Each year, more athletes are found guilty of doping. For those who use enhancements, their motivation is winning at all cost. Anti-doping organizations believe that doping goes against the integrity of the game. Winning is more important than a natural performance. But again, what's natural? There's not a fine line.
Everyone complains about doping in sports, especially in baseball. But truth is that a very high percentage of athletes are using enhancements (legal or illegal) to help with their strength and endurance. Some say it's unfair for athletes to get singled out for using performance enhancers. One simple and very logical solution would be to test every athlete. After all, it doesn’t make much sense to test anybody if you don’t test everyone. Athletes train together and if one does, others are going to follow the same path. So called doping rules and regulations as well as drug testing seems more like an act of the league commissioners to appease the fans and the media rather than a solid, well-regulated drug policy. They say they are testing for dopers, but they know that they don't test everyone and that a lot of underground "doping" is going on in their leagues. It seems like commissioners try to make the public believe that doping is under control, but in reality, it's getting worse.
My opinion is that it would be horrible and non-ideal to not test anyone. In some sports, for example, they are a lot of positions and players. Different skills are needed for each position, it's not all about getting strength for some players; it won't make them play better. Some players might feel forced to take steroids just because their opponents do. It would be ideal if every single player from all-levels would be tested for doping. I am in favor of Anti-Doping if it's done right, money should be invested, so drug testing becomes uniform.
No comments:
Post a Comment