Rio Ferdinand

L

lettie

Filthy / Gorgeous
Tackler
:thumbsdow Does anyone out there think that Rio should have his ban lifted or reduced and why?

I don't and here's why.

He failed to turn up to take a drug test, presumably drug testing is part of his occupational contract, therefore he in in breach of that contract. He wasn't asked to recite the Gettysburg address or learn how to split the atom, all he had to do was turn up at a certain place at a certain time and pee into a pot. Hardly a taxing task. I think the ban should stay, if only to show him that he is not too important to take a drug test.

What do you all think?
 
lettie said:
:thumbsdow Does anyone out there think that Rio should have his ban lifted or reduced and why?

I don't and here's why.

He failed to turn up to take a drug test, presumably drug testing is part of his occupational contract, therefore he in in breach of that contract. He wasn't asked to recite the Gettysburg address or learn how to split the atom, all he had to do was turn up at a certain place at a certain time and pee into a pot. Hardly a taxing task. I think the ban should stay, if only to show him that he is not too important to take a drug test.

What do you all think?
Click to expand...
I think that ban is correct and that the governing body had to be seen to be making an example of him so as to try and deter anyone else from pulling the same stunt.
My thoughts on the whole thing are that Man Utd KNEW that the player would not have passed the drugs test which is why they let him leave the training complex through a side door and told to go home.
I dont believe for one minute that a football player who has been playing for about 9-10 years forgot to wait and have (something that he will have done so many times before in his career) a drugs test - he knew he would fail it & so did the club.
As for the excuse that he was moving house and was in a hurry - when he was actually shopping in Manchester and also that the claim his mobile was switched off hence why he couldnt be contacted when in fact numerous calls were made from it during that morning all tell the story that he deliberately missed the drugs test.
He got what he deserves and was lucky that he didnt get a bigger ban.
 
Well said Glasgow guy, even though he will miss the European Championship it was clear to all and sundry that he could not give a clear reason for missing that test
 
Mik Dickinson said:
Well said Glasgow guy, even though he will miss the European Championship it was clear to all and sundry that he could not give a clear reason for missing that test
Click to expand...
I wasnt even thinking about euro 2004 to be honest, but now that you mention it - the thought of England dropping points in a crucial match sounds quite appealing ;),
and before people start going at how Scotland arent there - I know - but that doesnt bother me - I am not a scotland fan in any way, shape or form - never have been - its club football only for me !
But back to the topic - I think if it happens again ( which no doubt it will ) the player responsable will have the book thrown at him and may be looking at a 1 or 2 year ban.
 
I don't think we need Ferdinand that badly for Euro 2004, there's plenty other decent players that play in his position.
 
True there are more than likely other good players out there but it is nice to start a tournament with a tried and tested player
 
Just watched the Newcastle v Charlton game, Woodgate looks like a good fit to go along side Campbell, but don't know if the FA have forgiven him yet?
 
I agree with Glasgow Guy I think Man U Knew, maybe rio had been to Man U when his name was called that morning and they had suggested leaving and forgetting, Man U possibly trying their luck.
Can anyone Tell me what the consequences of RIO failing a drug test would be? If that would be worse than losing RIO for 8mnths then the answer is obvious, because I dont think RIO spends to much time working things out but MAN U do.
 
lettie said:
:thumbsdow Does anyone out there think that Rio should have his ban lifted or reduced and why?

He wasn't asked to recite the Gettysburg address or learn how to split the atom, all he had to do was turn up at a certain place at a certain time and pee into a pot. Hardly a taxing task.
Click to expand...
Are you implying that footballers are 'fick'? coz this one is about as sharp as a bowling ball.

How sweet would it be if England were to win Euro 2004, with Rio sat in the stands. i think this would be the only time he would ever regret missing the drugs test. His ego would take one hell of a self inflicted paggering.
 
Wayhey, that's the stuff!! Good point, Sparky, I would LOVE to see that. But we'd never win Euro 2004 with or without Rio.
 
The more money they waste the bigger the drop when they cant compete, so I say spend, spend, spend, then goodbye primadonnas.:D
 
Wasn't implying that footballers are thick, just that Rio was asked to do something that anybody could do, and believe me, it's a lot easier for a fella to get a urine sample into a pot than it is for a woman...:coffeecup
 
well even though i support Man United and think we are struggling at the back without him, the fact that he got banned was correct.

Every footballer has got to turn up for a drugs test, Rio didn't therefore he must pay the price. In my opnion if a player misses a drugs test they have something to hide.

I know people aren't happy cos another player got off n Rio didn't, but the FA have got to stop this type of thing happening so they had to ban him.

I would have done the same. And in my opinion he has brought shame to man u n the England squad and i think amn u shud just get another defender!

ab:)
 
thank-you

Well we couldn't let the gunners get all the glory! Just hope chelsea can stop them too, and then of course someone to knock chelsea out!!!

ab:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top