17 Comments

  1. @valke: Yep, now in the holidays when they all beefing up for the beach, growing goatee’s to look older etc, now is the time! I have seen three at Ballito Virgin Active who are obviously on something…..test now please!!

    ReplyReply
  2. @Scrum Doctor: To answer your question on a sanction for the culprit…..suspend him in the same manner a player who has tested positive in the Provincial structures.

    ReplyReply
  3. More talk, still no TESTING.

    Now is the time to test.

    It is scary to see some of these kids during October, November, December.

    Come April, when trails starts, it is to late.

    ReplyReply
  4. @Scrum Doctor: Totally agree on all points. 2-4 weeks for a positive steroid test is, to use the words of Gerrie Nel, shockingly inappropriate.

    ReplyReply
  5. @umbiloburger: They should look to the Youth Club Rugby structure for guidance on this: a red card in a match on Sunday earns the player a trip to Kings Park on Tuesday for a formal DC as would be the case in a senior club match. The player is sentanced there and then and flagged on the player database so that he cannot be selected onto a team sheet until his sentance has lapsed. The key here is INDEPENDANCE.

    ReplyReply
  6. Testing is all well and good BUT what do you do with the culprits ? Surely a mandatory seasons ban should be the minimum sanction . I know of cases in KZN this season gone by where boys were apparently given sentences ranging from two weeks to 4 weeks away from training and if this is not condoning drug taking I don’t know what is ! Performance enhancing drug usage is very prevalent in the top school teams across the spectrum and needs to be eradicated . In many cases this drug usage is being paid for and actually supported by the parents who seem to by trying to live their lives though their sons sporting “achievements” . I would suggest that each opposition coach nominate two players from the opposition team to be tested immediately after each tier 1 game and that will soon sort out the problem . The boys know who the steroid junkies are ( and so do the coaches ). Their is no place for illegal drugs in schoolboy sport !

    ReplyReply
  7. @GreenBlooded: It is actually ridiculous. I hate to say that the chap probably bought the supplement from a PT at VA.

    I am sure that the Dept of Sport & Rec have given jurisdiction of all sport to the respective federations. Hence rugby at a school in KZN is accountable to KZN High Schools and then the KZNRU etc etc. The problem lies in the honesty, or lack thereof, in the schools. If a boy does test positive in KZN, is he reported to the Kzn High schools committee? My guess is certainly not. Not to change the subject, but the sanctions on the issuing of red cards too is a contentious matter. Perhaps the high schools committee should address the steroid and other issues to create uniformity.

    ReplyReply
  8. @LineBreak: Agree with you on most counts. Random testing by an independant body that strikes without warning is what is required.

    One thing to remember is that less than 50% of substance usage is to enhance sporting achievement. The majority is used for body enhancements to impress potential partners. The potential damage to the body of the learner is significant. The problems emerge 5 – 8 years after the usage.

    With this in mind, maybe random testing of any learner would be create an awareness of the dangers to the non athletic kid.

    ReplyReply
  9. Stretch marks everywhere from getting too big too quick, also crazy vascularity and cut. Severe acne an obvious sign…

    ReplyReply
  10. Good step in the right direction! Now to test in off season whilst they all bulking up. I mean a teenage meathead in the Virgin Active yesterday was benching 160kg for 8 reps! The kid was easy 110kg plus. I won’t say what school uniform he walked out in…

    ReplyReply
  11. @LineBreak: Sadly you are 100% correct. As long as the policy is managed by those with a horse in the race it will solve nothing – bar giving the false impression that something is being done about it.

    It needs a body that is independent and that has authority to apply sanctions. And these sanctions need to be severe – to both the school and the athlete.

    ReplyReply
  12. @LineBreak: Agree. Untill there is a uniform rugby will to effectively test randomly? between all concerned this whole issue will just be a lot of hot air being spoken.
    To my mind schools of the future will have to decide if rugby in their school is going to be a sport played by kids as a sport or whether it is going to be a “professional game” played by superbly conditioned and pumped-up ahtletes

    ReplyReply
  13. Not sure it’s going to change much other than bringing the rest of the country into line with KZN.

    KZN currently has “nomination” testing which is a joke in itself as it’s unlikely any school is going to nominate their stars for testing at the risk of testing positive and having to do something about it. Even when there are positive tests we have 1 school handing out 1 year bans with others handing out a 2 week slap on the wrist.

    There are two key words in that article that nullify the entire process; “random” and “guidelines”.
    The problem with “guidelines” is that the sanction is still left to the school’s discretion which as can be seen above is not consistent.

    Forget “Random” testing, how about we stick with “nomination” testing but change the ruling to allow opposition schools to “nominate” the players they want to see tested, maybe limit to 3 per school.

    As long as the schools get to manage this process in-house, we’re never really going to see a difference.

    ReplyReply
  14. Eish guys whats happening ???? Are all the Glenwood,Westville,College,House,Hilton,DHS people not in Durban?
    The folks upcountry is waiting for the debate to begin !!!

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply