The Dew Drop Inn Virtual Antananarivo Arms, Madagascar

First topic message reminder :

Hello and welcome to the Antananarivo Arms Virtual Rugby Pub - a place where you can come in for a sly beverage and discuss whatever's on your mind, or just eavesdrop on the regulars if you fancy a break from all the rugby chat.

The Pub has made it's way to Madagascar, where 35,000 raucous fans recently watched the home side upset Namibia in a 110-point thriller.

The only rule in this pub is one of mutual respect for everyone in it, oh and no tampering with the pictures of the Madagascan team war dance, Japan/NRL-bound Sonny-Bill Williams, Bradley Wiggins and the prematurely-retired Mark Boucher above the bar.





Old Pub: https://www.606v2.com/t32066-the-dew-drop-inn-virtual-rugby-pub-oxford

With supplements, the clue is in the name. If you exercise, have a good protein-rich diet and supplement it with a protein shake or similar, then it'll have a beneficial effect. If you eat cr@p and expect a couple of protein shakes to transform your physique, then you're going to be disappointed.

Thomond mainstream brands are very unlikely to contain any banned substance, I'm not talking about dodgy stuff on the internet.

If a brand stocked at Tescos and endorsed by 100s of pro athletes contained a banned substance can you imagine the scandal? It is very unlikely.

Yes I'd say a lot of these suppliments it comes down to a placebo as much as anything, especially with sports energy drinks, ginsing etc....

That's a bit to do with it Lucky, some think those shakes just magically help. I have never taken them, but have considered it before don't think I will but we'll see. I know that a great deal of underage rugby palyers take them.



I think some of them give the appearance of strength but not always make you strong. If I remember my biology (good chance I don't) Creatine is a substance in the body anyway but it's main purpose is to retain water, so that's basically what the Creatine supplements do. It also helps in the Glycolitic energy system. ATP breaks down to ADP etc.

If you want to know the impact of illegal substances watch the tour de France and Olympics.

90% of what you see is illegally enhanced. No question.

Creatine certainly helps performance but the cheaper brands taste disgusting.

Protein suppliments are generally useless unless you are doing massive volumes of training and taking anabolic steroids...although a protein/carb mix before and after training is useful if you can't get a decent meal. If you don't get a carb based meal and a small bit of protein within 90min of training it has a massive impact on recovery.

Powerade and lucozade is useless but it tastes nice. 3 cups of Coffee is the best stimulant I've taken.

Thats my experience anyways.

rodders wrote:Well I don't define drugs, I go by the definition provided by the scientific and medical community and in terms of sporting legality the relevent governing bodies too.

Earning money for playing rugby used to be an illegal activity.

What I'm saying basically is just because it is legal now doesn't make it right or wrong.

"Powerade and lucozade is useless but it tastes nice. 3 cups of Coffee is the best stimulant I've taken.

Thats my experience anyways."

If it works for Darren Cave then why not Rodders

Yeah, they kind of made that point in the programme as well. I think just consistently doing it is the best way to build strength 2/3 times a work, maybe 4 of about an hours work and you will get results, it will be slow at first but you will get there.

MBTGOG wrote:

rodders wrote:Well I don't define drugs, I go by the definition provided by the scientific and medical community and in terms of sporting legality the relevent governing bodies too.

Earning money for playing rugby used to be an illegal activity.

What I'm saying basically is just because it is legal now doesn't make it right or wrong.

Absolutely right Munsty, I mean drinking alcohol and/or smoking is pretty wrong but still legal. Thanks be to god!!!

Thomond wrote:
I think some of them give the appearance of strength but not always make you strong. If I remember my biology (good chance I don't) Creatine is a substance in the body anyway but it's main purpose is to retain water, so that's basically what the Creatine supplements do. It also helps in the Glycolitic energy system. ATP breaks down to ADP etc.

Yeah I'm a bit foggy on it but the bolded part is the key one. Creatine is used by the ATP energy system which is the initial system your body uses in the 1st few seconds of intense exercise before it starts breaking down glycogen and working anaerobically.

Therefore taking a additional creatine is supposedly useful if you do power based high intensity sport.

I don't think its a great idea myself and possibly not great for the kidneys to be taking pure creatine long term but don't know enough about it.

Point is its not illegal or unethical and if people want to use creatine suppliments then fair enough.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:What's the rainbow all about, anyway? No one's ever told me.

You dont know about the Rainbow, Lucky? Man. Sometimes I wonder ya know...

I do now, Gibbo. Mickado's the font of all pink knowledge.

MBTGOG wrote:

rodders wrote:Well I don't define drugs, I go by the definition provided by the scientific and medical community and in terms of sporting legality the relevent governing bodies too.

Earning money for playing rugby used to be an illegal activity.

What I'm saying basically is just because it is legal now doesn't make it right or wrong.

I'm not sure what point you are making Munsty?

I'm making a clear distinction between legal dietary suppliments and performance enhancing drugs because on every level they are different. Legally, scientifically and morally.

Clearly you disagree so would you care to elaborate?

Glas a du wrote:

Thomond wrote:It's mainly just lifting and twisting with them isn't it? I wasn't at a class or anything but did some exercises with it recently. Easy enough to feic up your back with them.

Which of the above topics is this on?

I was thinking that. I really thought this Pub was evolving there for second. Ah well.

We're on the last page for this pub folks, get your venue and pic nominations in please

Cork, it's great.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I do now, Gibbo. Mickado's the font of all pink knowledge.

Ladyboys cut both ways me darlin. Its in our interest to know these tings. We are Metro-sexual roysh.

Does this apply to all Leinster players, too?

Kiwi,

Chester please.

Rodders,

What I'm saying is just because a institution defines something as legal, does not mean it's right.

Also, I would argue that morally it is not right either on the same level as drugs as it is pushing someone to beyond where their body is able to go naturally.

I probably wouldn't have such a problem with it but I have heard quite a few doctors voice their concerns on the subject and I would trust that considering they have personal concerns.


But you know what, I think by focusing on substances, we move away from the major problem and that is the attitudes that are prevalent in sports where athletes are pressured into taking drugs or supplements as they feel that is the only way they can compete.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Does this apply to all Leinster players, too?

Most all. Bit worried about Mike Ross. But hey, he's a blow-in.

Picture nominations Dr Jack Matthews (RIP), Kiwi. In fact the pub could be Bridgend for him too, unless something better comes up.

Afternoon all by the way

MBTGOG wrote:Kiwi,

Chester please.

Rodders,

What I'm saying is just because a institution defines something as legal, does not mean it's right.

Also, I would argue that morally it is not right either on the same level as drugs as it is pushing someone to beyond where their body is able to go naturally.

I probably wouldn't have such a problem with it but I have heard quite a few doctors voice their concerns on the subject and I would trust that considering they have personal concerns.


But you know what, I think by focusing on substances, we move away from the major problem and that is the attitudes that are prevalent in sports where athletes are pressured into taking drugs or supplements as they feel that is the only way they can compete.

I agree. Professionalism Munsty? Anyone remember when the Olympics were Amateur? Its not so long ago. Now, its fully Pro. How did that happen? Oh yeah. Corporatians and Muny. Phookin Yanks!

How about Bridgend for the new pub; the birthpkace of ex Wales and Lions centre Dr. Jack Matthews, who has sadly passed away.

It's not the Olympics that are the only problem, it happens in pretty much every sport.

Pete330v2 wrote: I mean drinking alcohol is pretty wrong but still legal.

WTF

Nominations for location - anywhere but blydi Ireland again (Bridgend would be good though )

Nomination for photo above the bar -
DR JACK MATTHEWS R.I.P.

Hound_of_Harrow wrote:How about Bridgend for the new pub; the birthpkace of ex Wales and Lions centre Dr. Jack Matthews, who has sadly passed away.

Rev, Penfrown and Hound, that sounds like a top choice lads.

Rev - telepathic mun

Gibson wrote:

MBTGOG wrote:Kiwi,

Chester please.

Rodders,

What I'm saying is just because a institution defines something as legal, does not mean it's right.

Also, I would argue that morally it is not right either on the same level as drugs as it is pushing someone to beyond where their body is able to go naturally.

I probably wouldn't have such a problem with it but I have heard quite a few doctors voice their concerns on the subject and I would trust that considering they have personal concerns.


But you know what, I think by focusing on substances, we move away from the major problem and that is the attitudes that are prevalent in sports where athletes are pressured into taking drugs or supplements as they feel that is the only way they can compete.

I agree. Professionalism Munsty? Anyone remember when the Olympics were Amateur? Its not so long ago. Now, its fully Pro. How did that happen? Oh yeah. Corporatians and Muny. Phookin Yanks!

Not necessarily the fault of the Yanks Gibbo. People have always wanted to be paid for money but in Europe it was tougher to bring through changes where money was involved as there was a very powerful ruling class who saw sports as a hobby and didn't see a need for it to be taken away from the amateur ranks.

Hound_of_Harrow wrote:Rev - telepathetic mun

Fixed for you - no charge

Munsty, I know in Europe it was hard on top athletes to train and work. As you say the Ruling Classes (as in Rugby & football) paid them a pittance in expenses. So, yeah a sportsperson should be paid what they're worth. But not 200 grand a week for Dwayne Rooney to be a scally.

Coporations have fed it and it is totally out of hand now.

You know what Gibbo? I don't remember when the Olympics was amateur and just about sport.

I was born in 1988. In 1980 and 1984 the Olympics had already become less about sport and the amateur ethos than Cold War politics. No it's less overtly political but a massive corporate behemoth.

The older generation of the pub might remember the spirit of amateurism in the Olympics, but it was twisted from that before I was even born when the Americans and Soviets started boycotting games.

It's worse in America Gibbo but I agree, getting paid 200k a weeks or $6/7 million dollars a year is a joke. One fella signed a 100 million dollar contract over 5 years this week. He is getting paid 40 this year alone. Feicing ridiculous altogether.


As long as people go tow watch it will continue to happen though.

MBTGOG wrote:Rodders,

What I'm saying is just because a institution defines something as legal, does not mean it's right.

Also, I would argue that morally it is not right either on the same level as drugs as it is pushing someone to beyond where their body is able to go naturally.

I probably wouldn't have such a problem with it but I have heard quite a few doctors voice their concerns on the subject and I would trust that considering they have personal concerns.

Munsty that is the comment I would disagree with. On what basis do you say that?

Is someone who eats 5 chicken breasts a day doing something different to someone who takes a couple of protein shakes? Is eating an orange or an apple different to having a multivitamin?

Sorry but these comments a are very naive or else I am misinterpreting.

All hard training is pushing your body beyond what it can do naturally, that is the point.

PEDs take it to a level beyond which it can adapt to through training alone, dietary suppliments do not.

Notch wrote:You know what Gibbo? I don't remember when the Olympics was amateur and just about sport.

I was born in 1988. In 1980 and 1984 the Olympics had already become less about sport and the amateur ethos than Cold War politics. No it's less overtly political but a massive corporate behemoth.

The older generation of the pub might remember the spirit of amateurism in the Olympics, but it was twisted from that before I was even born when the Americans and Soviets started boycotting games.

All true Notch. The rise of sport as a political weapon, came before the big shekels. Hated that too. Men & women trained for 6 - 8 years sometimes and missed out on the biggest moments of their lives, because of a few control-freak looneys on both sides.

I read about Dr. Jack in tge papee this morning, but was too busy to post anything earlier. Odd that three of us came up with the same suggestion almost at the same time.

PenfroPete wrote:

Hound_of_Harrow wrote:Rev - telepathetic mun

Fixed for you - no charge

I did laugh when I saw it Hound

Gibson wrote:Munsty, I know in Europe it was hard on top athletes to train and work. As you say the Ruling Classes (as in Rugby & football) paid them a pittance in expenses. So, yeah a sportsperson should be paid what they're worth. But not 200 grand a week for Dwayne Rooney to be a scally.

Coporations have fed it and it is totally out of hand now.

Corporations have fed it but they did not start it. If you're really looking for the problems, it's the greed and pride of these people pursuing these large sums of money.

Gibson wrote:

Notch wrote:You know what Gibbo? I don't remember when the Olympics was amateur and just about sport.

I was born in 1988. In 1980 and 1984 the Olympics had already become less about sport and the amateur ethos than Cold War politics. No it's less overtly political but a massive corporate behemoth.

The older generation of the pub might remember the spirit of amateurism in the Olympics, but it was twisted from that before I was even born when the Americans and Soviets started boycotting games.

All true Notch. The rise of sport as a political weapon, came before the big shekels. Hated that too. Men & women trained for 6 - 8 years sometimes and missed out on the biggest moments of their lives, because of a few control-freak looneys on both sides.

Sport has been a political weapon probably since it's inception however many thousands of years ago that was. But more recently, GAA was set up to help fight for Irish independence.

The Samaritan was only able to sort out the bloke left for dead in the gutter because he had money. It's your attitude towards it what you do with it that counts. It is not of itself evil.

No fee.

I see that Zlatan Ibrahimovich from Swedent is earning €35,000 a day with PSG football team.

The average man in Sweden earns €34,500 a year.

I don't think it was setup exclusively to do thatMunsty, but it certainly had a massive influence on the Irish people. Helped develop the snese of Irishness that many lacked. The correlation between GAA, IRB and then IRA members is thee for all to see.

MBTGOG wrote:

Gibson wrote:Munsty, I know in Europe it was hard on top athletes to train and work. As you say the Ruling Classes (as in Rugby & football) paid them a pittance in expenses. So, yeah a sportsperson should be paid what they're worth. But not 200 grand a week for Dwayne Rooney to be a scally.

Coporations have fed it and it is totally out of hand now.

Corporations have fed it but they did not start it. If you're really looking for the problems, it's the greed and pride of these people pursuing these large sums of money.

Corporations/Oligarchs own clubs. They want the big money, glory and advertising for their product. They feed the overpaid players by corporate sponsorship. It will happen in rugby too and destroy the game we all love. If you offer a working class lad 100k a week to come to your club, of course he will snap it up. Look at Beckham, an average player who has made countless millions from all this shoite. Unreal.

Tennis players are even worse. Specially de wimmin, who are paid the same as the men, for half the time.

It's funny when people attack sportsmen for getting paid ridiculous sums of money. I say good luck to them. If someone offered you a gazillion pounds to do something you'd happily do for a fraction of that, well you'd shake their hand and say yes please, wouldn't you?

MBTGOG wrote:

Gibson wrote:

Notch wrote:You know what Gibbo? I don't remember when the Olympics was amateur and just about sport.

I was born in 1988. In 1980 and 1984 the Olympics had already become less about sport and the amateur ethos than Cold War politics. No it's less overtly political but a massive corporate behemoth.

The older generation of the pub might remember the spirit of amateurism in the Olympics, but it was twisted from that before I was even born when the Americans and Soviets started boycotting games.

All true Notch. The rise of sport as a political weapon, came before the big shekels. Hated that too. Men & women trained for 6 - 8 years sometimes and missed out on the biggest moments of their lives, because of a few control-freak looneys on both sides.

Sport has been a political weapon probably since it's inception however many thousands of years ago that was. But more recently, GAA was set up to help fight for Irish independence.

Too right. Those Hittities have a lot of explaining to do!

rodders wrote:

MBTGOG wrote:Rodders,

What I'm saying is just because a institution defines something as legal, does not mean it's right.

Also, I would argue that morally it is not right either on the same level as drugs as it is pushing someone to beyond where their body is able to go naturally.

I probably wouldn't have such a problem with it but I have heard quite a few doctors voice their concerns on the subject and I would trust that considering they have personal concerns.

Munsty that is the comment I would disagree with. On what basis do you say that?

Is someone who eats 5 chicken breasts a day doing something different to someone who takes a couple of protein shakes? Is eating an orange or an apple different to having a multivitamin?

Sorry but these comments a are very naive or else I am misinterpreting.

All hard training is pushing your body beyond what it can do naturally, that is the point.

PEDs take it to a level beyond which it can adapt to through training alone, dietary suppliments do not.

First of all, no need to call my comments naive. I haven't exactly just made them up on the spot or not studied them (considering I do this as part of my university studies). Hard training isn't pushing your body past what it is capable of at all.

Also, what might be making this discussion a little harder, is I am making reference to teenagers who are still growing taking these substances which is what the documentary and Thomond were referring to and that is what is dangerous.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It's funny when people attack sportsmen for getting paid ridiculous sums of money. I say good luck to them. If someone offered you a gazillion pounds to do something you'd happily do for a fraction of that, well you'd shake their hand and say yes please, wouldn't you?

I didn't pass judgement. Just posted the facts!

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It's funny when people attack sportsmen for getting paid ridiculous sums of money. I say good luck to them. If someone offered you a gazillion pounds to do something you'd happily do for a fraction of that, well you'd shake their hand and say yes please, wouldn't you?

I 'd snap their hand off for it Lucky. But that's not the point. I want to moan about it... Its immoral the amount of shekesl... not right... In my day blah blah blah .. Put em in the Army... moan groan ... see how they like that yada yada yada.

I was just musing, Stag.

Gibbo, I don't know how these things work, but if you snapped their hands off I'm pretty sure they'd terminate your contract.

Thomond wrote:I don't think it was setup exclusively to do thatMunsty, but it certainly had a massive influence on the Irish people. Helped develop the snese of Irishness that many lacked. The correlation between GAA, IRB and then IRA members is thee for all to see.

"The primary purpose of the G.A.A. is the
organisation of native pastimes and the promotion of athletic
fitness as a means to create a disciplined, self- reliant, nationalminded manhood. The overall result is the expression of a
people’s preference for native ways as opposed to imported ones.
Since she has not control over all the national territory,
Ireland’s claim to nationhood is impaired. It would be still
more impaired if she were to lose her language, if she failed to
provide a decent livelihood for her people at home, or if she
were to forsake her own games and customs in favour of the
games and customs of another nation."

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It's funny when people attack sportsmen for getting paid ridiculous sums of money. I say good luck to them. If someone offered you a gazillion pounds to do something you'd happily do for a fraction of that, well you'd shake their hand and say yes please, wouldn't you?

I would like to think I'd say 'No' but until that situation arises, who knows. I say though that someone will definitely want to pay me a Gazillion pounds to chat to people while playing FIFA.