Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Fri Apr 26, 2019 9:21 pm  

MGarbutt1986 wrote:

DRUGS are ILLEGAL, they should go to prison

M***** you are a star.

How come you didn’t start a thread stating minns should have been thrown in Jail? Is it because he was a hull kr player?

Don’t ever stop posting. Please. Your posts are ace

Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Fri Apr 26, 2019 11:38 pm  

Ruune Rebellion wrote: Don’t ever stop posting. Please. Your posts are ace It's pretty evident from his catalogue of posts that he's not exactly blessed in the brain cells department so it's a bit unfair to mock. Re drug testing, this is typical, mindless spin by a pro-RU media. Top flight RU players get less tests per player than other major sports other than cricket - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/47748275

Ruune Rebellion wrote: Don’t ever stop posting. Please. Your posts are ace It's pretty evident from his catalogue of posts that he's not exactly blessed in the brain cells department so it's a bit unfair to mock. Re drug testing, this is typical, mindless spin by a pro-RU media. Top flight RU players get less tests per player than other major sports other than cricket - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/47748275

Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:13 pm  

Cricket - 21 day ban for taking recreational drugs by Alex Hales.

Another case of a different sport taking a different view.

Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:28 pm  

MorePlaymakersNeeded wrote:

Cricket - 21 day ban for taking recreational drugs by Alex Hales.

Another case of a different sport taking a different view.

There are no such things as recreational drugs, they are illegal, Hales should be banned for life and being questioned about his supplier.

When will the snowflakes get this.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Sat Apr 27, 2019 4:21 pm  

MGarbutt1986 wrote: There are no such things as recreational drugs, they are illegal, Hales should be banned for life and being questioned about his supplier. When will the snowflakes get this. I’ll spare myself the effort of explaining why recreational and illegal are not mutually exclusive. Obviously there are such things as recreational drugs, and the term is widely understood. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_drug_use And some of them are legal, most notably ethanol (alcohol). Instead, i’ll assume that you think the use of the term trivializes the serious of the consequences of using illegal drugs. I’m doing quite a lot of the heavy lifting for you here, aren’t I? Misuse of drugs is dangerous. Our biological systems have been carefully calibrated by evolution, and haphazardly chucking chemicals into the mix carries significant risks. But life is full of risks and we have to manage them sensibly. Our current drug laws and societal attitudes towards drugs are infantile, and that comes with significant costs. Drugs are bad and therefore illegal and therefore bad is not a convincing argument. That creates scepticism, and undermines meaningful efforts at health education. Our drug laws, though well intended i’m sure, don’t work and overall do more harm than good imo.

MGarbutt1986 wrote: There are no such things as recreational drugs, they are illegal, Hales should be banned for life and being questioned about his supplier. When will the snowflakes get this. I’ll spare myself the effort of explaining why recreational and illegal are not mutually exclusive. Obviously there are such things as recreational drugs, and the term is widely understood. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_drug_use And some of them are legal, most notably ethanol (alcohol). Instead, i’ll assume that you think the use of the term trivializes the serious of the consequences of using illegal drugs. I’m doing quite a lot of the heavy lifting for you here, aren’t I? Misuse of drugs is dangerous. Our biological systems have been carefully calibrated by evolution, and haphazardly chucking chemicals into the mix carries significant risks. But life is full of risks and we have to manage them sensibly. Our current drug laws and societal attitudes towards drugs are infantile, and that comes with significant costs. Drugs are bad and therefore illegal and therefore bad is not a convincing argument. That creates scepticism, and undermines meaningful efforts at health education. Our drug laws, though well intended i’m sure, don’t work and overall do more harm than good imo.

Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Sat Apr 27, 2019 5:25 pm  

MGarbutt1986 wrote:

There are no such things as recreational drugs, they are illegal, Hales should be banned for life and being questioned about his supplier.

When will the snowflakes get this.

You ever had a pint?

Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Sat Apr 27, 2019 9:52 pm  

Him wrote:

You ever had a pint?

It's ironic he's the one throwing the "snowflake" accusation around when it's him who is getting truly outraged about what other people get up to. But I suspect irony is beyond his ability to understand.

Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Sun Apr 28, 2019 9:45 am  

The Ghost of '99 wrote: It's pretty evident from his catalogue of posts that he's not exactly blessed in the brain cells department so it's a bit unfair to mock. Re drug testing, this is typical, mindless spin by a pro-RU media. Top flight RU players get less tests per player than other major sports other than cricket - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/47748275 Testing in both codes needs to be a lot higher. I'm actually surprised RU being so low isn't a story.

The Ghost of '99 wrote: It's pretty evident from his catalogue of posts that he's not exactly blessed in the brain cells department so it's a bit unfair to mock. Re drug testing, this is typical, mindless spin by a pro-RU media. Top flight RU players get less tests per player than other major sports other than cricket - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/47748275 Testing in both codes needs to be a lot higher. I'm actually surprised RU being so low isn't a story.

Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Sun Apr 28, 2019 2:05 pm  

puroresu_boy wrote:

Testing in both codes needs to be a lot higher.

I'm actually surprised RU being so low isn't a story.

Especially considering the punishments are so paltry and the results often hidden.

As I said, if this were in other sports it would be highly criticised by the media.

Re: Stringent Drug testing / should the RFL follow suit : Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:53 pm  

The Ghost of '99 wrote: It's pretty evident from his catalogue of posts that he's not exactly blessed in the brain cells department so it's a bit unfair to mock. Re drug testing, this is typical, mindless spin by a pro-RU media. Top flight RU players get less tests per player than other major sports other than cricket - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/47748275 you gone and mentioned cricket and now they've joined in https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/48102481

The Ghost of '99 wrote: It's pretty evident from his catalogue of posts that he's not exactly blessed in the brain cells department so it's a bit unfair to mock. Re drug testing, this is typical, mindless spin by a pro-RU media. Top flight RU players get less tests per player than other major sports other than cricket - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/47748275 you gone and mentioned cricket and now they've joined in https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/48102481