The Instigator
ObiWan
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
KBattleson
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Essendon's Players should be banned

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/15/2013 Category: Sports
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,046 times Debate No: 36717
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

ObiWan

Pro

Full Resolution: The players of the Essendon Football Club should receive the standard 2-year suspension for doping.

I don't know if anyone on here will know what I'm talking about, but it's worth a shot.

I believe that, regardless of whether or not the players were aware they were being given a banned substance they should still be suspended.

First round acceptance.

Forfeiting any round will result in the full 7 points being awarded to the other debater.
KBattleson

Con

I think there should simply be separate leagues for people who used steroids and other enhancements and those who do not. Pretty soon we will have people who are bred for specific genetic traits and prosthetic limbs that will make them far superior to normal athletes. Doping will look downright tame by comparison. But for now, I would rather see athletes push themselves beyond the limits of their bodies using technology than watch them be hobbled by people who think that the human race should cede to evolve any further than it already has.

Passing a "no steroids rule" is like passing a rule in basketball that says no player shall be over 6 feet tall.
Debate Round No. 1
ObiWan

Pro

The Essendon Supplement Scandal has attracted a lot of media intention in Australia lately.

The fact of the matter is, that during the off season these players were administered illegal peptides, believed to be AOD-9604 and Thymosin Beta 4, which was not approved for human use and is banned under the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA). If these players took this drug, then under the current system they should be banned for professional sports for the mandatory two year period outlined in the WADA code, of which Australia is a signatory. [1]

These banned substances were apparently administered by club sports scientist Stephen Dank and club doctor Stephen Dank, with the players claiming that they believed to whole thing was legal. However section 2.2.1 of the WADA code reads:
"It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation for Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method" [2]

We can take two key things away from this. The first being that it is the athletes responsibility to make sure they do not take a prohibited substance. Second, that it is not necessary that an athlete knows they have taken a banned substance in order to violate the terms of the WADA code.

So the question now becomes, was a performance enhancing drug taken? Well Essendon have all but admitted to administering their players with AOD-9604, a human growth variant. In his interview on the popular talk show, On the Couch Essendon captain Jobe Watson admits to it himself. (See video)

The evidence is growing larger and larger in the wake of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency (ASADA) report into the matter, and while this investigation remains on-going. As a fan of the game, this entire situation makes me feel deeply troubled. I really feel very sorry for the players, who seem to the victims in this entire saga. However, the rules are there, and it is not fair on the other 17 clubs in the competition if another club is able to take banned substances and get away with it.

I do not even know where to begin with my opponents opening statement, except to say with. The resolution of this debate is about what should happen to the Essendon players, not to sport in generally, and if that's the angle that you want to argue then it's fine by me, as long as you keep it relevant.

[1] http://www.theage.com.au...
[2] http://stage.wada-ama.org...
KBattleson

Con

The idea that a rule should be enforced simply because it exists is a fallacy.

Its the reasoning behind the rule that is important.

If there is a reasonable doubt as to whether or not the player knew they were taking an illicit substance, they should not be banned, merely stripped of whatever titles and records they had received during that time. I do not see what gives this appointed agency the right to create rules and regulations and enforce them without regard to players rights to arbitration or fair hearing. Remember, athletes are employees, and have all the same entitlements in that regard as any other employee, including access to civil courts.

If you can prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that they knew that they were taking an illicit substance, then yes, according to the terms of their agreement, they should be banned. But as is, there is some question as to whether they knew they were taking steroids to begin with.

Players often consume several different types of enhancements, most of them perfectly legal, such as vitamins, protein powder, herbal supplements, ect. If they were given, as prescribed by a professional, illegal substances as part of their training regiment, and told that they were 100% legal, with no prior knowledge as to what those substances were, they should not be banned.

Remember, these are people, people with kids and families that depend on their income, who were just doing there job, and risked censure by NOT taking these substances.
Debate Round No. 2
ObiWan

Pro

ObiWan forfeited this round.
KBattleson

Con

KBattleson forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by ObiWan 4 years ago
ObiWan
Well that's unfortunate, I thought I had more time. I urge the voters to vote Con for my oversight
Posted by ObiWan 4 years ago
ObiWan
Fair Enough
Posted by KBattleson 4 years ago
KBattleson
thats why its in the comments section.
Posted by ObiWan 4 years ago
ObiWan
Thats not even the debate
Posted by KBattleson 4 years ago
KBattleson
I'm not saying players should be forced to take steroids to compete, anymore than they should be expected to take methamphetimines to to increase their reaction times, (unless we bring back gladiatorial combat) but saying that a group of people who have a reasonable doubt as to whether they were literally doped against their wills should not be banned from the sport they love for something they were ultimately not responsible for.

At most, they should be stripped of whatever titles or records they earned or received while under the influence of drugs, including draws and losses.
Posted by KBattleson 4 years ago
KBattleson
And what if that child was given growth hormones? Or if they would be considered by the medical community to have a genetic disorder? There was, for a brief period, an asian man who was on the Lakers (?) who was over 7 feet tall. In the medical community, he might be considered to have a glandular disorder called gigantism, but he is not excluded from play. This disorder can even be induced, through the use of chemicals during childhood and puberty, using chemicals, and be totally undetectable.

Why is this supposed "natural" advantage allowed while "unnatural" drugs such as steroids such as androgen and testosterone, which your body produces naturally, are considered illegal? Further, steroids are only "illegal" in the sense that they require a prescription, several people suffer from deficiencies in one or both hormones, which make them weak and sickly. At what point does it stop being "medicine" and start being "an illegal performance enhancing substance"?

Take, for example, Lance Armstrong, who was being proscribed hormones due to his testicular cancer, and continued taking them after his cancer had gone into remission, AS PRESCRIBED BY HIS DOCTOR. How is it fair to strip him of his trophy for doing the very same thing we claimed to admire, succeeding in spite of having contracted cancer?
Posted by D.Wolf 4 years ago
D.Wolf
I find KBattlesons' argument completely absurd. To condone and subjugate a league between athletes whom use illegal steroids and athletes whom do not would be making a sports league that would have to be illegal in order for them to use of illegal steroids, thus, athletes would still be committing crimes, in turn, not making any progression in his argument.

"Passing a "no steroids rule "is like passing a rule in basketball that says no player shall be over 6 feet tall." There are plenty of distinctions to be made about this comment, but to keep it succinct, height is a natural advantage that does not encompass the unnatural side effects that steroids bring.

I agree with PRO, and the athletes should deal the ramifications of their actions because it is against the rules in sports and there are stipulations that the players disobeyed.
No votes have been placed for this debate.