I did my masters in anti-doping law, so just a few comments/suspicions based on my experience. Preamble: The below is based on Bambo having tested positive for some banned substance. We don't know that he has. The delay might be down to problems with sample analysis, so it may be a false positive, corrupted results, it might be an 'intelligence' suspension where somebody reported his absolutely staggering ab muscles to UKAD... But i'll take a stab at proceedings on the basis that there is a prohibited substance in his sample.. 1) Anti-doping rule violations are strict liability offences. This means that if the substance is in your sample you've committed an offence - no need for any intent. 2) The standard ban is 4 years for intentional doping. However, this can be mitigated down to no ban and a simple reprimand if an athlete can argue that they did not intend to dope. Unintentional cases usually start at 2 years to be argued down if the athlete can argue that they displayed no fault or negligence (rare) or, more commonly, no significant fault or negligence. 3) We've heard totally unconfirmed rumours that Bambo had accidentally used contaminated nutritional supplement. This is a common argument for those claiming no significant fault or negligence. But, athletes still have to prove that they did hours and days worth of research, got the supplements batch tested, took medical advice and so on and so on. 4) If Bambo can show that he did all the relevant research he should be able to mitigate a ban down at least by half and probably to no more than a year. 5) He's currently provisionally suspended pending the outcome. At the time of the final decision, any sanction/ban will take into account time served. 6) On that basis, I would presume that Bambo's suspension will be lifted if there was a problem with the sample taken (corrupted/unclear etc) or even if he did commit a violation because he's served such a significant time under suspension. Once again, all pure speculation but maybe it gives the BBS a bit of an idea of how the world of doping control works. Bambo always looks positive. He looks like he travels with the team for support - whenever Whitey posts videos he's there high fiving and cheering the team. He seems a real team player and a really positive young man. I hope his spirit isn't too dampened by the inadequacies of the powers that be. Hope to see him back on the pitch for us soon.
Very interesting, thanks. If the ban does eventually get reduced to nothing, for whatever reason, does the club have grounds for legal action to reclaim the money they've presumably been paying him? Or the player, for that matter, if he wanted to argue that it had affected his future earnings? I'm assuming the answer would be no based on point 1, but just interested.
thanks for trying to clear up what a complex matter it actually is but: Bambo always looks positive................................. eeeccckkkk
Many athletes have tried and failed to sue WADA, national anti doping organisations and governing bodies on grounds of restraint of trade, breach or contract, and even breach of human rights law, for compensation for loss of earnings, loss of sponsorship deals, trashed reputation and so on. The general view is that the integrity of sport is so so so important that these infringement on personal rights are justified. It can be pretty draconian. Athletes left out on a limb with no support and little to no feedback. Bambo is lucky that he plays a team sport so he's got teammates, a club, and hopefully the PFA all fighting his corner. A lot of these people are individuals in solo sports with little to no support team that will hang around while the prize money isn't rolling in..
Not sure what drugs can enhance a footballers performance. I would have thought they'd have the opposite effect.