You have hit the nail on the head here, the WADA regs in sport are quite clear about current testing and also masking drugs, and if you are unable to explain or take something that is known to be used to mask another drug, without advance notice or medical prescription, then you are assumed to be guilty. Paul Cullen might be right about not been able to directly test for HGH but if there is evidence of raised levels of things in a players blood that are not normal or evidence of other drugs that you can't explain with proper medical support or evidence then you are in trouble.

He won't at Wakefield anyway. They cancelled his contract earlier this morning.

How did you get on are you still with us.

I doubt we'll see him again in Super league.

He's 31 now, so 33 after 2 years out of the game he'd be a massive gamble.

I could imagine his PR though.

Tubby 33 yo hooker looking for work at cut price rates.

G1's thumbs couldn't dial fast enough

Well done Wakefield & John Kear for acting so decisively & unequivocally in this matter.

The more I see & hear John Kear the more I respect him as a decent bloke. Good luck to him & the Wildcats in getting over this.

Is this the same John Kear who in his capacity as assistant coach at the JJB would argue against the merits of the salary cap being good for the game.

I'd say he comes across as a decent bloke regardless of his views on the SC.

John Kear is a decent bloke and no-one here is suggesting otherwise. Any man who relaxes pre game by doing a spot of ironing has my admiration.

His views re- the salary cap should remain consistent regardless of who his employer is though, IMO. My recollection is that he has always supported it except for his stint at assistant coach at Wigan.



It's a bit like when his old boss Dave Whelan would call for a salary cap to be introduced in football (and cite it's use in SL) but would then don his other cap and argue against it's use in SL claiming it held the game back.

I'd say he was just following club policy lets face it how many times were the pies guilty of abusing it and since it's inception their dominence is well and truly a thing of the past.

My thoughts & opinions re Mr Kear are not affected by what he may or may not have said some fair time ago on an entireley unrelated matter when employed by someone else.
Employees at a senior level are often called upon to support the company line.
Did he adopt a different position re drugtaking? That would have been more pertinent to your argument.
Sorry but that was a weak attempt to refute my statement on what was in any event only a point of view.

I choose not to ignore these type of things when forming my opinions.



Fine. Leave you're integrity at the door but expect to have contradictory views pointed out.



Not that I recall. Can you name any coach in RL (past or present) that doesn't support the codes anti drug stance? As such it's a bit of a mute point.



We all have a point of view and I'm comfortable with mine also.

Not for Gobshoite Paul Cullen it's not.


Geddit?
Mute ... Paul Cullen ... eh? eh?


Oh, you meant moot point, oh ok ...

As my local MP is Douglas Hogg just think yourself lucky I wasn't talking about a moat point.

I see where you're coming from but it's pretty difficult for someone involved in the game to give an honest opinion at times. For example, if Sinfield's asked in an interview what he made of saints' most recent performance, he's hardly going to say "They were utter cack and James Graham made himself look like a whinging tool". However true it might have been. Much easier for a non-involved party to be honest with their opinions.

Am I right in thinking he's the first sportsman to test positive for HGH? If so then they'll 100s of sportsman all over the world bricking it.

I've been forced to have a little tidy-up.

Anyone posting any allegation that any other player or club is guilty of Mr Newtons indiscretion will have made their last post on SS.com, and RLFANS.COM for that matter.

I am not willing to allow this site or the RLFANS network to be accused of allowing potentially libelous comments to be posted.

That's you told tad, although in fairness no names were mentioned .... that I saw.

I think so?

If he'd been abit more clever he'd have used IGF-1. This essentially has the same effect as HGH but instead of subcutanious injection it is injected directly into the muscle tissue and is undetectable in blood and urine samples.

My lips are sealed on this. I've learnt my lesson.

As Daddy Mac_F says, Big daft lads...

You'd certainly need to be remarkably stupid to start administering any hormone product that wasn't administered under medical prescription and supervision, I'm sure there are plenty of dodgy people in dodgy gyms all over the country who will obtain "HGH" for you and swear on their mothers graves (how did she die then) that its all legit and comes from someone they know at the hospital etc etc etc

And of course you'd believe them implicitly - because you're big big daft lad.

And that, right there, is THE biggest danger with synthetic hormones steroids and any performance enhancing drug.

Not the overhyped and often plain false, side effects, but the fact you never really know what is in it or the procedures that were in place when producing it.

However there are certain very well respected labs that produce these products and you can order them from europe and check to their authenticity.

So, let me get this straight, these idiots are taking illegal substances to get bigger?

idiots.

Pies and Bitter. Pies and Bitter.

Worked for me.

No.

More likely to improve recovery.

Or in newtons case, to reduce water retention in his neck and face.

And they aren't illegal. Just banned for IOC tested athletes.

Thanks. But in case the gist of my post was lost on you, it was a light hearted comment.

Still your post was, nonetheless, very interesting.

Oh, in case that last sentence went over your head, it was heavily sarcastic.