Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2017 9:31:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by MrFurious on Aug 16, 2017 10:02:49 GMT
Sad, pity the US dosen't stand up to drug cheats. Hope she dosen't pull off a miracle
|
|
|
|
Post by Jep Gambardella on Aug 16, 2017 12:59:47 GMT
Her ban was for 15 months, not lifetime, so I don't see why she shouldn't be given a wildcard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 16, 2017 13:40:38 GMT
It's America. If they think she'll sell ten more tickets, they'd let her in if she killed someone 15 months ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Aug 16, 2017 13:46:57 GMT
Didn't the UK knight one of the worst child rapists in history and allow him to rape kids until the monster died? I believe the moralistic UK also allowed countless child rapists to hunt their prey for decades in the soccer leagues. Apparently using steroids should be a lifetime ban but raping helpless children gets you knighted and rich in the UK.
Odd what some countries place importance on. Pity the UK doesn't stand up to child rapists but instead rewards them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2017 14:08:40 GMT
Her ban was for 15 months, not lifetime, so I don't see why she shouldn't be given a wildcard. She's been off her tits on drugs for 10 years. Let's not reward her for it. Make her qualify the normal route. Fair enough when a star has been injured and lost their ranking position, then you can give them a wildcard, not for drug cheats though, not in my book. |
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Aug 16, 2017 14:28:55 GMT
Doesn't the link mangy stanly provided say she would have been allowed to compete at wimbeldon if not for an injury? Odd that brits choose to pat themselves on the back even though they would have done the same thing as the US Open if not for an injury.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jep Gambardella on Aug 16, 2017 14:40:28 GMT
Her ban was for 15 months, not lifetime, so I don't see why she shouldn't be given a wildcard. She's been off her tits on drugs for 10 years. Let's not reward her for it. Make her qualify the normal route. Fair enough when a star has been injured and lost their ranking position, then you can give them a wildcard, not for drug cheats though, not in my book. Clearly anyone who believes Sharapova's explanation for taking the drug for her entire career is a strong candidate for the Nobel Prize in gullibility, but the fact remains that it was legal during almost the entirety of that period. I deeply dislike Sharapova - for her performance-enhancing drug-taking and for her shrieking. If she had been given a lifetime ban you would definitely not hear me complaining about it. But she did her time and as a past champion and as a highly recognisable star I don't have a problem with inviting her to the US Open. |
|
|
|
Post by NJtoTX on Aug 16, 2017 15:15:03 GMT
She should have to have her voice box removed first.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2017 15:32:59 GMT
Doesn't the link mangy stanly provided say she would have been allowed to compete at wimbeldon if not for an injury? Odd that brits choose to pat themselves on the back even though they would have done the same thing as the US Open if not for an injury. No. She was never given a wildcard for Wimbledon. She needed to go through the qualifiers to play at Wimbledon. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2017 15:40:37 GMT
She's been off her tits on drugs for 10 years. Let's not reward her for it. Make her qualify the normal route. Fair enough when a star has been injured and lost their ranking position, then you can give them a wildcard, not for drug cheats though, not in my book. Clearly anyone who believes Sharapova's explanation for taking the drug for her entire career is a strong candidate for the Nobel Prize in gullibility, but the fact remains that it was legal during almost the entirety of that period. I deeply dislike Sharapova - for her performance-enhancing drug-taking and for her shrieking. If she had been given a lifetime ban you would definitely not hear me complaining about it. But she did her time and as a past champion and as a highly recognisable star I don't have a problem with inviting her to the US Open. Sport is soft on drug takers, way too soft, but she is back now and she has done her time... I just think she just shouldn't be getting special treatment. She should have to qualify like every other player with a diabolical ranking. If anything give the wildcard to a young up and comer or a local player. Not a drug cheat. She has cheated thousands of players out of prize money and glory, god only knows what has happened to her victims. If you tolerate this, then your children will be next. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2017 15:45:55 GMT
Awesome. Favorite Slam of the year. Nothing like night time tennis in New York as football is starting up and the weather is cooling down. I never really saw the big deal about Anna K - I was always in love with Martina Hingis. Wonder if she's playing doubles at the Open this year.... |
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Aug 16, 2017 15:53:00 GMT
Doesn't the link mangy stanly provided say she would have been allowed to compete at wimbeldon if not for an injury? Odd that brits choose to pat themselves on the back even though they would have done the same thing as the US Open if not for an injury. No. She was never given a wildcard for Wimbledon. She needed to go through the qualifiers to play at Wimbledon. So it's the wildcard that is making you feign OUTRAGE not the fact she is being allowed to play? It seems like a reach to praise the UK over that but if it helps you justify your jingoism go with it mate. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2017 16:13:17 GMT
No. She was never given a wildcard for Wimbledon. She needed to go through the qualifiers to play at Wimbledon. So it's the wildcard that is making you feign OUTRAGE not the fact she is being allowed to play? It seems like a reach to praise the UK over that but if it helps you justify your jingoism go with it mate. Well I would ban every single drug cheat for life, no questions asked, you fail a drug test, and your 'b' sample is positive too, you're out, don't even think about trying to appeal or give us your sob stories. I'd also have them arrested, and on trial for fraud. Then when that is over, I'd freeze their bank accounts, and make them repay every single competitor they ever cheated out of money. What I wouldn't do, is say "oh, don't worry about that tiny indiscretion when you defrauded thousands of players and many more spectators out of millions of dollars on a deceit that spanned over 10 years... here's a wild card for the US Open, you 'earned' it!" Can you imagine if the Olympics gave wildcards to drug cheats like Ben Johnson or Justin Gatlin if they hadn't qualified, or the Tour De France gave a wildcard to Lance Armstrong? Wouldn't happen. So why is it okay to give Sharapova a free pass when she hasn't earned it? |
|
|
|
Post by Jep Gambardella on Aug 16, 2017 16:33:32 GMT
So it's the wildcard that is making you feign OUTRAGE not the fact she is being allowed to play? It seems like a reach to praise the UK over that but if it helps you justify your jingoism go with it mate. Well I would ban every single drug cheat for life, no questions asked, you fail a drug test, and your 'b' sample is positive too, you're out, don't even think about trying to appeal or give us your sob stories. I'd also have them arrested, and on trial for fraud. Then when that is over, I'd freeze their bank accounts, and make them repay every single competitor they ever cheated out of money. What I wouldn't do, is say "oh, don't worry about that tiny indiscretion when you defrauded thousands of players and many more spectators out of millions of dollars on a deceit that spanned over 10 years... here's a wild card for the US Open, you 'earned' it!" Can you imagine if the Olympics gave wildcards to drug cheats like Ben Johnson or Justin Gatlin if they hadn't qualified, or the Tour De France gave a wildcard to Lance Armstrong? Wouldn't happen. So why is it okay to give Sharapova a free pass when she hasn't earned it? I abhor doping in sports and it appalls me that whenever the subject comes up there are always people who say that since it is impossible to stop doping completely, might as well legalise it. Having said that, in a sport like tennis (unlike racing or swimming or cycling) I don't think the drugs alone will give you such a big advantage - you still need talent, and lots of it! The same with football. I remember having a discussion on the old boards with somebody who dismissed Maradona's entire career because he was caught in a doping scandal. It wasn't the drugs that made him the best player of his generation and arguably one of the best ever. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2017 16:45:30 GMT
Well I would ban every single drug cheat for life, no questions asked, you fail a drug test, and your 'b' sample is positive too, you're out, don't even think about trying to appeal or give us your sob stories. I'd also have them arrested, and on trial for fraud. Then when that is over, I'd freeze their bank accounts, and make them repay every single competitor they ever cheated out of money. What I wouldn't do, is say "oh, don't worry about that tiny indiscretion when you defrauded thousands of players and many more spectators out of millions of dollars on a deceit that spanned over 10 years... here's a wild card for the US Open, you 'earned' it!" Can you imagine if the Olympics gave wildcards to drug cheats like Ben Johnson or Justin Gatlin if they hadn't qualified, or the Tour De France gave a wildcard to Lance Armstrong? Wouldn't happen. So why is it okay to give Sharapova a free pass when she hasn't earned it? I abhor doping in sports and it appalls me that whenever the subject comes up there are always people who say that since it is impossible to stop doping completely, might as well legalise it. Having said that, in a sport like tennis (unlike racing or swimming or cycling) I don't think the drugs alone will give you such a big advantage - you still need talent, and lots of it! The same with football. I remember having a discussion on the old boards with somebody who dismissed Maradona's entire career because he was caught in a doping scandal. It wasn't the drugs that made him the best player of his generation and arguably one of the best ever. Of course you need talent as well, but when you are taking PEDs you can train for longer, your recovery times are better, you can do more strength work, more cardio work, work on your speed, work on your technique for longer, it is just going to give you an edge in every way possible, physically and mentally. Maradona was a genius, but cocaine was his problem, if anything I think that would hinder you in a sport like football. I certainly don't think it was drugs in his case that made him possibly the greatest player that ever lived. I think in the 94 world cup, he was taking performance enhancers, but that was really to get himself in shape as he was getting old and his lifestyle had obviously taken its toll. Of course, he has to be banned at this point, but I would say in Maradona's case it wasn't the drugs that made him a great player. |
|
