Steroid News
News bot on steroids
SRU denies claims Scott MacLeod case could have been resolved quicker
[SIZE=-1]Scotsman, United Kingdom - 3 minutes ago[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Mike Morgan, of London law firm Hammonds, said: "Testosterone cases do take some time and WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency] and UK Sport have to be thorough, but when the SRU's independent panel first came together, to decide whether or not he had a case to answer, they could have asked Scott himself for an explanation. That is the bit that is missing from this; the aspect where things could have been cleared up earlier.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]"Like most people, I assume, he had no idea that alcohol could raise testosterone levels, but the experts involved knew that because it is more widely known within the drug-testing bodies. As soon as this was suggested to him he said straight away he had been drinking the night before.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]"If the effect of alcohol had been suggested to Scott before the suspension, they could have then established the evidence without the need for a suspension, and the costs to Scott of missing five weeks of rugby and indeed of legal representation.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]"I would agree that Scott could be justified in feeling this could have been dealt with before suspension. And if they are to learn something from this, it is that the governing bodies should speak to the athlete – had someone taken the time to speak to the athlete in this case it is more than likely that they would not have got this far and would not have needed to get lawyers involved."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]But in a single-line statement issued last night, the SRU said: "Scottish Rugby is satisfied it adhered to its anti-doping regulations and communicated fully with the player concerned at the appropriate time." ...[/SIZE]
More...
[SIZE=-1]Scotsman, United Kingdom - 3 minutes ago[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Mike Morgan, of London law firm Hammonds, said: "Testosterone cases do take some time and WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency] and UK Sport have to be thorough, but when the SRU's independent panel first came together, to decide whether or not he had a case to answer, they could have asked Scott himself for an explanation. That is the bit that is missing from this; the aspect where things could have been cleared up earlier.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]"Like most people, I assume, he had no idea that alcohol could raise testosterone levels, but the experts involved knew that because it is more widely known within the drug-testing bodies. As soon as this was suggested to him he said straight away he had been drinking the night before.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]"If the effect of alcohol had been suggested to Scott before the suspension, they could have then established the evidence without the need for a suspension, and the costs to Scott of missing five weeks of rugby and indeed of legal representation.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]"I would agree that Scott could be justified in feeling this could have been dealt with before suspension. And if they are to learn something from this, it is that the governing bodies should speak to the athlete – had someone taken the time to speak to the athlete in this case it is more than likely that they would not have got this far and would not have needed to get lawyers involved."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]But in a single-line statement issued last night, the SRU said: "Scottish Rugby is satisfied it adhered to its anti-doping regulations and communicated fully with the player concerned at the appropriate time." ...[/SIZE]
More...
