• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

Super Rugby News

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
5.2k Posts 139 Posters 1.4m Views
Super Rugby News
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Billy TellB Offline
    Billy TellB Offline
    Billy Tell
    wrote on last edited by
    #1133

    Maybe it's just me, but when I saw the stuff headline "AB tests positive" and a photo of Paddy...

    ...my first thought was Tuipolotu has HIV...

    🤦

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    replied to nzzp on last edited by Stargazer
    #1134

    Thanks for that link and info @nzzp.

    Because of all the (mis)information in the (social) media, I think it's good to highlight a few more of these WADA rules (I'm sorry if this repeats parts of NZZP's post):

    • The media release from NZR says this is a case of specified substance.

    • That rules out that anabolic agents and hormones and those stimulants and hormone antagonists and modulators so identified on the prohibited list were found in his sample.(rule 4.2.2).

    • Specified substances are substances which are more likely to have been consumed by an athlete for a purpose other than the enhancement of sport performance.(footnote to rule 4.2.2)

    • Intent, fault, negligence or knowledge of use on the athlete’s part don't have to be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation for use of a prohibited substance (rule 2.2.1). It is, however, relevant for the sanction!

    • Ineligibility (read: ineligibility to play) for the use of a prohibited substance in case of a specified substance is four years if the anti-doping rule violation has been established to be intentional. This sanction is subject to a potential reduction or suspension. (Rule 10.2.1.2)

    • If the violation was not intentional, the period of ineligibility shall be two years. (Rule 10.2.2)

    • In case "no fault or negligence" can be established by the athlete, (s)he will not be ineligible. (Rule 10.4)

    • If an athlete can establish "no significant fault or negligence" in case of an anti-doping violation involving a specified substance, the period of ineligibility shall be - at a minimum - be a reprimand and no period of ineligibility, and - at a maximum - two years of ineligibility. This depends on the degree of fault of the athlete. (Rule 10.5.1.1)
      (The same applies in case of contaminated products, rule 10.5.1.2)

    • A period of provisional suspension will be deducted from the ineligibility period that is eventually imposed. (Rule 10.11.3.1)

    • A mandatory part of each sanction shall include automatic publication, as provided in Article 14.3. (Rule 10.13)

    • Teams will only be penalised for anti-doping rule violations if more than two members of a team have been found to have committed such a violation during an "event period". (Rule 11.2)

    • The identity of any Athlete or other Person who is asserted by an Anti-Doping Organization to have committed an anti-doping rule violation, may be Publicly Disclosed by the Anti-Doping Organization with results management responsibility only after notice has been provided to the Athlete ... (Rule 14.3.1)

    • No later than twenty days after it has been determined in a final appellate decision under Article 13.2.1 or 13.2.2, or such appeal has been waived, or a hearing in accordance with Article 8 has been waived, or the assertion of an anti-doping rule violation has not otherwise been timely challenged ..., the Anti-Doping Organization responsible for results management must publicly report the disposition of the anti-doping matter including the sport, the anti-doping rule violated, the name of the Athlete ..., the Prohibited Substance ... and the Consequences imposed. (Rule 14.3.2)

    • In any case where it is determined, after a hearing or appeal, that the Athlete or other Person did not commit an anti-doping rule violation, the decision may be Publicly Disclosed only with the consent of the Athlete or other Person who is the subject of the decision. (Rule 14.3.3)

    • No Anti-Doping Organization or WADA -accredited laboratory, or official of either, shall publicly comment on the specific facts of any pending case (as opposed to general description of process and science) except in response to public comments attributed to the Athlete, other Person or their representatives.(Rule 14.3.5)

    • The mandatory Public Reporting required in 14.3.2 shall not be required where the Athlete or other Person who has been found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation is a Minor. (Rule 14.3.6)

    This last rule is about a minor, that is, a young person under the age of majority. This has nothing to do with a anti-doping rule violation being minor.

    It might be interesting to also consult the World Rugby rules against doping, but I've other things to.

    nzzpN StargazerS 2 Replies Last reply
    3
  • nzzpN Offline
    nzzpN Offline
    nzzp
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #1135

    @Stargazer good work, great summary. Wonder why this sort of factual information isn't actually being reported in the main stream media. Takes a couple of internet searches and a bit of reading.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • MajorRageM Away
    MajorRageM Away
    MajorRage
    wrote on last edited by
    #1136

    I think he's in deep shitski here. NZRU had an annus horribilus last year from a PR point of view - I can't see any other outcome outside of completely throwing the book at, and making an example of, him.

    Whether that is just or not, not for me to say.

    StargazerS 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    replied to MajorRage on last edited by Stargazer
    #1137

    @MajorRage said in Super Rugby News:

    I think he's in deep shitski here. NZRU had an annus horribilus last year from a PR point of view - I can't see any other outcome outside of completely throwing the book at, and making an example of, him.

    Whether that is just or not, not for me to say.

    Because the breach of the anti-doping rule (if the B-sample is also positive) happened either during the Rugby Championship or the EOYT, the ruling will not be NZR's to make, but either SANZAAR's or World Rugby's. As I posted earlier, there are set penalties for this kind of violations and there are reductions that apply in case the player can establish lack of intent/knowledge/recklessness etc. What I understand from the little real information that has been published by the media, that's what PT is now working on (at the same time awaiting for that B-sample).

    It's also normal practice to take into account a player's record, which - I think - is pretty clean in PT's case (especially relating to doping).

    All will also depend on the additional anti-doping rules from SANZAAR/WR.

    rotatedR 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • rotatedR Offline
    rotatedR Offline
    rotated
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #1138

    @Stargazer said in Super Rugby News:
    What I understand from the little real information that has been published by the media, that's what PT is now working on (at the same time awaiting for that B-sample).

    It's also normal practice to take into account a player's record, which - I think - is pretty clean in PT's case (especially relating to doping).

    The B-Sample is only tested at the athletes request. So far PT hasn't requested that going by reports.

    If he is completely befuddled and has no idea how this substance was found the first course of action would be to demand the B Sample is tested as it could have been a false positive (has happened plenty in other sports).

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • No QuarterN Offline
    No QuarterN Offline
    No Quarter
    wrote on last edited by
    #1139

    If the personal reasons are that his mum gave it to him then I'm fine with it.

    nzzpN 1 Reply Last reply
    5
  • nzzpN Offline
    nzzpN Offline
    nzzp
    replied to No Quarter on last edited by
    #1140

    @No-Quarter said in Super Rugby News:

    If the personal reasons are that his mum gave it to him then I'm fine with it.

    He's not going to look skinny though, is he 🙂

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    wrote on last edited by Stargazer
    #1141

    Ben Smith re-signs with NZR and the Highlanders until 2020.

    1 Reply Last reply
    6
  • MajorRageM Away
    MajorRageM Away
    MajorRage
    wrote on last edited by
    #1142

    Who is that guy in the brown suit? Seen him on a few things related to the clan, but never known who he is.

    SmudgeS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    wrote on last edited by Stargazer
    #1143

    NZR media release about Ben Smith:

    http://www.allblacks.com/News/30328/it-s-new-zealand-rugby-for-ben-smith

    New Zealand Rugby has also confirmed that as part of the long-term deal, Smith also has an option of an extended non-playing break from the game in order to manage his workload and an early termination option post Rugby World Cup 2019.
    
    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • SmudgeS Offline
    SmudgeS Offline
    Smudge
    replied to MajorRage on last edited by
    #1144

    @MajorRage said in Super Rugby News:

    Who is that guy in the brown suit? Seen him on a few things related to the clan, but never known who he is.

    Sam Casey. I'll leave my opinions about him to myself...

    MajorRageM 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    wrote on last edited by
    #1145

    Great to hear that Bender has re-signed. The reported options in the contract look attractive to a front line AB at this stage of his career.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • mariner4lifeM Offline
    mariner4lifeM Offline
    mariner4life
    wrote on last edited by
    #1146

    either i missed it, our you guys are ignoring the best story of the off-season so far. Dipshit returning Red Scott Higgenbotham has been charged after it appears he drunkenly tried to break his mate out of jail for taking a piss in public.

    One count of assaulting police, and one count of being unlawfully being on police property or some shit.

    He's been told to stay home from training. While i don't expect anything to come of it, it's pretty fucking funny.

    antipodeanA TimT 2 Replies Last reply
    8
  • antipodeanA Offline
    antipodeanA Offline
    antipodean
    replied to mariner4life on last edited by
    #1147

    @mariner4life Ahahahaha What a muppet. I'd have used the taser about 50 times for my own amusement.

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to mariner4life on last edited by
    #1148

    @mariner4life said in Super Rugby News:

    either i missed it, our you guys are ignoring the best story of the off-season so far. Dipshit returning Red Scott Higgenbotham has been charged after it appears he drunkenly tried to break his mate out of jail for taking a piss in public.

    One count of assaulting police, and one count of being unlawfully being on police property or some shit.

    He's been told to stay home from training. While i don't expect anything to come of it, it's pretty fucking funny.

    😆

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • Billy TellB Offline
    Billy TellB Offline
    Billy Tell
    wrote on last edited by
    #1149

    Very disappointing really. I'd expect any frontline AB to know Israel Dagg scored the first try at WC 2011.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • MajorRageM Away
    MajorRageM Away
    MajorRage
    replied to Smudge on last edited by MajorRage
    #1150

    @Smudge said in Super Rugby News:

    @MajorRage said in Super Rugby News:

    Who is that guy in the brown suit? Seen him on a few things related to the clan, but never known who he is.

    Sam Casey. I'll leave my opinions about him to myself...

    Cheers ... although it still sort of leaves the question unanswered. Who is he? Just a fan, or does he have another actual role there?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • BovidaeB Offline
    BovidaeB Offline
    Bovidae
    wrote on last edited by
    #1151

    Good news about Smith but one can only assume NZR increased their iniital offer and probably added these attractive options/out clauses.

    Now we wait for Dagg...

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • nzzpN Offline
    nzzpN Offline
    nzzp
    wrote on last edited by
    #1152

    Drug Free Sport representative apparently on radio (second hand) saying Patrick T is either out for 4 years if drug taken deliberately, or 2 years if inadvertent.

    I can't validate as I didn't hear it, but if that's on the radio, then it sounds legit.

    gt12G 1 Reply Last reply
    0

Super Rugby News
Sports Talk
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.