Another issue with this sorry business relates to sporting performance and cheating. There was a time when sports performers were rightly banned because they took something that gave a performance advantage over opponents who weren't taking the drugs. Somewhere along the way, and I'm unclear about how, why, or when this happened, it became an incursion into sports people's private lives. Personally, if footballers or other sports people want to smoke weed when off the clock, I think it's no-one else's business, because you could hardly regard it as performance enhancing. Cocaine is debatable in that regard, but it ought not enhance performance unless stoned while playing - and even that is debatable.
Somewhere, it drifted from the prevention of cheating into a moralistic, role-model crusade.
A thought on this to maybe give a little food for thought: I will use Mo Salah as my example, not because I've any problem with him - quite the opposite - but he is the best-known Muslim player in the English league. In Muslim cultures, although more liberal Muslims partake, drinking alcohol is regarded as poor form and illegal in some places, yet he would not be tested for alcohol in a football urine test. Nor would any other players. Yet alcohol is no more performance enhancing than some other substances that are the subject of such tests. The role-model argument falls flat on its face like the proverbial drunkard, as some players over-indulge from time to time.
From personal first-hand experience, I can testify that (so-called) 'recreational' drugs definitely do not improve sporting performance in the game of football...
...however, they can lead to missing an open-goal with a spectacular display of lack of coordination, resulting in an uncontrollable outburst of giggling...!
Another issue with this sorry business relates to sporting performance and cheating. There was a time when sports performers were rightly banned because they took something that gave a performance advantage over opponents who weren't taking the drugs. Somewhere along the way, and I'm unclear about how, why, or when this happened, it became an incursion into sports people's private lives. Personally, if footballers or other sports people want to smoke weed when off the clock, I think it's no-one else's business, because you could hardly regard it as performance enhancing. Cocaine is debatable in that regard, but it ought not enhance performance unless stoned while playing - and even that is debatable.
Somewhere, it drifted from the prevention of cheating into a moralistic, role-model crusade.
A thought on this to maybe give a little food for thought: I will use Mo Salah as my example, not because I've any problem with him - quite the opposite - but he is the best-known Muslim player in the English league. In Muslim cultures, although more liberal Muslims partake, drinking alcohol is regarded as poor form and illegal in some places, yet he would not be tested for alcohol in a football urine test. Nor would any other players. Yet alcohol is no more performance enhancing than some other substances that are the subject of such tests. The role-model argument falls flat on its face like the proverbial drunkard, as some players over-indulge from time to time.
ffs
Please, if you have a counter-view with logical (or even illogical) reasons behind it, I would have no problem with you expressing it. I can cope with a well-argued opinion that differs from mine.
From personal first-hand experience, I can testify that (so-called) 'recreational' drugs definitely do not improve sporting performance in the game of football...
...however, they can lead to missing an open-goal with a spectacular display of lack of coordination, resulting in an uncontrollable outburst of giggling...!
I have a picture in my head of you face down in a muddy six yard box with loads of other players pissing themselves with laughter after this.