Conner Duthie 2 year ban

**Slim Shady** · 12-02-2020 08:40 AM

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

**SquashedFrogg** · 12-02-2020 08:50 AM

Originally Posted by Slim Shady

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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

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

***NORTHERNHIBBY*** · 12-02-2020 09:12 AM

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** · 12-02-2020 09:22 AM

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/subst...marijuana-faq/

**~~Cataplana~~** · 12-02-2020 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by NORTHERNHIBBY

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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~~** · 12-02-2020 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by Cataplana

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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~~** · 12-02-2020 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by Peevemor

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not on the basis of rumours.

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

**~~Peevemor~~** · 12-02-2020 09:36 AM

Originally Posted by Cataplana

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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

Then I would accept that rules are rules.

**~~Cataplana~~** · 12-02-2020 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by Peevemor

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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** · 12-02-2020 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by Phil MaGlass

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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~~** · 12-02-2020 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by Cataplana

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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~~** · 12-02-2020 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by Anthony Soprano

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.c...fences-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~~** · 12-02-2020 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by Hermit Crab

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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~~** · 12-02-2020 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by Peevemor

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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** · 12-02-2020 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by EI255

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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** · 12-02-2020 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by Cataplana

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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*** · 12-02-2020 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by Yorkshire HFC

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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** · 12-02-2020 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by Cataplana

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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** · 12-02-2020 11:27 AM

Originally Posted by silverhibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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~~** · 12-02-2020 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by Yorkshire HFC

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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?

Originally Posted by Yorkshire HFC

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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*** · 12-02-2020 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by Cataplana

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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** · 12-02-2020 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by Cataplana

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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~~** · 12-02-2020 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by Yorkshire HFC

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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** · 12-02-2020 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by Anthony Soprano

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.