Roar Pro
Joined July 2015
3.1k
Views
1
Published
112
Comments
Published
Comments
Seeing as some don't seem to have a clue what he's doing when selecting a team I thought I'd have a crack at it…
You keep going on about the five warnings but failing to mention that the evidence we have says she didn’t read then final email telling her it was banned. Why is she supposed to stop taking a substance that was on the watch list indefinitely? She had every right to continue using it.
Sharapova should be banned for four years
If she could prove that she didn’t know she should get of scot-free. Carelessness isn’t a crime.
Sharapova should be banned for four years
Here’s a controversial opinion for you: if she can prove that she didn’t know then she shouldn’t be banned at all.
WADA trying to scare people into submission with warnings doesn’t change the fact that it wasn’t illegal until less than 3 months ago and based on the knowledge we have she didn’t know it was banned.
There were no “potential doping violations” until it was banned.
Sharapova should be banned for four years
Glen, whether she received five individual written notifications or not doesn’t change the fact that the drug wasn’t banned and she had every right to continue to use it. It’s not cheating if it’s completely legal. And now it is banned, but whether or not she actually knew that is based entirely on assumption.
So no, she’s not a flagrant drug cheat unless she knew and it’s totally possible that it really was accidental.
Sharapova should be banned for four years
Looks like he was just trying to shake his leg free from McCaw’s standard cheating (yes great players can still be cheats). May have clipped his head but I doubt it was intentional and it’s out of frame on this angle so you’re all jumping to conclusions.
Was David Pocock's boot to Richie McCaw's head accidental or deliberate?
Yeah, but it looks like the pink one is worse, I think they should just all wear pink and play with the white balls haha.
POLL: Should the day-night Adelaide Test go ahead?
Haha oops, I didn’t think of that. Would be a lot easier to not wear white though as Chris says.
POLL: Should the day-night Adelaide Test go ahead?
I honestly don’t understand why the pink ball was ever necessary in the first place when the quality is no better than the white ball, they should just use white balls, at least the players are used to them.
POLL: Should the day-night Adelaide Test go ahead?
I think that was satire from Will, mapu.
The Scots were right! World Rugby confirm Joubert got it wrong
Although do you have to have used your hands to have ‘played’ at the ball? Rugby laws are messy…
Wallabies break Scottish hearts with last-minute win at Twickenham
I’m not sure who the penalty was given against but after watching it again it looks like Strauss plays at the ball even though it hits his shoulder/upper arm so I have no problem with the penalty either way.
Wallabies break Scottish hearts with last-minute win at Twickenham
Was thinking about this some more, my reading of ‘advantage’ was just a derp as I’ve had no sleep, but I don’t think that changes anything, The ball was played preventing WB possession therefore preventing an advantage, penalty correctly awarded.
Wallabies break Scottish hearts with last-minute win at Twickenham
Is it just me or does anyone else notice how every time Moore makes a carry he just dives at the defenders feet rather than try to run through a gap or hit it up? It’s ridiculous. Off topic kind of, but I feel like no one ever mentions it.
Five talking points from the Wallabies' win over Scotland
Agree that Foley was bad but you need to chill out with the hyperbole. “half dozen or so conversions and penalties he missed”. Nope, 3 conversions. “we’ll struggle if he’s starting next week and have no hope if we get through that and have to face SA or NZ in the final” For all you know he could turn it around and play well the next two weeks, best to wait and see what happens before jumping to conclusions.
Five talking points from the Wallabies' win over Scotland
I think it means “advantage” as in the literal definition not the rugby term. Hence my interpretation.
Wallabies break Scottish hearts with last-minute win at Twickenham
Luke it is subjective but your original interpretation was correct because playing the ball prevented The Wallabies from regaining possession and therefore “prevented an opponent from gaining an advantage”.
Wallabies break Scottish hearts with last-minute win at Twickenham
If the last Scottish player doesn’t intentionally play the ball then sure, but he grabbed it and ran at the defence. Long arm penalty was correct.
Wallabies break Scottish hearts with last-minute win at Twickenham
Disagree. Wasn’t the case with every scrum and Sio should have adjusted better but he was pulling out of the contest and should have been penalised. You could literally see him move backwards.
Wallabies vs Scotland highlights: Australia scrape past Scotland in World Cup Quarter-Final
+1
Wallabies vs Scotland highlights: Australia scrape past Scotland in World Cup Quarter-Final
The scrum superiority isn’t gone, Joubert was just blind to Nel pulling out of the contest.
Wallabies vs Scotland highlights: Australia scrape past Scotland in World Cup Quarter-Final
Wrong.
Wallabies vs Scotland highlights: Australia scrape past Scotland in World Cup Quarter-Final
Nope, because he never has. Just like he didn’t give this game to anyone.
Wallabies vs Scotland highlights: Australia scrape past Scotland in World Cup Quarter-Final
How mate? The offside call was correct. Maitland’s yellow card was harsh but consistent and certainly didn’t influence the end result when you consider The Wallabies should have had another try because there was a Scottish hand in the ruck and Genia didn’t knock it on with the disallowed try.
Wallabies vs Scotland highlights: Australia scrape past Scotland in World Cup Quarter-Final
Yellow card was consistent although harsh, 79th minute penalty was correct to the letter of the law.
Wallabies vs Scotland highlights: Australia scrape past Scotland in World Cup Quarter-Final
It is highly unlikely that anyone would be that incompetent if they did know.
To say WADA widely broadcasts what they ban is an overstatement. It’s much more likely that she just became careless after receiving so many nonsense warnings when it was indefinitely on the watch list and she had every right to continue taking it.
Everyone knows that she would have PR doing damage control, but they’re there to write her speeches and word things in the best way possible, they would give advice on what to do but she still makes that decision on her own and if she chose to deny any wrongdoing they would write that speech instead. So yes it is a sign of higher integrity. You think other athletes aren’t advised to tell the truth but choose to deny things anyway?
Sharapova should be banned for four years