upper reaches wrote:

[
When I hear about cases like this (careless, silly, non-performance enhancing) I always wonder why there isn't something like a 3-6 month 'kick up the pants' ban instead of the blanket 2 year for anything. 

I think it's best that the penalties stay fixed and uncompromising otherwise there will be all kinds of ugly accusations of some drug cheaters getting off easier than others.

The clubs have a responsibility to educate their athletes on the doping policies and how to stay compliant, especially at the likes of Brookes and other high performance oriented outfits.

Last edited by chainyanker (6/16/2017 6:12 pm)

upper reaches wrote:

Richard Hawkins wrote:

Tim's ban, was for a non performance enhancing study aid so the fact that it was 2 years is ridiculous to start with.
Under the rules of his ban he was able to train with us from the 4th of April, before the deadline, but wasn't allowed to race until the 4th of June.
At no point durning his ban did he train with us or even step inside the Brookes gym or boathouse.

When I hear about cases like this (careless, silly, non-performance enhancing) I always wonder why there isn't something like a 3-6 month 'kick up the pants' ban instead of the blanket 2 year for anything.

Back to the crew...
I'm surprised that a crew with the history of this one (u23 teams, u23 trialists, WC medallist cox) isn't looking to row in the intermediate events anyway. I'm not surprised at all that most clubs would look at this crew and say "WTF?".

I get that you guys may have put in a genuine entry in good faith and followed every stated rule to the letter, and that the change is both upsetting and a bit annoying. What I don't get is why you (or at least the cox) is so outraged and crying 'injustice' about it. Surely you guys factored the risk of being asked to row up into your plans? You'd be pretty bloody naive if you hadn't.

That you've been asked to row up should be annoying, but begrudgingly accepted as a fair cop. Your cox has laid it on a bit thick and hasn't done himself (or you guys) any favours. 

I hope that you do get into a good frame of mind for racing and do well in the Visitors, but absolutely no sympathy if you consider yourselves hard done by.

I think the Stewards are doing well by finally taking a proper look at the issues with the Club events. Some of the rules and expectations were clearly outdated.
 

Non performance enhancing?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15179180

dopaminergic and noradrenergic response for coke and 'study aids' are similar. Hence these not are so innocent doping incidents away from training/racing

Club Rower wrote:

Fastscullah wrote:

Why can't people rowing for a club be faster than those that are studying? Will someone instantly become slower when they transition from student to graduate?

-- Some top uni athletes are on part time courses
-- Nearly every job is more time demanding than uni courses
-- Workers get ~5 weeks holiday a year, uni's more like 15 (?)
-- Skipping lectures is an options, skipping your job isn't
-- People often travel for work which kills weekday sessions

Also learning to row in your twenties and trying to be competitive within 2 years is what a lot of club rowers have to try.

As an example time I did engineering at Imperial which I understand to be very time demanding course (only did one degree) but: Lectures either from 9am or 10am. 2 hour break for lunch, finish by 5 or 6. Granted I had to work a lot at home. Oh and Wednesday afternoon was free. That is but a distant happy memory compared to work now. Very few jobs here in London are 9 to 5....

Actually those aren't good points as having a job is a choice, not a requirement of being a member of a rowing club. Club rowers can have absolutely no commitments outside of training unlike those at university

chainyanker wrote:

I think it's best that the penalties stay fixed and uncompromising otherwise there will be all kinds of ugly accusations of some drug cheaters getting off easier than others.

The clubs have a responsibility to educate their athletes on the doping policies and how to stay compliant, especially at the likes of Brookes and other high performance oriented outfits.

Surely after decades of constantly improving monitoring and enforcement, the system is mature enough to deal with some nuance.

The one-size-fits-all ban hammer is not a particularly smart tool. Not all violations are equal. Some are probably worth more than a two year ban. Having the option for shorter first-offence/stupid offence isn't an unreasonable suggestion, especially if the next step is like a tonne of bricks.

Partly back to what is a 'club':
Many non-elite/non-funded clubs don't have the resources to do the education. However, the likelihood of being tested is slim to none.

Ex-Capt wrote:

Fastscullah wrote:

Actually those aren't good points as having a job is a choice, not a requirement of being a member of a rowing club. Club rowers can have absolutely no commitments outside of training unlike those at university

What planet are you from?

And can your parents pay my living expenses?

Generally I am on the side of 'real' club rowers on this issue, and i am glad to see the stewards enforce it this year - but the time argument is a poor one

By the same logic you would ban people who work flexible hours, stay at home parents, the unemployed, young people innoart time jobs or jumping between internships...