Ha ha James Rules offered to "stand down"the whole squad to face Rovers,yeah right that would have gone down well at the RFL.

I do wonder, why it has taken so long for Martin Gleeson to "come clean" on this matter. I suppose it had nothing to do with him engaging the services of Max Clifford and getting paid for his comments by The Wail on Sunday - after The Sun had turned him down

Dont you just love "bright"FC fans?
Tell me again that Gleeson criminal conviction mate ? hahaha

He makes a fair point, IMO. The Mail story seems/claims to have documents backing it up though. They're accusing the RFL of something subtlely different to what the RFL are denying, and I suspect ultimately the story will disappear down that gap. Has any other major news source picked it up? Some might tomorrow, I guess.

Making it about us - it puts the Mason furore of roughly the same time, and all the grief our board got, in the shade. Which is some achievement. I'd maybe be a tad peeved if I was them that the RFL didn't quietly try to bend the rules a bit more, in light of this, to help us avoid the embarrassing consequences. Possibly it didn't matter when WM's Toulon trip became known.

The paper has stated that it has written statements from other players at FC that have been taking this drug...... As a rl supporter i believe each and every one of these players should have their names brought forward and also banned for taking this drug....

By not doing so both the RFL and UKAD are being complacent in their duties to both the clubs and the fans by not taking the appropriate measures into dealing with the Drug cheats(intentional or not). And what it re-affirms is the fact that the RFL are just as crooked as most other major sporting organisations by turning a blind eye to the widespread usage of the substance... As mentioned by another poster it does make you wonder on just how widespread that it may be...

It's a interesting point and I wonder for the players to admit that they took the drug it would be put down to the condtioners error and no charges would be brought due to their 'honesty'.

While the intial error was the conditioners the players have the means to check.

I believe that will be exactly the case. I also believe, had it been a Championship team, they would have had the book thrown at them. And the kitchen sink. And anything else which came to hand.

Of course they should. How can they ban Gleeson and no one else? Will they? Of course they won't.

Was Gleesons ban for the drug, the cover up or both?

Does/Should it matter?

Well yes, that would be how they can ban Gleeson and no other player.

Surely any other players involved would be part of the cover up?

Wasn't Gleeson due a longer ban before being a snitch?

They could be, they could have also not known till Rule and Cooper told them that the diet pills they have been given are against the rules and they'll have to tell the rfl they were taking them.

All speculation obvouisly.

No it didn't, I suggest you read it again

Now it's correct, hardly a difference.

Paper also says Gleeson was 'banned for two years following him testing positive', no mention of the coverup, at that point, there was no coverup, Gleeson revealed the coverup in a "I'm taking you with me" kind of way.

Horrible read, for the sport.

Who else is taking this? Why use a dietary supplement when you're 'feeling tired'? Isn't that drug abuse?

In fact, a group of Hull players had used OxyElite Pro, putting themselves at risk of failing tests for a performance-enhancing drug.
These players included Gleeson and Long as well as other international players whose identities are known to Inside Sport.
They have admitted in statements to UKAD that they had used OxyElite Pro while at Hull FC, albeit in the mistaken belief that it had been cleared by Cooper as 'safe'.

Ok the paper hasnt statements but UKAD have apparently.

Again a very clever use of words by The Wail:

[iIn fact, a group of Hull players had used OxyElite Pro, putting themselves at risk of failing tests for a performance-enhancing drug.

These players included Gleeson and Long as well as other international players whose identities are known to Inside Sport.

[uThey[/u have admitted in statements to UKAD that they had used OxyElite Pro while at Hull FC, albeit in the mistaken belief that it had been cleared by Cooper as 'safe'.[/i

The "they" referred to in the article could well be just Gleeson and Long. It's all in the ambiguity of the wording

"[iOn the basis of the statements sent to UKAD in Rosewarne's email on June 4, UKAD temporarily lifted Gleeson's provisional suspension for his failed drugs test and he, along with Long and other players who have admitted using OxyElite Pro, played in the 17-10 defeat by Hull KR, despite the risk of testing positive for a banned substance."[/i

Very clever wording, I mean, it's almost like they're implying other players have admitted to taking it...

Putting aside the shameful cover-up part of the story, is this different to Senior and Bailey at Leeds (apart from the fact they were only fined?) in terms of the supplement part?
[urlhttp://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/rugby_league/3837690/Keith-Senior-My-drugs-hell.html[/url

Probably not, but the precedent for this drug has been set by Gleesons banning therefore I would assume any player testing positive for this will in the future be banned.

It seems very difficult for the players, should they take the word of the trained professional that what they take is ok or should they all have their own personal advisor to safeguard against this happening again.

I do agree with a dum dum, surely if you need a drug to stop you feeling tired then you must be on a slippery slope, why would a diet pill make you feel less tired, surely the whole point of diet pills is to use energy not add it.

Another point to bare in mind, a lot are saying these type of drugs are trivial and don't aid performance but surely if you feel knackered during a match and you take something that stops you feeling knackered then its enhancing your performance.

That was 2004, 5/6 years before what Gleeson took was even banned. Morally a stuff-up is still just a stuff-up, but I think the rules have probably tightened on the back of things like that. If 7/8 of your players were taking it too, they must be looking at Gleeson and thinking 'could have easily been me'. Gleeson, for all his issues over the years can justifiably wonder 'why me?'

Completely agree. It's one thing using a drug for what it's meant for, in this case a slimming aid. But to use it for it's other benefits, faster recovery time & extra energy, (I believe) has got to be wrong in anyones eyes IMO.

The rules are actually very clear on this point. The ultimate responsibility for making sure that anything taken by an athlete is not on the WADA banned list lies with the athlete and nobody else. This was reinforced following the Senior incident.

Have resisted untill now to voice my opinion on this, But having read the League press this morning & done a little investigating of my own I find it interesting that there is such an emotive use of the word banned drug! it turns out that the said drug is perfectly legal to take except within 12 hours of competition. As is caffine (drink to much coffee you can fail the drugs test).
I find this a none story by a rag that wont report on our game in any other circumstance & should be treated with the contempt it deserves, If it has the proof it says it has then go to the police otherwise shut up & leave our game alone as it dose for most of the year.