What's it going to be this year?

Honeysett wrote:You got me by telling porkies? That's not the way it works mate. Need to bait someone with real info.

Nah I got you to take the bait regarding Johns drug usage.

"But but but but Lockyer also took drugs" was the response I was looking for and you delivered. That Johns took E instead of cocaine is irrelevant.

Is the NRL just following AFL rules and doing sweet fuck all about drugs now or what? How is it that the Sharks came under ASADA sanctions for PED use but this is exempt?

Krump wrote:Is the NRL just following AFL rules and doing sweet fuck all about drugs now or what? How is it that the Sharks came under ASADA sanctions for PED use but this is exempt?

I think the answer is that under ASADA it's not prohibited outside of competition and it's then up to the governing body. Would also explain why Big Del got 2 years and Barba was getting 12 weeks

WTF ???

Here's how I got to that conclusion.

Go to ASADA website
Click check your substances
It sends you to a site call global DRO
Type in Athlete/Rugby league/Australia/Cocaine
and after you agree to the waiver, you get this

No Worries wrote:

Lol thats a pearler

No Worries wrote:

I think the answer is that under ASADA it's not prohibited outside of competition and it's then up to the governing body. Would also explain why Big Del got 2 years and Barba was getting 12 weeks

WTF ???

Here's how I got to that conclusion.

Go to ASADA website
Click check your substances
It sends you to a site call global DRO
Type in Athlete/Rugby league/Australia/Cocaine
and after you agree to the waiver, you get this

To be fair Barba has nobody to blame but himself.

Sailor was actually done the morning after he played a game. Don't know whether the rules have changed, but because it was withing 24 hours or something like that, it was deemed to be in-competition testing instead of out of competition testing. Apparently Cocaine is only a banned stimulant for in competition, which makes sense.

Makes you wonder when the first positive test was. With the Doggies, Broncos or Sharks. - ***Edit***, Sharks CEO says the last positive result was in early 2015, so that would make it with the Sharks.

This one is cool. Aka Scarface.

Dip wrote:Sailor was actually done the morning after he played a game. Don't know whether the rules have changed, but because it was withing 24 hours or something like that, it was deemed to be in-competition testing instead of out of competition testing. Apparently Cocaine is only a banned stimulant for in competition, which makes sense.

Makes you wonder when the first positive test was. With the Doggies, Broncos or Sharks.

On a side note I just heard on the news that all clubs were warned by email that drug testing would likely take place around Mad Monday.

Dip wrote:Sailor was actually done the morning after he played a game. Don't know whether the rules have changed, but because it was withing 24 hours or something like that, it was deemed to be in-competition testing instead of out of competition testing. Apparently Cocaine is only a banned stimulant for in competition, which makes sense.

Makes you wonder when the first positive test was. With the Doggies, Broncos or Sharks. - ***Edit***, Sharks CEO says the last positive result was in early 2015, so that would make it with the Sharks.

In competition refers to during a season with a defined start & end date, not doing a Russell Packer.

Yeah. He admitted to E's. Because... When you get caught, you might as well 'fess up to all of the fucking stuff.

Of course he never did anything else.

Seriously, my phone just transposed "good" to "fucking".
I should look into that.

dasherhalo wrote:Seriously, my phone just transposed "good"  to "fucking".
I should look into that.

Who knows what he has done, still does, or will do in the future - he has prob done every drug under the sun.
In saying that though, I have mates who take Pingers all the time yet wont touch coke or speed or anything else really.
Who knows..

TopDog wrote:
Nah I got you to take the bait regarding Johns drug usage.

"But but but but Lockyer also took drugs" was the response I was looking for and you delivered. That Johns took E instead of cocaine is irrelevant.

So your logic is to bring up a player that has nothing to do with Barba and when someone else brings up another player that has nothing to do with Barba you win?... Makes sense. Ten Internet points to you.

Honeysett wrote:

So your logic is to bring up a player that has nothing to do with Barba and when someone else brings up another player that has nothing to do with Barba you win?... Makes sense. Ten Internet points to you.

I added that little tidbit about Johns because I knew you would react and comment about it in some way. My entire reasoning was to make you react - which you did. Hook, line and sinker. I got you good ole boy

dasherhalo wrote:Seriously, my phone just transposed "good"  to "fucking".
I should look into that.

Yeah worth some leg work that one, intruiging.

No Worries wrote:

I think the answer is that under ASADA it's not prohibited outside of competition and it's then up to the governing body. Would also explain why Big Del got 2 years and Barba was getting 12 weeks

WTF ???

Here's how I got to that conclusion.

Go to ASADA website
Click check your substances
It sends you to a site call global DRO
Type in Athlete/Rugby league/Australia/Cocaine
and after you agree to the waiver, you get this

Well I understand it now at least, still makes fuck all sense to me though.

Revraiser wrote:
Yeah  worth some leg work that one, intruiging.

ON second thoughts, bringing up the stats on words typed on my phone might just be depressing.

dasherhalo wrote:

ON second thoughts, bringing up the stats on words typed on my phone might just be depressing.

Let me guess, you and Jarryd Hayne have similar hobbies?

TopDog wrote:
I added that little tidbit about Johns because I knew you would react and comment about it in some way. My entire reasoning was to make you react - which you did. Hook, line and sinker. I got you good ole boy

So because I reply to #shitposting with more shit posting its a reaction and not a post? You're a stranger fellow.

Honeysett wrote:

So because I reply to #shitposting with more shit posting its a reaction and not a post? You're a stranger fellow.

Call it what you want the desired outcome was achieved.