Nadal: 2010 vs. 2013

[Kieran]

Front, you're basically trolling now. You posted the WADA site as if it contained proof that Rafa did something wrong.

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

The other stuff is irrelevant because it only shows that when one door closes to you, you barge down another one. Little things like facts and proof and regulations etc, mean nothing to you...

 

[Front242]

Front, you're basically trolling now. You posted the WADA site as if it contained proof that Rafa did something wrong.

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

The other stuff is irrelevant because it only shows that when one door closes to you, you barge down another one. Little things like facts and proof and regulations etc, mean nothing to you...

Should me the TUE his doctor sent them and sure I will. Without that you have nothing. So see the little facts and proof as you say you have none of either. Touché.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Front, you're basically trolling now. You posted the WADA site as if it contained proof that Rafa did something wrong.

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

The other stuff is irrelevant because it only shows that when one door closes to you, you barge down another one. Little things like facts and proof and regulations etc, mean nothing to you...

Kirean..Front has been trolling for more than a year now.. All have called him on it , especially , You and I

 

[Front242]

Front, you're basically trolling now. You posted the WADA site as if it contained proof that Rafa did something wrong.

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

The other stuff is irrelevant because it only shows that when one door closes to you, you barge down another one. Little things like facts and proof and regulations etc, mean nothing to you...

Kirean..Front has been trolling for more than a year now.. All have called him on it , especially , You and I

Yeah and of course that means it's true lol. Good one guys. The hilarity on display today is well, hilarious! I mentioned Spanish courts being pretty far from ethical which is 100% true and Kieran comes back with I'm trolling. You're both a joke and once for all screw this thread 'cos I've better things to do with my time and your respective hypocrisy replying that things you simply don't like to hear/read are trolling 'cos you've no better answer is a priceless example of internet forum failure.

 

[Kieran]

Front, you're basically trolling now. You posted the WADA site as if it contained proof that Rafa did something wrong.

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

The other stuff is irrelevant because it only shows that when one door closes to you, you barge down another one. Little things like facts and proof and regulations etc, mean nothing to you...

Should me the TUE his doctor sent them and sure I will. Without that you have nothing. So see the little facts and proof as you say you have none of either. Touché.

Nice how you didn't even answer the question. WADA doesn't back you up, and you're the one who posted their site.

Can't even believe you when you say you're done, buddy... :nono

 

[Ricardo]

Front, you're basically trolling now. You posted the WADA site as if it contained proof that Rafa did something wrong.

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

The other stuff is irrelevant because it only shows that when one door closes to you, you barge down another one. Little things like facts and proof and regulations etc, mean nothing to you...

Should me the TUE his doctor sent them and sure I will. Without that you have nothing. So see the little facts and proof as you say you have none of either. Touché.

Nice how you didn't even answer the question. WADA doesn't back you up, and you're the one who posted their site.

Can't even believe you when you say you're done, buddy... :nono

honesty and integrity mean nothing to you, so who are you to criticise others now... you are simply in no position, especially being this provocative.

 

[Moxie]

Front, you're basically trolling now. You posted the WADA site as if it contained proof that Rafa did something wrong.

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

The other stuff is irrelevant because it only shows that when one door closes to you, you barge down another one. Little things like facts and proof and regulations etc, mean nothing to you...

Kirean..Front has been trolling for more than a year now.. All have called him on it , especially , You and I

Yeah and of course that means it's true lol. Good one guys. The hilarity on display today is well, hilarious! I mentioned Spanish courts being pretty far from ethical which is 100% true and Kieran comes back with I'm trolling. You're both a joke and once for all screw this thread 'cos I've better things to do with my time and your respective hypocrisy replying that things you simply don't like to hear/read are trolling 'cos you've no better answer is a priceless example of internet forum failure.

Front, Kieran has read the link that you posted, and shown you the exception in the ruling. Just address that point. And no, you don't have room to say that the Spanish courts are far from 100% ethical, just because you disagree (as I do) with a specific ruling. Beyond that, neither of us is an expert in Spanish judicial law, so I wouldn't make sweeping assumptions. And it's not hypocrisy to debate the material that you present. He did read it.

 

[Front242]

Front, you're basically trolling now. You posted the WADA site as if it contained proof that Rafa did something wrong.

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

The other stuff is irrelevant because it only shows that when one door closes to you, you barge down another one. Little things like facts and proof and regulations etc, mean nothing to you...

Should me the TUE his doctor sent them and sure I will. Without that you have nothing. So see the little facts and proof as you say you have none of either. Touché.

Nice how you didn't even answer the question. WADA doesn't back you up, and you're the one who posted their site.

Can't even believe you when you say you're done, buddy... :nono

I did answer it but yet again neither yourself or Moxie read my post actually instead of the other way round. He needs a TUE (Therapeutic Use Exemption) to use PRP and until I see it on the desk in front of me none of you can prove he's been legally allowed use PRP and not simply top officials brushing things aside for a top player which naturally is a huge loophole.

 

[Front242]

Front, you're basically trolling now. You posted the WADA site as if it contained proof that Rafa did something wrong.

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

The other stuff is irrelevant because it only shows that when one door closes to you, you barge down another one. Little things like facts and proof and regulations etc, mean nothing to you...

Kirean..Front has been trolling for more than a year now.. All have called him on it , especially , You and I

Yeah and of course that means it's true lol. Good one guys. The hilarity on display today is well, hilarious! I mentioned Spanish courts being pretty far from ethical which is 100% true and Kieran comes back with I'm trolling. You're both a joke and once for all screw this thread 'cos I've better things to do with my time and your respective hypocrisy replying that things you simply don't like to hear/read are trolling 'cos you've no better answer is a priceless example of internet forum failure.

Front, Kieran has read the link that you posted, and shown you the exception in the ruling. Just address that point. And no, you don't have room to say that the Spanish courts are far from 100% ethical, just because you disagree (as I do) with a specific ruling. Beyond that, neither of us is an expert in Spanish judicial law, so I wouldn't make sweeping assumptions. And it's not hypocrisy to debate the material that you present. He did read it.

No one needs to be an expert in Spanish judicial law to witness a blatant cover up. The judge ordered the blood bags be destroyed. Don't be so blind and quick to defend everyone and everything. Some things can't be defended. That Fuentes court case was a disgrace to Spain.

 

[Kieran]

I did answer it but yet again neither yourself or Moxie read my post actually instead of the other way round. He needs a TUE (Therapeutic Use Exemption) to use PRP and until I see it on the desk in front of me none of you can prove he's been legally allowed use PRP and not simply top officials brushing things aside for a top player which naturally is a huge loophole.

No, you didn't answer it. Now, you've dragged this out long enough, no? And it is trolling, and you know I enjoy your posts, but when it comes to Rafa, you troll.

I mean, firstly there were 4 MTO's - then there weren't.

The WADA regulations were cited by you show that Rafa had broken the rules - except they didn't say what you thought they did.

Now, asking to see his TUE is just being evasive and stupid. So here's the question you avoided answering, have another go:

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

 

[Front242]

I did answer it but yet again neither yourself or Moxie read my post actually instead of the other way round. He needs a TUE (Therapeutic Use Exemption) to use PRP and until I see it on the desk in front of me none of you can prove he's been legally allowed use PRP and not simply top officials brushing things aside for a top player which naturally is a huge loophole.

No, you didn't answer it. Now, you've dragged this out long enough, no? And it is trolling, and you know I enjoy your posts, but when it comes to Rafa, you troll.

I mean, firstly there were 4 MTO's - then there weren't.

The WADA regulations were cited by you show that Rafa had broken the rules - except they didn't say what you thought they did.

Now, asking to see his TUE is just being evasive and stupid. So here's the question you avoided answering, have another go:

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

You failed to read it again. Are you blind? Yes, it can be used but only with a TUE and you have no way of knowing if he genuinely got one or if they conveniently have different rules for different people and it certainly wouldn't be the first time they did. Just look at Agassi. READ WHAT I READ! And stop telling me I haven't read or answered your damn question 'cos I did both And no, it's not trolling when someone posts something you didn't read or answer properly or simply dislike to read and also the first thing you said was trolling was in reply to me saying the Fuentes case was a disgrace. The destroying of evidence ruling by the Spanish judge most certainly WAS a disgrace and so was your reply that "this was trolling."

 

[Kieran]

No, Front - again, you're avoiding the question. Here it is:

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

Here's your reply:

Should me the TUE his doctor sent them and sure I will. Without that you have nothing. So see the little facts and proof as you say you have none of either. Touché.

That's unrelated to the question.

Now, I can see why you evade it, because you cited WADA, then when you're wrong there, you wriggle onto another hook, and ask to see a TUE which would obviously be confidentially part of WADA files.

This is a serious issue, my friend, that's why I'm insisting. You can't just go throwing accusations about without foundation. You did the same thing last summer when you blackened Monfils by saying he was serving a silent ban after Wimbledon, only to blame a dodgy troll-site you frequent when he showed up at the US Open.

You can't just be so loose with words, when it comes to peoples reputations. That's the perfect definition of trolling, right there...

 

[Front242]

No, Front - again, you're avoiding the question. Here it is:

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

Here's your reply:

Should me the TUE his doctor sent them and sure I will. Without that you have nothing. So see the little facts and proof as you say you have none of either. Touché.

That's unrelated to the question.

Now, I can see why you evade it, because you cited WADA, then when you're wrong there, you wriggle onto another hook, and ask to see a TUE which would obviously be confidentially part of WADA files.

This is a serious issue, my friend, that's why I'm insisting. You can't just go throwing accusations about without foundation. You did the same thing last summer when you blackened Monfils by saying he was serving a silent ban after Wimbledon, only to blame a dodgy troll-site you frequent when he showed up at the US Open.

You can't just be so loose with words, when it comes to peoples reputations. That's the perfect definition of trolling, right there...

How the hell have I evaded it by telling you he needs a TUE and you can't prove he ever got one? I'm not wrong in anything I've said regarding his need for this examption and you're the one trying to weasel your way out of the issue of finding out if he ever got one and you probably won't find the answer. Also I don't frequent the so called dodgy troll site about Monfils. I saw it on tennis.com from a passing comment by someone on and googled it. The only serious issue here is your inability to read my answer and going round in circles like a chicken with no head.

 

[Kieran]

How the f**k have I evaded it by telling you he needs a TUE and you can't prove he ever got one? I'm not wrong in anything I've said regarding his need for this examption and you're the one trying to weasel your way out of the issue of finding out if he ever got one and you probably won't find the answer. Also I don't frequent the so called dodgy troll site about Monfils. I saw it on tennis.com from a passing comment by someone on and googled it. The only serious issue here is your inability to read my answer and going round in circles like a chicken with no head.

If you were in a court, you'd be banged up for contempt by now. You're not answering the question.

The question is not about Rafa - it's about WADA.

You keep bringing up stupid red herrings like his own TUE, as if that would be in the public domain. It wouldn't be, so don't be hiding behind it. And please - even if it was produced, you wouldn't believe it, so at least try be consistent, if you can't be honest.

You posted the WADA regulations and prohibitions - the question relates to them.

Want to try again?

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

 

[Front242]

How the hell have I evaded it by telling you he needs a TUE and you can't prove he ever got one? I'm not wrong in anything I've said regarding his need for this examption and you're the one trying to weasel your way out of the issue of finding out if he ever got one and you probably won't find the answer. Also I don't frequent the so called dodgy troll site about Monfils. I saw it on tennis.com from a passing comment by someone on and googled it. The only serious issue here is your inability to read my answer and going round in circles like a chicken with no head.

If you were in a court, you'd be banged up for contempt by now. You're not answering the question.

The question is not about Rafa - it's about WADA.

You keep bringing up stupid red herrings like his own TUE, as if that would be in the public domain. It wouldn't be, so don't be hiding behind it. And please - even if it was produced, you wouldn't believe it, so at least try be consistent, if you can't be honest.

You posted the WADA regulations and prohibitions - the question relates to them.

Want to try again?

Would you agree with me that the WADA rules contained conditions and exemptions, and that it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them? Would you accept that much at least, since it comes from WADA themselves?

You should go back and read where I said YES! I said yes but only with a TUE. See your first line? That YES! was the answer which I already answered.

 

[Kieran]

Thank you, but "Yes" is the only answer you needed.

Adding the other stuff is irrelevant because that's in the question: "it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them."

So adding Rafa to your answer was just a red herring because the TUE wouldn't be in the public domain - and you must know this - and even if it was, you wouldn't believe it. You'd think there was a cover up.

So, given that the website you linked as proof that Rafa was cheating actually shows that there are exemptions which sportsmen can legally benefit from, are you willing to admit that it's possible that Rafa may have benefited from an exemption?

Just "may have", let's take baby steps first, but this is very important, as I say: you blackened Monfils - and it wasn't tennis.com, you said it was another forum - and you constantly make snide innuendos about Rafa, without realising that the same baseless accusations could be thrown at Federer, Djokovic, and anybody else...

 

[Front242]

Thank you, but "Yes" is the only answer you needed.

Adding the other stuff is irrelevant because that's in the question: "it's possible that sportsmen could use PRP if the conditions and exemptions apply to them."

So adding Rafa to your answer was just a red herring because the TUE wouldn't be in the public domain - and you must know this - and even if it was, you wouldn't believe it. You'd think there was a cover up.

So, given that the website you linked as proof that Rafa was cheating actually shows that there are exemptions which sportsmen can legally benefit from, are you willing to admit that it's possible that Rafa may have benefited from an exemption?

Just "may have", let's take baby steps first, but this is very important, as I say: you blackened Monfils - and it wasn't tennis.com, you said it was another forum - and you constantly make snide innuendos about Rafa, without realising that the same baseless accusations could be thrown at Federer, Djokovic, and anybody else...

Yes was enough and yet you still hadn't the power of reading enough to read the one small three letter word without multiple follow on repetitive posts?! Look, of course he could get an exemption but you're also conveniently brushing aside the possibility that the top players have had things hidden for years and I've already mentioned how they protected Agassi so maybe he actually doesn't have any exemption either and it's a case of different rules for different people.

I didn't blacken Monfils, he's already black. Next.

There are just too many coincidences about Nadal but you seem to think there's an answer for everything thrown around about him when you actually have no more concrete proof of anything than I do but yet that makes me a troll 'cos you don't like controversy. Cool. Is that how it works? As simple as I'm right, he's my player and you're wrong. I finally get it!

Now for a taste of your own medicine of repeating stuff over and over, but since we didn't get any answer from you except that I'm a troll for bringing it up, how do think the Spanish courts handled the Fuentes' case? The last time I mentioned it being a blatant cover up by destroying the evidence the best you could come up with was a gem of a comeback that I was a troll! That's a whole lot of defense for a blatantly shambolic court case and it only resulted in me being labelled a troll for no reason.

 

[Kieran]

Buddy, you hate Rafa, that much is well known, and when it comes to him, you are trolling. Always, even going back to the time when you said you read something in his autobiography - that wasn't there. :nono

You make up stuff all the time about him, and it's always just examples of your prejudice and hatred.

You're bringing Fuentes into this because he's Spanish, and Rafa is Spanish...therefore?

The Fuentes case was despicable, but that has nothing to do with Rafa. You only bring these things up as red herrings to deflect attention away from all the other stuff you brought up in this thread that were blatantly and obviously false - and all of them prejudicial to Nadal.

You should be more responsible, and yeah, it's a good joke about Monfils, but the fact remains, you just tossed it into a thread, a gossip-mongering piece of unsubstantiated nonsense, without regard for the man's reputation.

I wonder would you ever attack Federer in the same way - unsubstantiated and prejudicial?

I think that when it comes to making allegations, you should follow a wise policy and leave it - until you have hard and irrefutable evidence, because otherwise, you're only leaving yourself open to the obvious conclusions being drawn... :nono

 

[Front242]

Buddy, you hate Rafa, that much is well known, and when it comes to him, you are trolling. Always, even going back to the time when you said you read something in his autobiography - that wasn't there. :nono

You make up stuff all the time about him, and it's always just examples of your prejudice and hatred.

You're bringing Fuentes into this because he's Spanish, and Rafa is Spanish...therefore?

The Fuentes case was despicable, but that has nothing to do with Rafa. You only bring these things up as red herrings to deflect attention away from all the other stuff you brought up in this thread that were blatantly and obviously false - and all of them prejudicial to Nadal.

You should be more responsible, and yeah, it's a good joke about Monfils, but the fact remains, you just tossed it into a thread, a gossip-mongering piece of unsubstantiated nonsense, without regard for the man's reputation.

I wonder would you ever attack Federer in the same way - unsubstantiated and prejudicial?

I think that when it comes to making allegations, you should follow a wise policy and leave it - until you have hard and irrefutable evidence, because otherwise, you're only leaving yourself open to the obvious conclusions being drawn... :nono

If I heard a rumour on more than one forum with people claiming they had links to any top player failing a test I would post it actually even if it was Federer. Case in point I like Monfils and posted what was only a rumour but had circulated at the time on many forums and at the time we had two cases with Troicki and Cilic in a short period of time and it seemed all hell was breaking loose and we were finally getting positive action from the testers actually doing their job properly. Many people who work at the tennis camps of top players have a lot of juicy info believe me. We'll likely have to wait many years after the current players have retired before anything will surface and it may never happen but it has in the past (Agassi) and in other sports such as cycling and my hope is it will in tennis too. The thread is most definitely not a "gossip-mongering piece of unsubstantiated nonsense". You decided to make it all about Nadal actually and not me.

I actually made much more of a case for Errani and Ferrer since they've worked with a known dirty blood doping doctor and there's absolutely no reason to work for such a doctor unless you plan to avail of his services. Plus who the hell gets fitter at 30+ than when they were 25? There's the nonsense part but the blind people will choose to remain blind. And again I don't make up loads of stuff about Nadal and never have. I mentioned 4 MTOs by mistake in this thread but so what? It was 4 calls of the trainer, one of which was a MTO at a totally dubious time. Big deal. Get over it. I was up late typing that and that was the only thing you successfully managed to counter in the whole thread regarding my "trolling"!

 

[Kieran]

Your "trolling" is making up stuff (MTO's) and then when it's shown to be false, going off and posting other stuff (WADA link), and when you find that doesn't support your argument, you throw yourself onto another equally prejudicial and insubstantial hook. All this is related to Nadal - you don't troll on other stuff, obviously, or I wouldn't bother replying to this thread.

You just shouldn't post about drugs in sports because you're like a gossip monger. It's unfair to accuse players of cheating, or repeat snide gossips like the ones about Monfils, without any evidence. It makes your whole case look incredible.

Are any top tennis players using drugs? Unfortunately, it's not impossible, but only a fool would accuse one player who he hates rabidly, while ignoring the others.

Anyhow, this thread has run its course for me. I felt it necessary to reply because lurkers out there might have believed that Rafa had done something which WADA prohibited, when in fact their rules and prohibitions are more nuanced than that.

And though you can't be trusted when you say it, believe me now: I'm done with this thread.

I have limited time to post before I sign off for Wimbo and this one has being dragged out too long...