Trust in sport fading - Murray

[Front242]

There's not a whole lot out there really but all this stuff goes on behind closed doors. I did find this though which you may have already seen. Andy, Roger and Rafa tag teaming for more testing and Novak saying he thinks it's a bit much :snicker

http://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/other-sport/tennis/roger-federer-joins-andy-murray-6828298

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/nov/13/roger-federer-calls-for-doping-tests-tennis

 

[Kieran]

Talk is cheap, brother. The most guilty villain will tell the cops, "search my bag then!" Knowing its full of swag, but also knowing that they may be convinced of his innocence by him offering the bag.

By the same token, an athlete might be utterly clean but still gripe about the process.

I think the issue lies with the authorities and how much money and resolve they have.

How much does the ITF/ATP tour contribute to keeping the game clean? How much are they really committed?

 

[Front242]

Can't find it right now but I read somewhere they actually drastically cut the doping budget this year. tented also posted the link below recently (http://www.tennisfrontier.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2815&pid=215496#pid215496 ) which shows they've almost halved the in-competition testing from 2013 to 2014. Shameful.

http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/itf-increased-number-doping-tests-2014/

 

[Kieran]

Can't find it right now but I read somewhere they actually drastically cut the doping budget this year. tented also posted the link below recently (http://www.tennisfrontier.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2815&pid=215496#pid215496 ) which shows they've almost halved the in-competition testing from 2013 to 2014. Shameful.

http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/itf-increased-number-doping-tests-2014/

How much do these lads earn every year?

I feel very strongly that the prize money for every ATP tourney should include a % that goes to dope testing agencies, and a % that goes to old knobbly-kneed gents who played in the amateur era and who were ripped off for centuries before the game became legit: they built the sport that Rafa and Roger and the rest of them became rich off of.

These are practical and easy ways of protecting both the sports legacy - and its integrity! :nono

 

[Great Hands]

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.

Why is there less of a case for him? You have not provided any legitimate reasons why this is so at all.

The only thing you have said is that he called for samples to be kept for years. Well anybody can 'call for' something to happen. Andy has just called for more rigorous procedures, and you regard this as suspicious. Federer does so, and it's a case for his innocence. This is double standards. Again, I'm not saying either is guilty or innocent, but that we need to be fair and objective.

Seems to me that you are being influenced by the fact that you like Federer as a player and it is affecting your judgement. You should treat everyone equally when it comes to such an issue.

 

[Front242]

Definitely agree with that. Good article here with quotes from Arsene Wenger about doping in football.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/arsenal/11987053/Arsenal-news-Arsene-Wenger-claims-football-has-widespread-doping-problem.html

Personally I think this quote from Wenger is brilliant and hits the nail on the head about the era with live in today:

“For me, the beauty of sport is that everyone wants to win, but there will only be one winner. We have reached an era in which we glorify the winner, without looking at the means or the method. And, 10 years later we realise the guy was a cheat. And during that time, the one that came second suffered. He didn’t get recognition. And, with all that’s been said about them, they can be very unhappy.”

 

[Kieran]

I was thinking of Wenger earlier today. The problem is everywhere and it's not so simple as to reduce it to nationalities or what people say.

Great Hands: Great Post! :clap

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.

 

[Front242]

As I said though, asking for samples to be retested for up to 8 years is a big indicator of innocence because while the cheats are always one step ahead of the testers, technology will have improved leaps and bounds in 8 years and you just wouldn't be doping if that were the case. Sure, you could beat tests now I guess since as I said the testers are well behind the cheats, but there's nothing you could do to stop them re-testing the living $h1t out of your old samples. For that reason, there's very little chance of doping possible there imo.

 

[Kieran]

Cheats will always know what to say. And that's not to say anything about any particular players. The ATP players council should have insisted more strongly - and still should. And any shenanogans and alleged silent bans and so forth which happened with the co-operation and knowledge of the ATP players council only leaves the sport open to disgrace.

There should be an automatic policy and fund which comes directly from and sanctioned by the ATP players which tackles this obvious problem...

 

[Kieran]

An article about this on tennis.com, with reactions from Nadal, Murray and Federer:

Nadal said he would like all test results to be released publicly, and said he would not object to improvements being financed from prize money amounts.

I hadn't read this before I suggested that the cost of testing should come from the huge amounts of prize money...

 

[sid]

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.

Great post this & thank you all for your views,been good reading on what we all think.
cheers

 

[masterclass]

The point is not who is doping and who is not. This is a red herring, and people shouldn't point fingers at the athletes just yet.
99% of the top 30 players in tennis could be doping, 50%, 10%. We won't know while we have the system in place that we do now, which is simply farcical.

Federer is pointing the finger at the current system, and saying and has said previously he isn't getting tested enough, and believes at least everyone reaching a quarterfinal should be tested. This only makes sense. The money/points increase significantly from the quarter finals on and players must be accountable. But still, even though the implication is there, Federer does not go far enough. Murray in his latest statement is saying that even a lot of testing is not enough, pointing to the example of Armstrong. Even if the amount of testing increased and were regular, Tennis and other sports anti-doping programs and testing are clearly in the wrong hands.

We have seen first hand that the existing model of sports federations and even national federations and related institutions policing themselves is prone to corruption and other reprehensible acts. Not enough testing, not the right kind of testing. Selective slaps on the wrist to lesser players to show their program is working. The current system is prone to cover up of star athletes doping, delays in reporting, notifications or sanctions, allowing players who have tested positive to keep competing, corruption in bribes or payoffs, destruction of evidence. Omerta, threats against those who go against the status quo. These are the kinds of things that are likely to happen when there is a conflict of interest and big rewards. It stinks from the top down.

The current system needs to be overhauled. Independent testing and testing programs designed to catch dopers when they are doping is needed. More oversight and control with labs and samples is needed. Samples need to be stored and protected for years and periodically automatically retested as new and improved tests for more drugs become available. Funding for anti-doping has to be increased and/or used more appropriately.

As each big doping scandal hits, the statements by various media, athletes, gov't officials, the public at large, show there is more belief that sports have a high potential of corruption, and little confidence that the current anti-doping systems are anything more than a facade designed to circumvent WADA, and permit their sport's best athletes to perform like supermen.

Respectfully,
masterclass

 

[Kieran]

Welcome back, masterclass, great to see you! Good post, too...

 

[masterclass]

Thanks Kieran. It was about time I changed the out-of-date Del Potro thread title as well.

Respectfully,
masterclass