Viewing Thread:
"F**king Disgraceful"

So Ferdinand gets a 50 grand fine and an 8 month ban for missing a drugs test in which he offered to do again the same day and bloody Mutu gets a 20 grand fine and a 7 month ban for testing positive.

FA are stupid f**king nobs!!!1111

That is all.

lalakersrule wrote:
> Shame they aren't clamping down on people who actually fail the tests
> then

Har har.....?

:P

I know you'd be annoyed if Terry had got an 8 month ban for missing a test and Ruud actually fails one and gets a month less.

lalakersrule wrote:
> I know you'd be annoyed if Terry had got an 8 month ban for missing a
> test and Ruud actually fails one and gets a month less.

Not really, seeing as what's just happened. If those are the rules, then i'll have to live with it wont I?

Mutu wasnt gonna play any football this season anyway(until january anyway), so this ban has just set his career back by half a season really.

Bit like when Roy Keane got suspended for the haaland thing while he was injured anyway.

Indeed. The FA's increasingly stern stance on drugs is apparent in the rapidly increasing length of bans being dished out for offences.

Bosnich - 9 months

Ferdinand - 8 months

Mutu - 7 months


Erm... wait a second...

Colourless wrote:
> Ha. You are joking aren't you Damarus?

No. Ferdinand may aswell of turned around and admit to taking a banned substance (even though he didn't) if this is the case.

Chelsea wanted rid of Mutu anyway. It's obvious they were just looking for a way to end his contract.

Heard on Sky Sports a reason for the different punishments between Rio and Mutu. Rio was charged for missing the drugs test, which apparently means they have a different line to follow in dealing with him, compared to Mutu who was charged for taking recreational drugs, hence the difference in what has to be taken into account, and how they are dealt with.

To me, thats stupid, and no wonder no one knows where they stand with regards to taking drugs, or not taking drugs in any sport.

Colourless wrote:
> Not really, seeing as what's just happened. If those are the rules,
> then i'll have to live with it wont I?


I'm talking if that was the situation that had just happened, i.e Ruud replaces Mutu and Terry replaces Ferdinand in this equation

WHAT A CQCK UP


they definatly made and example of rio
the b stards

I think it's good he got a smaller punishment than Ferdinand, because for one, he was only on recreational drugs which would more likely have hindered his performance. He was not gaining an unfair advantage which Rio could have been.

Also if they gave a larger ban than to Ferdinand, that would set the precedent for a lot of drug-using footballers to not go to their test, as they would be sure to recieve a more lenient punishment then if they went and were found guilty.