What I am saying is when we was in the national league and come up against super league opposition in friendlies or CC i was amazed at the physical size difference.I know of horror stories of testosterone being extracted from dead bodies on mort slabs to be transferred to gym queens ,the illness is the reverse of anorexia where the client only sees small ,rugby players need to be big,fast ,strong for our entertainment and for themselves

Comedy gold channel has nothing on the fc mob and the fc stuff is free !!!!
Asprinwalls was over a wooley hat !!!!!!
You really couldnt write better comedy.

The thing is that whatever the accusations/claims (and I'm not saying they're false) at this point there's no evidence of it. The UKAD have said they went back to FC several times after this incident and all tests were negative. Would be hard to prove at this point, I'd have thought, particularly since the investigation has taken 6 months.

In terms of the impact on the competition, the question I guess is whether Gleeson playing for 6 games impacted FC's position. He played well against Rovers, but you finished above us anyway. I think at most you could say he got us 8th rather than 9th, potentially denying Cas a play-off place. They may well be hacked off by this and claim some financial recompense for a lost share of play-off gate receipts. However, there have been many instances of players being found guilty of use of banned substances, eg Ryan Hudson, Keiron Cunningham, Keith Senior, Ryan Bailey, Terry Newton - can't remember a team being docked points in any of these cases to offset previous unfair advantages, though I may be wrong.

I agree that at the very least Agar and Kath Hetherington would have been in a obvious position to have known the truth.

Not that I expect anyone on here to know but on stopping taking the drug in question how long did it then stay in a player's system?
As soon as Gleeson tested positive if any other players were also taking it they would surely have stopped immeadiatly.

Of course. Up until the drugs test on Gleeson, the supplements were endorsed as legal by Ben Cooper. When Gleeson failed the test, why would they not have stopped immediately, had any of them also been taking the supplement? The fact remains that all subsequent tests were negative, so it can't be proved one way or the other.

If Rovers were drug enhanced I'd at least want a top 4 spot otherwise what's the point

Gleeson arrived, and it gave the rest of the squad the timely boost they needed over a difficult Easter period. 2 wins playing at great intensity

Sadly they struggled after the Salford game for some reason

Sadly, this is our whole dilemma!

[quote="Mrs Barista"]. . . there have been many instances of players being found guilty of use of banned substances, eg Ryan Hudson, Keiron Cunningham, Keith Senior, Ryan Bailey, Terry Newton - can't remember a team being docked points in any of these cases to offset previous unfair advantages, though I may be wrong.

The point is, this is the first time club officials have been found to be guilty in relation to a player's offending. Whether this should result in points deduction is moot, but the Gleeson case cannot be compared with the one's you have cited.
However, the RFL and SL executive might want to make an example of FC. Lets face it, our ruling bodies are prone to nonsensical decisions, so who knows what they will do!

Neither does Nick Griffin