Baxter - Tests positive for banned substance

[sitwell]

I know a guy who works in a bar in Barnsley. He says Baxter once came up to him and asked him to sort him out with some gear.

Flat cap and donkey jacket ?

 

[Roygbiv]

I have never taken drugs, I am well passed the age of trying it for a laugh, so that just leaves would I take them if I was going through a crisis, I can't answer that but I bet a lot of people would have answered yes. Yes alcohol is a drug and yes people do drink to forget or to make them fell better, we all have way of making situations in our lives better, some are stronger than others, some need a little help.

I'm not saying Baxter doesn't have an issue as I couldn't possibly know. The fact this is his 2nd drug related incident maybe suggests that he does in fact. I do think though that most people take drugs simply to enhance their night rather than to get away from anything.

 

[Silent Blade]

.if found guilty, put the lad up for sale (someone will buy him) or sack him and nip this in the bud early.
.

Which club will actually BUY him?

 

[mosbolad]

First off 'the players claim of no wrongdoing' Official website, so Baxter aside until 'further findings' are found.
Players are professional athletes give or take the odd pie. Players know they are regularly drug tested. They know that a positive test is likely to result in a ban.They are 'professional' footballers the clues in the name and they are acting in a completely unprofessional manner. Any player who knowingly takes banned substances is letting down not only himself but his team mates, the club, and the fans.
Unacceptable, bad pro'.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

The fact this is his 2nd drug related incident

It isn't yet his second drugs related incident.

 

[Trigger Blade]

I know a guy who works in a bar in Barnsley. He says Baxter once came up to him and asked him to sort him out with some gear.

The story I heard was that Baxter was on his bike, which developed a technical fault. In fact, he asked the barman if he could help him out with some gears, as he was having problems with his Sturmey-Archer 3 speed.

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

The story I heard was that Baxter was on his bike, which developed a technical fault. In fact, he asked the barman if he could help him out with some gears, as he was having problems with his Sturmey-Archer 3 speed.

Nah, it would have been flat tyres if Baxter was on a bike.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Alcohol is a drug too

Absolutely. If only this was much more widely spoken about.

Drugs and alcohol is a nonsense statement; it's like saying food and pasta.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Which club will actually BUY him?

We would. Maybe we can sell him to ourselves - and make some money on the deal.

 

[sheffielder]

I.just hope there is no overreaction in the shoutbox

No, but the fans can take the blame for this last fuck up! You should all be ashamed. Bloody one cells

Love Wealdstone warrior

 

[Large Mendonca]

No, but the fans can take the blame for this last fuck up! You should all be ashamed. Bloody one cells

Love Wealdstone warrior

I heard it was fan criticism that drove him to it

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

Nah, it would have been flat tyres if Baxter was on a bike.

Many of his distractors would say spare tyres

 

[Ballinpigpubs13]

His drink could have been spiked - yeah right hahahahahaha

 

[sitwell]

I know in my lads case ,if they even suspect they might have been spiked they have to report to base and it immediately becomes a police matter. Police take spiking very seriously ,obviously because of date rape drugs mainly. But you wouldnt put it past someone spiking a footballers drink out of jealousy or spite.

 

[UnitedBlade]

His drink could have been spiked - yeah right hahahahahaha

I'm with you on this but he's claimed "no wrongdoing".

If he doesn't go for spiking he must have some other wonderful scenario lined up.

Looking forward to it.

I think his test was out of competition, so he'll face 6 months maximum.

I'm guessing after his explanation he'll get ...................... 6 months.

Interesting article from Gordon Taylor below. Testing becoming more rigorous and players may be tested 3 times a year. Only 4 caught this last season, of course one had to be an idiot we employ.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32771526

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

The issue for United will be that he's contracted until June 2016 I believe.
We paid £350-£500k for Baxter according to reports...if found guilty, put the lad up for sale (someone will buy him) or sack him and nip this in the bud early.

It's not the same but we should learn lesson's from the Ched debacle.

Which club will actually BUY him?

Right now, isn't he basically unsellable ? No one knows yet what sanctions might be brought against him by the FA, if he is indeed found "guilty". If there are sanctions it might entail a lengthy ban. The current uncertainty is bad enough for any club thinking of taking him off our hands, but if, hypothetically, a several month ban imposed later this summer meant he wouldn't be able to play until February, who's going to come to us with a wad of cash for that ?

One of the few players we've got who might have brought us a few bob in the transfer market has just effectively lost a lot (or all) of his value--unless the process shows he is innocent, of course. Might the club be insured for this kind of thing ?

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I know in my lads case ,if they even suspect they might have been spiked they have to report to base and it immediately becomes a police matter. Police take spiking very seriously ,obviously because of date rape drugs mainly. But you wouldnt put it past someone spiking a footballers drink out of jealousy or spite.

Informative but just want to point out before this becomes Baxter said his drink was spiked the idea of a spiked drink is just one of many ways he could have tested posted positive (including whatever was found in his system he took it knowingly).

Also, depending on the substance, if the quantities are small enough then he might still test positive but not be aware of the spike so he wouldn't report it to the police.

Reporting to the police is eminently sensible, but not always practicable.

Across this whole issue there are all sorts of possibilities.

 

[Esablade]

Which club will actually BUY him?

Let's say he gets 6 month ban...he could be back before Xmas 2015.
IMO Someone would buy him for around £50-£100k at least.

Probably best just to sack him though eh?

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Might the club be insured for this kind of thing ?

Speculating, could you sue for breach of contract? No idea about these things. Don't recall any precedents.

And if an employee is on a self-destructive downward spiral suing them is likely to exacerbate that.

I'd imagine something like you no longer have to pay wages, but you do potentially miss out on resale value.

What happened with that Chelski player?

 

[Blade56]

Guilty or not guilty couldn't give a toss. What's twanging my anger strings is we've just put a crap season to bed and I for one was look forward to a clean sheet, a fresh start, transfers, ins and outs, trying to get excited again about my football.

What do we get? Weeks and weeks if not months of scandal putting sufc in the lime light for all the wrong reasons AGAIN. Off putting to potential new players and demotavating for the existing ones.

It's the fans feckin fault!

Rant over

 

[metalblade]

I have yet to read anywhere that it says what has allegedly been found in his sample, there are some really wild rumours doing the rounds here but has anybody stopped to think maybe our club doctor has dropped a bollock with a prescription, maybe he had a cough like Kenny who knows. We can always string him up at the nearest gas lamp if he is found to have taken something illegal, lets hope it is sorted out one way or the other very quickly the speculation is once again damaging the clubs image.

 

[UnitedBlade]

I have yet to read anywhere that it says what has allegedly been found in his sample, there are some really wild rumours doing the rounds here but has anybody stopped to think maybe our club doctor has dropped a bollock with a prescription, maybe he had a cough like Kenny who knows. We can always string him up at the nearest gas lamp if he is found to have taken something illegal, lets hope it is sorted out one way or the other very quickly the speculation is once again damaging the clubs image.

There are very strict notification requirements on clubs for treatment that may involve a banned substance. I very much doubt the club has dropped a bollock.

If it is ecstasy (as the Star is reporting) I'm not sure what you can get across the counter that includes that as an ingredient !

 

[UnitedBlade]

he got caught when he was an apprentice aswell. we shouldnt be paying him whilst hes made himself unavailable for selection.he should be sacked when the b sample comes back positive. A samples dont lie so iam not sure why hes saying hes innocent. Fed up of little wankers bringing our clubs name into disrepute.Get rid nigel

I'm pretty sure the B sample is back - according to the regulations it has to be analysed within 5 calendar days.

Didn't appear in playoff 1st leg (I suspect FA had contacted the club and it's an immediate temporary suspension but no publicity)
United issue statement yesterday (B sample back and FA have informed player and club and said they are issuing a press release hence United's statement)

It's up to Baxter to explain this no wrongdoing.

I agree I'm fed up with individual players letting down the club with clear disciplinary transgressions. The FA couldn't make this much clearer, the problem is some won't listen and think they can get away with it.

 

[TarquinDelouche]

Speculating, could you sue for breach of contract? No idea about these things. Don't recall any precedents.

And if an employee is on a self-destructive downward spiral suing them is likely to exacerbate that.

I'd imagine something like you no longer have to pay wages, but you do potentially miss out on resale value.

What happened with that Chelski player?

Chelsea started to seek compensation from Mutu in early 2005. The Football Association Premier League Appeals Committee decided that the player had committed a breach of his contract without just cause which made Chelsea eligible to claim the compensation. Mutu started his first appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) but the case was dismissed. On 11 May 2006, Chelsea applied to FIFA for an award of compensation against Mutu. In particular, the club requested that the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) award compensation to the club following Mutu's breaching the employment contract without just cause. However, on 26 October, the DRC decided that it did not have jurisdiction to make a decision in the dispute and that the claim by the club was therefore not admissible. On 22 December, Chelsea lodged a new appeal before the CAS seeking the annulment of the DRC’s decision. On 21 May 2007, a CAS panel upheld the club’s appeal, set aside the DRC’s decision, and referred the matter back to the DRC, “which does have jurisdiction to determine and impose the appropriate sporting sanction and/or order for compensation, if any, arising out of the dispute” between the Club and the Player"

On 6 August 2007, on the basis of the Second CAS Award, Chelsea filed with the DRC a "Re-amended application for an award of compensation", seeking damages to be determined on the basis of various factors, "including the wasted costs of acquiring the Player (£13,814,000), the cost of replacing the Player (£22,661,641), the unearned portion of signing bonus (£44,000) and other benefits received by the Player from the Club (£3,128,566.03) as well as from his new club, Juventus (unknown), the substantial legal costs that the Club has been forced to incur (£391,049.03) and the unquantifiable but undeniable cost in playing terms and in terms of the Club’s commercial brand values", but "at least equivalent to the replacement cost of £22,661,641". On 14 September, Mutu submitted to the DRC a brief requesting the rejection of Chelsea's plea, and asking FIFA to open an investigation against the club for having used and/or dealt with unlicensed agents. But Mutu failed to suspend the arbitration and his claim for use of unlicensed agents was found not to be supported.

On 7 May 2008, the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber ordered Mutu to pay €17,173,990 in compensation to his former club, Chelsea FC, for breach of contract. This included €16,500,000 for the unamortised portion of the transfer fee paid to Parma, €307,340 for the unamortised portion of the sign-on fee (received by Mutu), and €366,650 for the unamortised portion of the fee to the Agent, but was not to take into account the determination of the damages for the amounts already paid by the club to the player (consideration for services rendered) or the remaining value of the employment contract (valued at €10,858,500). Mutu had to pay within 30 days after being informed of the decision in August 2008. Mutu lodged an appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport for the second time, but on 31 July 2009, that court dismissed his appeal, and Mutu was ordered to pay Chelsea the amount plus interest of 5% p.a. starting on 12 September 2008 until the effective date of payment; the matter was be submitted to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for its determination. In addition, Mutu had to pay the costs of arbitration for both parties, including CHF 50,000 to Chelsea. The fine was the highest ever levied by FIFA.

Mutu may be banned from football by FIFA if he does not pay, although some lawyers have disputed this. Mutu started his third appeal, this time to the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland, in October 2009, but on 14 June 2010 this appeal was also dismissed with Mutu again being ordered to pay Chelsea €17m in damages. Mutu then submitted an appeal to European Court of Human Rights.

In 2013, FIFA DRC decided in a new ruling that Livorno and Juventus were also jointly liable to pay compensation; both clubs immediately appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. On 21 January 2015 The Court of Arbitration for Sport annulled the FIFA DRC ruling; Mutu remained the sole party to pay the compensation.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Thanks.

Is that the definition of legal wrangling? Well at least it's Chelski spending all that money on what will presumably set some kind of precedent.

There's some fine detail in there, including those lawyers' fees down to the nearest penny, ".03"

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

There are very strict notification requirements on clubs for treatment that may involve a banned substance. I very much doubt the club has dropped a bollock.

If it is ecstasy (as the Star is reporting) I'm not sure what you can get across the counter that includes that as an ingredient !

Aiui you don't often/never test for a particular substance rather some kind of signature it makes.

I think there are technical terms for this but I've no idea what they are.

Different substances can leave similar signatures.

I'm not saying that's what's happened here, just that the testing is not always straightforward.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Informative but just want to point out before this becomes Baxter said his drink was spiked the idea of a spiked drink is just one of many ways he could have tested posted positive (including whatever was found in his system he took it knowingly).

Also, depending on the substance, if the quantities are small enough then he might still test positive but not be aware of the spike so he wouldn't report it to the police.

Reporting to the police is eminently sensible, but not always practicable.

Across this whole issue there are all sorts of possibilities.

Interesting that it was soluable in a drink. But there's no way he or those he was out with wouldn't have noticed and therefore as a professional athlete he should have reported it.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Does anyone know what the position is wrt strict liability ie even if it's contaminated food then the individual is still liable.

That's generally the case in sport but as drugs and football(for some reason...) don't get that much coverage I don't think I've ever seen it mentioned specifically.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Interesting that it was soluable in a drink. But there's no way he or those he was out with wouldn't have noticed and therefore as a professional athlete he should have reported it.

Baxter = Athlete

 

[judge]

To be fair to him he was probably so pissed he didnt know what he was doing


For the last 5 years