Baxter Drug Hearing on July 10

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


How is he making out that he unknowingly took ecstasy?
 
metalblade said:
To be fair I'd sack the idiot too even council road sweepers are down the road if they fail a drugs test why should Baxter be any different ? You would have thought he would have learnt his lesson and choose better friends to knock around with after the last time.
Click to expand...

Because the drug laws are stupid, irrational and hypocritical, and if he had gone out binge drinking and got pissed on booze, which is far more damaging to the country and to individuals than drugs, everyone would have said what a top bloke and had a good laugh about it. It would be different maybe if what he did was meant to be performance enhancing, but far from it.
 
Newbury Blade said:
Because the drug laws are stupid, irrational and hypocritical, and if he had gone out binge drinking and got pissed on booze, which is far more damaging to the country and to individuals than drugs, everyone would have said what a top bloke and had a good laugh about it. It would be different maybe if what he did was meant to be performance enhancing, but far from it.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately we don't get to chose which laws to disregard because we find them "stupid, irrational and hypocritical".
 
The lad's 23 years old, just a kid. Bloody hell I'm 67 and still have good nights out, often with some regret!

Recreational drugs are different to performance enhancing drugs, surely.

As for sacking the lad, hold on a minute. The lad has talent and he can be a key player in a side playing the right way, life has been tough for him playing out of position in Clough teams and he needs movement in the team. No team has too many players who can score goals and provide assists consistently.

As well as that, he's a human being. As well as that we paid a fee for him and might get it back one day!

Having said all that I would understand if the club said it was all over with him. They know what his attitude is and what type of lad he is.
 
TarquinDelouche said:
Unfortunately we don't get to chose which laws to disregard because we find them "stupid, irrational and hypocritical".
Click to expand...

Many, perhaps most, people (including politicians and tabloid journalists) break the law by taking illegal drugs but the politicians and journalists then create a climate of total hysteria around the subject. A proportionate response would be to take the lad to one side and tell him not to do it again. It's silly, but only because it's illegal, not because any actual harm is done to himself or anyone else. No ban, sacking etc is necessary.

My point about alcohol is that if he drank 10 pints of lager instead of one tablet no one would bat an eyelid so long as he doesn't do it every night, and yet it is potentially much more harmful to him and society. Look at the part alcohol played in the Ched case. Result: two (at least) ruined lives.

I like a drink and I enjoy the fact that at least two of our songs celebrate beer but you can't deny that alcohol causes great harm, and the only harm caused by drugs is because they are illegal and so can't be properly controlled, so of course millions goes to drug barons and more and more crime is generated because of people stealing to pay for drugs. It's complete madness.
 
If guilty. I'd prefer we don't sack him, but recoup a couple hundred grand for him when he's eligible to play again.
 
I think a sacking would be extreme, he let the club down badly but players are not just employees for football clubs, they are investments. Following on from the council road sweepers comparison, there's no multi-million pound transfer market in road sweepers betweeen councils, I'm afraid.
 
Agree with that Newbury in general but all drugs can be harmful if abused. That in itself is probably not a reason they should be illegal, given alcohol isn't.
I'd guess that around 75% of murders in London are due to wars between gangs who are primarily funded by drug dealing and Essex is full of professional criminals who turned to drug dealing and made literally millions.
It's a massive hypocrisy. Drugs are easily available anyway so prohibition is failing in that respect, whilst creating an environment that allows scum to make serious money.

But at present, Baxter's going to get banned unless he's got a very plausible story.
 
Don't discount the huge importance drug dealing has within the economy.

I'd say drug money was funding a great proportion of the development (building work) happening in northern England now.
 
What do the people saying a sacking is harsh want? Do you think he should even be banned?
 
Newbury Blade said:
My point about alcohol is that if he drank 10 pints of lager instead of one tablet no one would bat an eyelid so long as he doesn't do it every night, and yet it is potentially much more harmful to him and society. Look at the part alcohol played in the Ched case. Result: two (at least) ruined lives.

I like a drink and I enjoy the fact that at least two of our songs celebrate beer but you can't deny that alcohol causes great harm, and the only harm caused by drugs is because they are illegal and so can't be properly controlled, so of course millions goes to drug barons and more and more crime is generated because of people stealing to pay for drugs. It's complete madness.
Click to expand...

Seriously? I mean, you are making this as a serious comment?

http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/6/1509.short

http://sti.bmj.com/content/76/4/292.short

http://sti.bmj.com/content/76/4/292.short

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=365202

I could go on and on if you like. I can give you detailed information on the use of skunk (with it's very high levels of THC) and the increase in psychotic episodes associated with it. Hepatitis and crack use, PCP and paranoid increases, Cocaine and heart problems. If you want a serious debate on this, by all means, but leave out trite comments like that.
 

Get ready for the petitions, role model nonsense, sponsor's five minute of fame if he is found guilty Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 
Jehovah said:
What do the people saying a sacking is harsh want? Do you think he should even be banned?
Click to expand...
I'd like to see the FA just turn over the results to the CPS who then decide whether or not it's in the public interest to prosecute, if it's not performance enhancing.
 
SouthEssexBlade said:
Seriously? I mean, you are making this as a serious comment?

http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/6/1509.short

http://sti.bmj.com/content/76/4/292.short

http://sti.bmj.com/content/76/4/292.short

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=365202

I could go on and on if you like. I can give you detailed information on the use of skunk (with it's very high levels of THC) and the increase in psychotic episodes associated with it. Hepatitis and crack use, PCP and paranoid increases, Cocaine and heart problems. If you want a serious debate on this, by all means, but leave out trite comments like that.
Click to expand...

I think his point is - and it is a point I have some sympathy with - is that all drugs (including alcohol and nicotine) are harmful when abused and it seems strange that you get the full weight of the law falling down in respect of one sort of drug and not another sort. If someone takes an occasional tab of ecstasy on a night out, he is no more likely to come to harm that someone who has a few pints on a night out.
 
knockoffnigel said:
Get ready for the petitions, role model nonsense, sponsor's five minute of fame if he is found guilty Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Click to expand...

I don't think many sponsors are going to be kicking up too much of a fuss if a player is found guilty of taking a recreational drug, to be honest.
 
Darren said:
I think his point is - and it is a point I have some sympathy with - is that all drugs (including alcohol and nicotine) are harmful when abused and it seems strange that you get the full weight of the law falling down in respect of one sort of drug and not another sort. If someone takes an occasional tab of ecstasy on a night out, he is no more likely to come to harm that someone who has a few pints on a night out.
Click to expand...

Not how I took his point, " but you can't deny that alcohol causes great harm, and the only harm caused by drugs is because they are illegal."

As you say all drugs abused are harmful (caffeine included). The law is bonkers, but the comment above doesn't say that at all. It says 'no consequences'. No more right for the illegal stuff as it is for the legal. An odd fag probably does little damage, long-term heavy smoking has consequences we're all familiar with. Similarly with alcohol, we know the outcome of heavy use. Well, heavy use of any drug (cannabis, cocaine, ecstasy, legal highs like spice etc.) has consequences. Legalising cannabis or skunk wouldn't make the psychotic episodes for some heavy users go away.
 
SouthEssexBlade said:
Not how I took his point, " but you can't deny that alcohol causes great harm, and the only harm caused by drugs is because they are illegal."

As you say all drugs abused are harmful (caffeine included). The law is bonkers, but the comment above doesn't say that at all. It says 'no consequences'. No more right for the illegal stuff as it is for the legal. An odd fag probably does little damage, long-term heavy smoking has consequences we're all familiar with. Similarly with alcohol, we know the outcome of heavy use. Well, heavy use of any drug (cannabis, cocaine, ecstasy, legal highs like spice etc.) has consequences. Legalising cannabis or skunk wouldn't make the psychotic episodes for some heavy users go away.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but wouldn't the problem just be the same as the problem we have with people suffering from alcoholism?

All illegality seems to do is to criminalise people who use drugs (as some people use alcohol) recreationally with little harm to themselves and to put money in the pockets of some very unsavoury people.
 
Newbury Blade said:
Many, perhaps most, people (including politicians and tabloid journalists) break the law by taking illegal drugs but the politicians and journalists then create a climate of total hysteria around the subject. A proportionate response would be to take the lad to one side and tell him not to do it again. It's silly, but only because it's illegal, not because any actual harm is done to himself or anyone else. No ban, sacking etc is necessary.

My point about alcohol is that if he drank 10 pints of lager instead of one tablet no one would bat an eyelid so long as he doesn't do it every night, and yet it is potentially much more harmful to him and society. Look at the part alcohol played in the Ched case. Result: two (at least) ruined lives.

I like a drink and I enjoy the fact that at least two of our songs celebrate beer but you can't deny that alcohol causes great harm, and the only harm caused by drugs is because they are illegal and so can't be properly controlled, so of course millions goes to drug barons and more and more crime is generated because of people stealing to pay for drugs. It's complete madness.
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with the majority of your argument there are a couple of points. If he (or any footballer) was regularly out on the ale or say video emerged (as they tend to do) of him spannered laying on a street or slumped wherever I think folk would bat an eyelid. He is (as all footballers are) a professional athlete who owes a duty to himself the club and supporters to keep fit in shape and not to partake in behaviors that jeopardise this.

Secondly like it or not, recreational drugs are unlawful and as such athletes, footballers should not take them. They know they shouldn't, they know they are on the banned list. Furthermore they know that they will be regularly drug tested and they also know that a positive will result in a ban. So knowing all this any athlete (footballer) who then chooses to take such a drug, in my mind is a bad pro whose attitude to the abuse of his body without regard to the outcome may well reflect in the performances on the field.
 
I wouldn't sack him. No way. We'd be shooting ourselves in the foot. I wouldn't expect him to be starting every game, but he could still play a big part next season

It was a stupid mistake, like getting in a fight or driving at 100mph on the Parkway in a new sports car

(Then again, if you take the Ched "role model" argument to its logical conclusion, no sportsman should be allowed to play again after a criminal conviction of moral turpitude)
 
SouthEssexBlade said:
Not how I took his point, " but you can't deny that alcohol causes great harm, and the only harm caused by drugs is because they are illegal."

As you say all drugs abused are harmful (caffeine included). The law is bonkers, but the comment above doesn't say that at all. It says 'no consequences'. No more right for the illegal stuff as it is for the legal. An odd fag probably does little damage, long-term heavy smoking has consequences we're all familiar with. Similarly with alcohol, we know the outcome of heavy use. Well, heavy use of any drug (cannabis, cocaine, ecstasy, legal highs like spice etc.) has consequences. Legalising cannabis or skunk wouldn't make the psychotic episodes for some heavy users go away.
Click to expand...

Really?I've heard far more about people dying from taking recreational drugsthan having pints.
 
Darren said:
Indeed, but wouldn't the problem just be the same as the problem we have with people suffering from alcoholism?

All illegality seems to do is to criminalise people who use drugs (as some people use alcohol) recreationally with little harm to themselves and to put money in the pockets of some very unsavoury people.
Click to expand...

Of course the issue of addiction is the same (add gambling, sex, shopping and just about anything that can gain an unhealthy, uncontrolled fixation) whether legal or illegal. But that is a different debate to the harm caused by substances whether legal or not. the implication that illegal causes no harm is a dangerous one. If the THC levels in skunk (which is what the majority of people in this country are using when said to be using cannabis) continues to rise as it has done, the implications for mental health in this country could be significant.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/09/health/weed-potency-levels/

http://www.theguardian.com/science/...nk-cause-psychosis-but-milder-cannabis-doesnt
 
SouthEssexBlade said:
Of course the issue of addiction is the same (add gambling, sex, shopping and just about anything that can gain an unhealthy, uncontrolled fixation) whether legal or illegal. But that is a different debate to the harm caused by substances whether legal or not. the implication that illegal causes no harm is a dangerous one. If the THC levels in skunk (which is what the majority of people in this country are using when said to be using cannabis) continues to rise as it has done, the implications for mental health in this country could be significant.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/09/health/weed-potency-levels/

http://www.theguardian.com/science/sifting-the-evidence/2015/feb/16/does-smoking-skunk-cause-psychosis-but-milder-cannabis-doesnt
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with that and I have seen plenty of my clients sent crazy by over use of cannabis.

However, would it not be better to legalise and regulate like we do with alcohol and tobacco?
 

Newbury Blade said:
Many, perhaps most, people (including politicians and tabloid journalists) break the law by taking illegal drugs but the politicians and journalists then create a climate of total hysteria around the subject. A proportionate response would be to take the lad to one side and tell him not to do it again. It's silly, but only because it's illegal, not because any actual harm is done to himself or anyone else. No ban, sacking etc is necessary.

My point about alcohol is that if he drank 10 pints of lager instead of one tablet no one would bat an eyelid so long as he doesn't do it every night, and yet it is potentially much more harmful to him and society. Look at the part alcohol played in the Ched case. Result: two (at least) ruined lives.

I like a drink and I enjoy the fact that at least two of our songs celebrate beer but you can't deny that alcohol causes great harm, and the only harm caused by drugs is because they are illegal and so can't be properly controlled, so of course millions goes to drug barons and more and more crime is generated because of people stealing to pay for drugs. It's complete madness.
Click to expand...

Alcohol is legal and that is controlled, how?

Whatever people a law - it is exactly that, a law.

When you see a No Entry sign on a road do you disregard it "...because nothing's coming?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom