs, a lesser punishment would of been more suitable.

Drug laws in this country need looked at.

No sympathy, he knew the risk and took his chance. Just maybe others will think twice.

[Since452]

Rediculous punishment. Career ending ban for smoking a joint. Deary me.

[Kato]

String ‘em all up I say.Or string 'em all out, whatever floats her boat.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Greenbeard]

No. If they did, cannabis would hardly warrant the same punishment as coke, would it? They base it on legality.

I'll say it again, nobody was saying that Conner didn't take a risk, he clearly knew he could get caught out by it. He misjudged the likelyhood of it and he'll be living with that until March 2021.

Nobody in good health 'needs' to use pillows, but if it brings them comfort, relief to certain mental or physical issues or generally makes life more enjoyable without harming others, there's no issue, is there? Having a purely legalistic approach to morality is a very dangerous game IMO.

You've said he's got no sympathy from you, we get it, a staunch defender of regressive drug policy.
"They base it on legality."
The WADA committee that reviews and updates the list of prohibited substances is made up of eminent sport scientists, medics and pharmacists from all around the world of sport and they discuss this just about every year. They are spliffed...I mean split on cannabis, but the majority favour it remaining banned. But maybe they'll take note of the hibs.net view next time.
"He misjudged the likelyhood of it"
If he is dependent I would dare to suggest that he didn't misjudge anything.

[Vault Boy]

"They base it on legality."
The WADA committee that reviews and updates the list of prohibited substances is made up of eminent sport scientists, medics and pharmacists from all around the world of sport and they discuss this just about every year. They are spliffed...I mean split on cannabis, but the majority favour it remaining banned. But maybe they'll take note of the hibs.net view next time.
"He misjudged the likelyhood of it"
If he is dependent I would dare to suggest that he didn't misjudge anything.

It's UKAD for our sport, isn't? Either way, the point was that clearly having a blanketed punishment for cannabis and cocaine is skewered by their respective legality in the UK, not the social or physiological impact of the two drugs, else the punishment wouldn't be the same.

As for Conner's own relationship with weed, that's for you to speculate, I'm personally not that interested.

[Greenbeard]

It's UKAD for our sport, isn't? Either way, the point was that clearly having a blanketed punishment for cannabis and cocaine is skewered by their respective legality in the UK, not the social or physiological impact of the two drugs, else the punishment wouldn't be the same.

As for Conner's own relationship with weed, that's for you to speculate, I'm personally not that interested.
WADA List and Code applies globally. UKAD just enforce it.
For others to say “they” don’t know what they are doing or have not considered all there is to consider about cannabis use by sportsmen/women just demonstrates immense ignorance.

[jacomo]

A stupidly disproportionate punishment for a completely benign offence. Absolutely absurd.


:agree:

[jacomo]

The law doesn't need to be looked at, because it's illegal? That makes absolutely zero sense.

When something which is less damaging to a person's health than alcohol, cigarettes, sugar and red meat is illegal, there's clearly questions to be asked.

Passively accepting something as righteously true just because it's currently enshrined in law would have us still living in a country where only landlords could vote.

The guy has fallen victim to a deeply unfair element of our justice system. 2 year ban is unbelievably harsh.


Personally I’d end all prohibition, but cannabis being illegal is preposterous. Even America is realising this - why can’t we?

[Baader]

Ridiculously harsh. It is hardly 'performance enhancing' and not like what Garry O was getting up to. Silly but the punishment doesn't fit the crime here.

[Vault Boy]

WADA List and Code applies globally. UKAD just enforce it.
For others to say “they” don’t know what they are doing or have not considered all there is to consider about cannabis use by sportsmen/women just demonstrates immense ignorance.

So a two year ban for cannabis, equivalent to class A drugs, is a scientifically measured punishment and everybody else should just shut up and accept that? Now believing that would be immense ignorance.

WADA create the list of prohibited substances and it's not exactly consistent what national enforcement agencies do to punish it. A two year banning order for cannabinoids is seriously disproportionate. It's about safeguarding athletes and maintaining fair competition, so why aren't alcohol and tobacco on their list? Legality.

Nobody said 'they don't know what they're doing,' folk are well within their right to disagree with the listing of a highly debated banned substance.

[Tricla]

Anybody got any zig zags?

[HendoDelivered]

Harsh.

[cameronw-hfc]

Harsh.

Think it was hash mate.

[Greenbeard]

So a two year ban for cannabis, equivalent to class A drugs, is a scientifically measured punishment and everybody else should just shut up and accept that? Now believing that would be immense ignorance.

WADA create the list of prohibited substances and it's not exactly consistent what national enforcement agencies do to punish it. A two year banning order for cannabinoids is seriously disproportionate. It's about safeguarding athletes and maintaining fair competition, so why aren't alcohol and tobacco on their list? Legality.

Nobody said 'they don't know what they're doing,' folk are well within their right to disagree with the listing of a highly debated banned substance.
Granted, those who decide what should be prohibited, and how these are categorised, are not the same folk who decide what the sanctions should be. It is not a "scientifically measured punishment". What is? But neither has it anything to do with the legality of cannabis in different countries.
I actually agree that two years is harsh for cannabis use (as do some on the List committee) but it's a two-year starting point which can be reduced if a player/athlete can demonstrate "no significant fault" - down to as little as a reprimand. Clearly the judges in this case, who have had all the facts of the case before them (assuming Duthie was full and honest with his evidence), decided there was significant fault. That being the case, their hands are tied by the globally accepted and consistent sanctions applied by the WADA Code. That consistency safeguards athletes across the sporting world and ensures a level playing field for all across all sports and all nations. This is the cornerstone of the WADA Code. There is no going back to a free-for-all where some countries take a more lenient attitude to drugs in sport, including drugs which have different legal status country to country. BUt he did get some leniency in recognition of him admitting his offence. This allowed his two-year sanction to be backdated to the date the sample was collected rather than the date he was charged, so effectively a two-month reduction. Paul Daniels might have something to say about that.

For others, drop the non-performance enhancing aspect of cannabis in this case. It is irrelevant to this case (no mention in the judgement) and echo echo echo there are other criteria for its inclusion on the banned list.

[Scott Allan Key]

Awwwwww mon now

Alcohol and tobacco are both drugs that kill thousands up and down this country every year, both are completely legal and readily available from shops.

Cannabis has never killed anyone. Yet is illegal in this country.

Had Conner been caught drunk smoking a 20 deck of L&B, he might of got the sack but he wouldn't of been banned.

Regardless of your personal opinion on recreational drug use, you can't seriously tell me that's not ridiculous.Cannabis was almost certainly a factor in the psychosis of the terrorist who killed Lee Rigby. I'm playing devil's advocate, as I tend to agree with your wider points, otherwise.

Sent from my LYA-L09 using Tapatalk

[Yorkshire HFC]

No sympathy, he knew the risk and took his chance. Just maybe others will think twice.

It may well be my age, but I can't understand why young athletes do this. They know that drugs, drink, parties etc. won't help them - why don't they put 100% into being the best footballer they can be?

Every club must have teams of people telling them how to maximise their chances of making it - but I guess when you're 16 - 20 you just don't want to hear it.

Or you follow the drinking squad - or Finn Russell etc.

But there's guys in my running club who won't drink for 6 months before their big race - and they're just normal guys who work in an office, with none of the help that a footballer gets.

It's probably my age. Just say no.

[Phil MaGlass]

Bans just right, too many folk especially youngsters think they can get away with anything nowadays. Deserves everything he gets. Fed up hearin hes young, the bans too long, its about time kids in Scotland realise you need to work hard to make it. Nae pity for him or others, and aye its not performance enhancing, but either is alcohol.

[Cataplana]

It may well be my age, but I can't understand why young athletes do this. They know that drugs, drink, parties etc. won't help them - why don't they put 100% into being the best footballer they can be?

Every club must have teams of people telling them how to maximise their chances of making it - but I guess when you're 16 - 20 you just don't want to hear it.

Or you follow the drinking squad - or Finn Russell etc.

But there's guys in my running club who won't drink for 6 months before their big race - and they're just normal guys who work in an office, with none of the help that a footballer gets.

It's probably my age. Just say no.

They dont sound very normal to me, in fact they sound obsessive and really need a bit more balance in their lives.

I'm genuinely curious what possible harm can alcohol do to the body six months before a race? Sounds a bit like an ego trip to me.

[Since90+2]

Alcohol is far far worse for you.

I find people over the age of around 50 very hypocritical when it comes to their ignorance around how bad alcohol is , to themselves and society , but at the same time think every drug is the devil.

[Peevemor]

Alcohol is far far worse for you.

I find people over the age of around 50 very hypocritical when it comes to their ignorance around how bad alcohol is , to themselves and society , but at the same time think every drug is the devil.

No rash generalisations there then...

[Since90+2]

No rash generalisations thee then...

Just my experience in general.

[Peevemor]

Just my experience in general.

You do know that recreational drugs were in use before the millennium?

[calumhibee1]

They dont sound very normal to me, in fact they sound obsessive and really need a bit more balance in their lives.

I'm genuinely curious what possible harm can alcohol do to the body six months before a race? Sounds a bit like an ego trip to me.

The improvements they’d make whilst training would be massively negated by drinking while training. It’s not so much a direct impact on race day, but an impact on how much the 6 months of training will benefit them.

[Cataplana]

Just my experience in general.

I think you need to talk to more people then.

[Cataplana]

The improvements they’d make whilst training would be massively negated by drinking while training. It’s not so much a direct impact on race day, but an impact on how much the 6 months of training will benefit them.

Is there scientific evidence to back this up? I only ask because I work with a guy who cannot go more than four hours without doing a training run. He strikes me as a bit of a fruit loop to be honest, and has the same issues I see in people with other addictions.

[Slim Shady]

Strangely enough they do say petty crimes like theft and drug use go hand in hand. :rolleyes:

[SquashedFrogg]

Strangely enough they do say petty crimes like theft and drug use go hand in hand. :rolleyes:

They also say that an unregulated drug trade goes hand in hand with serious organised crime.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Would everybody still have the same opinions, if this lad was still in our first team and running out in the colours every Saturday? Not really sure that the legalities of cannabis really apply?

[JeMeSouviens]

Why are cannabinoids on the WADA Prohibited List?
For something to be added to the WADA Prohibited List, it must meet two of the three inclusion criteria: a) it poses a health risk to athletes b) it has the potential to enhance performance and c) it violates the spirit of sport.

In 2011, WADA published a paper in Sports Medicine discussing the reasons marijuana and cannabinoids meet the criteria. Below are excerpts from this publication that address the three criteria:

“Athletes who smoke cannabis or Spice in-competition potentially endanger themselves and others because of increased risk taking, slower reaction times and poor executive function or decision making.”
“Based on current animal and human studies as well as on interviews with athletes and information from the field, cannabis can be performance enhancing for some athletes and sports disciplines.”
“Use of illicit drugs that are harmful to health and that may have performance-enhancing properties is not consistent with the athlete as a role model for young people around the world”.
In 2019, WADA exempted cannabidiol (CBD) from this category. However, all other cannabinoids, whether natural or synthetic, are prohibited in-competition. Even though CBD is permitted at all times, this article explains the legal and anti-doping issues that continue to make these products risky for athletes.

https://www.usada.org/athletes/substances/marijuana-faq/

[Cataplana]

Would everybody still have the same opinions, if this lad was still in our first team and running out in the colours every Saturday? Not really sure that the legalities of cannabis really apply?

I can think of a player who was rumoured to be a regular dope smoker. He scored the sixth goal in one of our greatest victories.

Would people who say cannabis gives an unfair advantage be prepared to say his contributions to the team should be ignored. Perhaps the points should be voided.

[Peevemor]

I can think of a player who was rumoured to be a regular dope smoker. He scored the sixth goal in one of our greatest victories.

Would people who say cannabis gives an unfair advantage be prepared to say his contributions to the team should be ignored. Perhaps the points should be voided.

Not on the basis of rumours.

[Cataplana]

Not on the basis of rumours.

Say it could be proven to be true, what then?

[Peevemor]

Say it could be proven to be true, what then?

Then I would accept that rules are rules.

[Cataplana]

Then I would accept that rules are rules.

Fair enough, but we all know it's not a rumour. Just as we all know the rules make no sense at all.

It's against the law to drive dangerously, yet football had no problem with allowing players who have done that to keep on playing.

Gambling on your own team is wrong, but the authorities are very supportive of managers and players who go down that road.

Sometimes the law is an ass.

[Anthony Soprano]

Bans just right, too many folk especially youngsters think they can get away with anything nowadays. Deserves everything he gets. Fed up hearin hes young, the bans too long, its about time kids in Scotland realise you need to work hard to make it. Nae pity for him or others, and aye its not performance enhancing, but either is alcohol.

Ridiculous, if anything footballers lifestyles these days are far superior to days gone by.

Cruyff smoked 20 cigarettes a day and is one of the all time greats, guess what killed him? Guess what's also legal?

[Peevemor]

Fair enough, but we all know it's not a rumour. Just as we all know the rules make no sense at all.

It's against the law to drive dangerously, yet football had no problem with allowing players who have done that to keep on playing.

Gambling on your own team is wrong, but the authorities are very supportive of managers and players who go down that road.

Sometimes the law is an ass.

I don't disagreee with any of that, but the rules are what they are.

Like most people I break rules all the time - speeding, just a wee bit, for example. There are stretches of road that I use almost every day where I think the limit is too low. If I go too fast and get caught and fined then I'll accept that - I know the risk.

If driving 1mph over the limit meant an automatic 2 year ban, yes that would be extremely harsh, but you can be sure I wouldn't do it.

[EI255]

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/conner-duthie-former-hibs-youngster-banned-sport-two-years-over-drug-offences-1393137

Tested positive for cannabis therefore has been banned from all sport for 2 years.

Harsh imo, not as if it's a performance enhancer, I understand footballers need to be held to certain standards but it's only a bit green ffs, a lesser punishment would of been more suitable.

Drug laws in this country need looked at.How come you feel its harsh when laws are already in place for this, and have been for years?

Players know. Fans should know too.

Sent from my LG-H840 using Tapatalk

[EI255]

Its an illegal drug. Kids look up to sports men and women for inspiration. He knew what he was doing.

Drug laws don't need looked at. If its illegal don't do it simple as that, especially if your career depends on you being drug free.Totally!

Sent from my LG-H840 using Tapatalk

[Cataplana]

I don't disagreee with any of that, but the rules are what they are.

Like most people I break rules all the time - speeding, just a wee bit, for example. There are stretches of road that I use almost every day where I think the limit is too low. If I go too fast and get caught and fined then I'll accept that - I know the risk.

If driving 1mph over the limit meant an automatic 2 year ban, yes that would be extremely harsh, but you can be sure I wouldn't do it.

I think it might make sense for a review of drug testing rules. I don't think this decision makes any sense as most of the kids who look up to these sportsmen will know the punishment isn't fair.

If anything it could drive more youngsters away from sport if they feel that the people running it are idiots.

[Anthony Soprano]

How come you feel its harsh when laws are already in place for this, and have been for years?

Players know. Fans should know too.

Sent from my LG-H840 using Tapatalk

Again, I'm not saying he shouldn't of got the ban or that he wouldn't of known the consequences.

I'm saying that in this day in age it's ridiculous that marijuana is still prohibited by such draconian laws.

The rules are clear and it's 100% his own fault he's got the ban, I agree.

The point I'm trying to make is that the laws in this country regarding cannabis use are severely outdated, as is a lot of people's perception of it. This thread is proof of that.

[Yorkshire HFC]

They dont sound very normal to me, in fact they sound obsessive and really need a bit more balance in their lives.

I'm genuinely curious what possible harm can alcohol do to the body six months before a race? Sounds a bit like an ego trip to me.

It's not an ego trip. They just run 6 days a week and if they drink then they don't sleep properly, feel rubbish, don't eat properly and are dehydrated - so they can't train properly.

The sort of stuff you'd think a footballer would know about.

[silverhibee]

It may well be my age, but I can't understand why young athletes do this. They know that drugs, drink, parties etc. won't help them - why don't they put 100% into being the best footballer they can be?

Every club must have teams of people telling them how to maximise their chances of making it - but I guess when you're 16 - 20 you just don't want to hear it.

Or you follow the drinking squad - or Finn Russell etc.

But there's guys in my running club who won't drink for 6 months before their big race - and they're just normal guys who work in an office, with none of the help that a footballer gets.

It's probably my age. Just say no.


They don't sound like normal guys, 6 months without a drink for one race, strange.

[Yorkshire HFC]

Is there scientific evidence to back this up? I only ask because I work with a guy who cannot go more than four hours without doing a training run. He strikes me as a bit of a fruit loop to be honest, and has the same issues I see in people with other addictions.

I agree - running / exercise addiction is a problem for a lot of people.

But for most people, it's just a hobby and isn't an issue.

[Yorkshire HFC]

They don't sound like normal guys, 6 months without a drink for one race, strange.

Lots of people don't drink - it's not strange at all.

[Cataplana]

It's not an ego trip. They just run 6 days a week and if they drink then they don't sleep properly, feel rubbish, don't eat properly and are dehydrated - so they can't train properly.

The sort of stuff you'd think a footballer would know about.

There is an alternative argument that they shouldn't train for six months solid, at that level. I believe professional athletes factor in lie weeks, for example. Their regime sounds like they will end up over trained for one race.

As a side note, it's interesting that we all define normality as what we personally think is the right thing to do.

What detrimental effects would occasional cannabis use have on an athlete, and how would they balance out against the benefits such as relaxation of mind and body?


I agree - running / exercise addiction is a problem for a lot of people.

But for most people, it's just a hobby and isn't an issue.

A bit like Cannabis use then?

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

I can think of a player who was rumoured to be a regular dope smoker. He scored the sixth goal in one of our greatest victories.

Would people who say cannabis gives an unfair advantage be prepared to say his contributions to the team should be ignored. Perhaps the points should be voided.

Not overly sure that is the point. Whether cannabis is legal or illegal, doesn't really impact on whether a professional athlete should partake or not?

[Yorkshire HFC]

There is an alternative argument that they shouldn't train for six months solid, at that level. I believe professional athletes factor in lie weeks, for example. Their regime sounds like they will end up over trained for one race.

As a side note, it's interesting that we all define normality as what we personally think is the right thing to do.

What detrimental effects would occasional cannabis use have on an athlete, and how would they balance out against the benefits such as relaxation of mind and body?



A bit like Cannabis use then?

All training programmes will build in heavy weeks and recovery weeks.

Everyone needs a hobby - there's more to life than work.

I don't know much about drugs - although this doesn't stop me feeling that they're no good for athletes.

[Cataplana]

All training programmes will build in heavy weeks and recovery weeks.

Everyone needs a hobby - there's more to life than work.

I don't know much about drugs - although this doesn't stop me feeling that they're no good for athletes.

That's hardly the basis to make a judgement. Not a pop at you, I just think it highlights the lack of joined up thinking on the subject.

I feel a two year ban is not the way to help recovery if there is a problem. As I said, if someone reports gambling problems, which could impact much more directly on sporting integrity, they are supported.

I'd be more inclined to agree with the ban if it was a drug that enhances performance. It just doesn't make sense to me.

[Greenbeard]

Again, I'm not saying he shouldn't of got the ban or that he wouldn't of known the consequences.

I'm saying that in this day in age it's ridiculous that marijuana is still prohibited by such draconian laws.

The rules are clear and it's 100% his own fault he's got the ban, I agree.

The point I'm trying to make is that the laws in this country regarding cannabis use are severely outdated, as is a lot of people's perception of it. This thread is proof of that.
Maybe so but irrelevant as far as Duthie's sporting ban goes under the current anti-doping rules. See previous posts and JeMeSouviens above.
One of the current problems is that when the global rules on sanctions (in the WADA Code) were last changed in 2015, all references to whether the substance was "intended to enhance performance" were removed. This was because that factor was leading to considerable discrepancy in sanctions case to case depending on who was judging on the matter and imposing the sanction, with even different top-of-the-tree arbitrators from the Court of Arbitration for Sport taking different views. So currently if it is on the banned list and found in your sample, that is it no matter whether you intended to enhance your performance or not.
However, when the new WADA Code come into effect from 2021 (after a 3-year review process) there will be a newly defined category "substances of abuse".
"If the Athlete can establish that any ingestion or use occurred Out-of-Competition and was unrelated to sport performance, then the periodof Ineligibility shall be three months ineligibility." And this can be reduced to one-month if the athlete undertakes a treatment programme, all as long as it is a first offence.
These new rules were agreed 25 November i.e. before the decision on Duthie was finalised, but they don't come into effect 1 Jan 2021, c.10 weeks before Duthie's two-year ban ends. So yes, his two-year ban is harsh.
There is a general principle in law - can't recall what it is called - anyone? - that where a more lenient law has been agreed, but is not yet effective, you can get the benefit of the new more lenient law. But there is no mention of this in the written decision.

[whiskyhibby]

A stupidly disproportionate punishment for a completely benign offence. Absolutely absurd.


I have to agree, i wouldn’t think cannabis enhances performance, wonder if the same would apply to an old firm player........

[Betty Boop]

you reminded me of this >>>


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZrrQoME56U

Haha brilliant !