Trust in sport fading - Murray

[sid]

Hi guys what's your views on what Murray has said?

British number one Andy Murray has said tennis should invest more money in anti-doping and believes trust in sport is "fading".

"As a sport we could invest more money," said the Briton ahead of Sunday's ATP World Tour Finals. "Prize money is so high there's no reason for us not to have as perfect as possible a process.

"I do think that the more money that's invested gives you a better chance of catching the cheats and also gaining the trust of the public, which I think across sport in general is fading.

"It seems like every week something new is coming out across a variety of sports. I'm just hoping tennis can remain as clean as possible.

"This year I've been tested more than ever before, but to be honest it's getting to the stage where that doesn't even matter. Lance Armstrong was most tested athlete on the planet... it doesn't necessarily guarantee anything."

 

[Front242]

My thoughts are he is obviously saying the right thing but 110% his team tell him what to say 'cos deep down here are his own thoughts pre-Armstrong being disgraced (see below). Childish and the completely wrong attitude. Someone on his team clearly told him to grow up because complaining about doping controls makes you look extremely poor. On the other hand, only changing your tune in light of a major scandal is an attempt to divert attention away from yourself. Of course you need to right your wrongs if you made dumb comments before as he has.

https://twitter.com/andy_murray/status/15793981339

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/feb/06/tennis-andy-murray-anti-doping

 

[Kirijax]

I agree with what he is saying of course. With all the money that is available and at stake, there should be a better system. No question. You don't need a team of coaches to tell you to say something that obvious if you really care about being honest.

Both of those examples you posted are at least five years old. We have to remember that a lot of these guys come up so young, they grow up in the spotlight and everything they say isn't always what they believe. They are just in the process of trying to figure it out themselves. Murray is one of the more vocal guys at the top of tennis and his comments have provided fans with plenty of amusement over the years. They have occasionally got himself in trouble as well. Got to him some slack a bit.

 

[Front242]

Sorry, not a hope. Roger Federer has been vocally pro testing for years before the Armstrong debacle and has never backtracked on any comments like this. For years he has wanted them to keep samples for 8 years. Both Murray and Nadal have done the reverse, they've always shown their distain for testing until a major scandal came out and then of course they have to change their tunes. Rather, people should be asking themselves why exactly that is.

 

[Front242]

^ and btw you nailed it here with your comment below:

"they grow up in the spotlight and everything they say isn't always what they believe."

^ This was entirely my point. What they're saying now is not what they believe, it's what they've been told to say, to divert attention away from their previously dumb comments because to protest against doping is clearly not a good image to put out there. Especially when your game is centered around your fitness and power.

 

[Kirijax]

^ and btw you nailed it here with your comment below:

"they grow up in the spotlight and everything they say isn't always what they believe."

^ This was entirely my point. What they're saying now is not what they believe, it's what they've been told to say, to divert attention away from their previously dumb comments because to protest against doping is clearly not a good image to put out there. Especially when your game is centered around your fitness and power.

Yeah, ok. I'll leave you to your speculations, guesses and assumptions then.

 

[Kieran]

Sorry, not a hope. Roger Federer has been vocally pro testing for years before the Armstrong debacle and has never backtracked on any comments like this. For years he has wanted them to keep samples for 8 years. Both Murray and Nadal have done the reverse, they've always shown their distain for testing until a major scandal came out and then of course they have to change their tunes. Rather, people should be asking themselves why exactly that is.

When Federer was president of the ATP players council from 2008-2014, did he make any official noise in this regard? This is not a rhetorical question...

 

[Front242]

And did Nadal, Murray or anyone else ask the ATP to keep samples for 8 years WAY before the Armstrong scandal? The answer is no. He's done way more than these two who only whinged about the doping controls for years till a big scandal came out and suddenly they want to be looking like saints asking for more testing. Spot the difference.

 

[Great Hands]

I'm not jumping to any conclusions about anybody. Anybody could be innocent or guilty.

However, I don't see what is so strange in Murray's comments. If you weren't taking any drugs, and didn't think of it as being a major problem in the sport, you'd be much more inclined to see these processes as unnecessary and unreasonable invasions of privacy and complain about them. If you were actually guilty of doing drugs, you wouldn't criticise the measures over fear of making you look suspicious. Open criticism of the invasion of privacy involved seems natural for an innocent person not doing drugs, who thus doesn't understand why all the invasion of privacy is necessary. Then in the wake of major drug scandals, you realise these invasions of privacy are worth it to keep the integrity of the sport.

As I said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions, but this seems like a young, private person hating having to pull his pants down in front of strangers in his own home at 7am. Then he grows up and realises the extent of drugs in sport, and thinks 'O.K., I guess what they're doing is necessary.'

You are assuming that what he said all those years ago is still how he feels. Why? What reason do you have for thinking this? Maybe he just changed his mind.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying you seem to be jumping to very specific, negative conclusions about players you don't like, and giving players you like an easier ride. So what if Federer - who, for the record, I really like - is vocally pro testing. If he was doing drugs - not saying he is, just a hypothetical - and was smart, that's exactly what he would say to divert suspicion away from himself. Again, I'm not saying he is. I'm just saying there's no more reason to clear him of suspicion than there is anyone else.

I think you need to be more objective.

In my opinion, any tennis player could be taking drugs or not, and none of us know unless we have clear evidence. And that is all that can be said.

 

[Kieran]

And did Nadal, Murray or anyone else ask the ATP to keep samples for 8 years WAY before the Armstrong scandal? The answer is no. He's done way more than these two who only whinged about the doping controls for years till a big scandal came out and suddenly they want to be looking like saints asking for more testing. Spot the difference.

Did he do anything officially in his famous capacity as president of the ATP players council from 2008-2014?

 

[Front242]

Except, they should all realize invasion of privacy is 100% needed as the out of competition testing is the most important of all and hence, why while it may seem natural to complain, a rational athlete wouldn't as they have to be more intelligent and realize there is tons of corruption in sport and they make an absolute ton of money at the top of the game. To moan about doping controls that are very much needed actually makes you look like a doper who doesn't want to get caught, even more so when you're then all for them after a major scandal. I don't see how it could appear any differently except to the naive.

 

[Front242]

And did Nadal, Murray or anyone else ask the ATP to keep samples for 8 years WAY before the Armstrong scandal? The answer is no. He's done way more than these two who only whinged about the doping controls for years till a big scandal came out and suddenly they want to be looking like saints asking for more testing. Spot the difference.

Did he do anything officially in his famous capacity as president of the ATP players council from 2008-2014?

He tried to get samples kept for 8 years and tried to get more testing done but the clowns are actually doing less now. Seems he has no pulling power and they're perfectly content to let doping run rife if it makes them all rich at the ATP/ITF.

 

[Great Hands]

Except, they should all realize invasion of privacy is 100% needed as the out of competition testing is the most important of all and hence why while it may seem natural to complain, a rational athlete wouldn't as they have to be more intelligent and realize there is tons of corruption in sport and they make an absolute ton of money at the top of the game.

I agree with you! A rational and informed athlete should accept it, as Murray does now. But maybe he wasn't so rational and informed back then, and didn't realise the extent of the corruption. His comments seem naive to me, rather than suspicious.

Again, not defending him really, just asking for objectivity.

 

[Kieran]

And did Nadal, Murray or anyone else ask the ATP to keep samples for 8 years WAY before the Armstrong scandal? The answer is no. He's done way more than these two who only whinged about the doping controls for years till a big scandal came out and suddenly they want to be looking like saints asking for more testing. Spot the difference.

Did he do anything officially in his famous capacity as president of the ATP players council from 2008-2014?

He tried to get samples kept for 8 years and tried to get more testing done but the clowns are actually doing less now. Seems he has no pulling power and they're perfectly content to let doping run rife if it makes them all rich at the ATP/ITF.

I agree with you that there's a problem, but I think the ATP players council hasn't been prominent at all about this, and that's where the revolution should begin...

 

[Front242]

Why would they if an absolute ton of them are doping. Therein lies the main problem.

 

[Great Hands]

To moan about doping controls that are very much needed actually makes you look like a doper who doesn't want to get caught, even more so when you're then all for them after a major scandal. I don't see how it could appear any differently except to the naive.

You see, I feel just the opposite way. Moaning about the tests doesn't stop them happening. And they were moaning about them because they were complying with them (Unlike Troicki, for example). Then after major drug scandals they realise the necessity of them and stop complaining.

A drug user would be outwardly squeaky clean, never criticising the procedures or drawing attention to themselves in this area, but secretly doing everything they could to cheat.

 

[Front242]

We'll agree to disagree there and that's fine A guy who wants samples kept for 8 years seems pretty sure of himself as doping tests will be far better in the future so that squeaky clean image seems to be just fine in my eyes. You certainly wouldn't ask for controls like that if you were a doper. You'd want to be a lunatic. Rather you would do so because you know others are doping and you want them caught even if it takes 8 years and someone with a pair of balls to do something about it.

 

[Great Hands]

We'll agree to disagree there and that's fine A guy who wants samples kept for 8 years seems pretty sure of himself as doping tests will be far better in the future so that squeaky clean image seems to be just fine in my eyes. You certainly wouldn't ask for controls like that if you were a doper. You'd want to be a lunatic.

Nice we could have a respectful debate about such a controversial issue, thanks.

And by the way, when I talked about someone being 'squeaky clean', I was just speaking hypothetically and was not referring to Federer.

 

[Front242]

No worries, I'm not saying he's innocent either but there's a lot less of a case for him if people do a bit of research.

 

[Kieran]

No worries, I'm not saying he's innocent either but there's a lot less of a case for him if people do a bit of research.

Can you research into what he did in this regard as president of the ATP players council and how he used his considerable influence then?

Again, this is not a rhetorical question...