ONE WONDERS HOW Gerbrandt Grobler has been feeling over the last week and a half as the controversy around Munster signing him has kicked off and picked up speed.
Six months into his one-year stint in Ireland, the South African probably hoped he had skipped beyond having to deal with this kind of storm, but the debate has been raging as the wider public and media have become aware of his past.
If anything, the heat Grobler must be feeling serves as an example to other players who might have or might be considering doping as a means to progressing their career – you are likely to be tarred by it if you’re caught.
Many people will struggle to feel even a hint of sympathy for Grobler but this must be a difficult time in his life. He did the crime and, though Munster have pointed out that he did the time with his two-year ban, he continues to pay the price.
While it has been debated whether Grobler deserves to be at the centre of this storm, it is a positive for Irish rugby that we are talking about the issue of doping. We simply don’t do it enough.
Only the most innocent of us believe that rugby is clean, but this debate is raised so rarely in our sport – aside from the usual voices, who have often been unfairly ridiculed for fighting this particular fight.
The majority of us who look at rugby and other sports are not stupid; we have our suspicions, even if it is sometimes from an inexpert point of view and to express those suspicions without proof is libellous.
Now, we have been given an opportunity for Irish rugby to talk about the circumstances around a player who has decided to cheat, has been caught and has served a ban before being brought into our system.
Does the player deserve a second chance? Should Irish rugby be providing that second chance for any player? What is our policy on convicted dopers? These questions are all now part of an open debate, and that is welcome.
One intriguing aspect of this whole episode is asking whether fans even care. The supporters are the ones who shell out their hard-earned money to follow the professional sport, to buy tickets and jerseys, to fly around Europe backing their team.
A fascinating column by Sean Ingle in the Guardian this week discussed academic evidence from cycling, baseball and other sports that suggests that although people say they abhor doping, they continue to support even after athletes have been caught cheating.
We all say we want a drug-free sport, but it seems we don’t back that up when it comes down it. For some, doping is absolutely wrong until it directly affects their team.
Of course, the Grobler case is different in that he has already served a ban and previously returned to play with Racing 92, but even still it appears that some of us simply accept doping as part of the deal in professional sport.
It has also been interesting to note the criticism the media have faced for pursuing this story, with that criticism being particularly aggressive from some quarters.
Perhaps this debate should have happened back in July when Grobler’s signing was announced by Munster, or when he took to the pitch for the province in pre-season before injury, but to focus so repeatedly on the timing is to avoid the real conversation.
What has been evident in the last 11 days is that many people were not aware of Grobler’s past, with high-profile ex-players and pundits among those admitting to a lack of knowledge.
Yes, the hardcore Munster fans were obviously up to speed on Grobler’s arrival and probably debated its merits passionately.
But the hardcore fans aren’t the only ones who need to consider this. They are the foundation of the support base, of course, but there are thousands of casual fans who swell the numbers at provincial and international games or pay to watch rugby on TV.
Those casual supporters need to be part of this debate and it’s very clear that the Grobler controversy is completely new to them and has brought doping in rugby back into their consciousness.
The media also have a duty to ask questions, whether one thinks it’s timely or not. If the rugby media in Ireland is happy to simply toe the IRFU and provinces’ line, regurgitating press releases and asking the easy questions, then they are failing in one of their duties.
Yes, the Grobler storm has probably led to increased numbers of paper sales or website clicks, but if we ever get to the point where the rugby media is totally compliant and unwilling to rock the boat, it will be a sad day.
The Irish Independent’s Rúaidhrí O’Connor deserves credit for raising the issue with Johann van Graan at Munster’s press conference last week and kick-starting this debate.
As a result of the media pressure, the IRFU have now shown their willingness to actively consider their policy on the recruitment of players with a history of doping. That is a huge positive in all of this, whatever their conclusion.
Many will angrily argue that the IRFU should never sanction the signing of another player with Grobler’s past, others will vehemently defend their sense that the player has served his ban and is entitled to his ‘second chance.’
Some believe that players who have admitted to knowingly taking banned substances should be banned for longer than two years, while others feel that two full seasons out of work is sufficient.
Let’s debate that point vigorously again, perhaps the key point in all of this, and hope that the relevant rugby authorities do too.
One thing that seems sensible for us all to agree on, and act on, is that doping in sport is very wrong. So to be talking about it openly like this in Irish rugby for the first time in years is welcome.
The42 has just published its first book, Behind The Lines, a collection of some of the year’s best sports stories. Pick up your copy in Eason’s, or order it here today (€10):
Move on ffs
@Shane Cal: my thoughts exactly too much hype. More about a campaign by newstalk. Very unbiased. It’s like the residency rule, they should amend the law to a minimum of 10 years and then get on with it.
@Shane Cal: @Shane Cal: read the article. This conversation is important. And the more people like you who shut it down point blank, the more clear that is. By insisting there is no argument to be had you are perpetuating it. Well done.
@Shane Cal: they haven’t made enough money off the story yet.
@Conor Paddington: you miss the his point, he is saying how this dead horse is being flogged, there’s nothing more to say or do about this
@Conor Paddington: I agree there’s a conversation to be had. To me that conversation is about why 2yrs is deemed an adequate ban for this offence. I don’t believe it’s even close to being adequate but if the guy had been banned for 4+ years I think it would be a different story, if any. Still, I think this is a witch hunt.
Munster should have the courage of their convictions. He served the ban, he’s free to play, they back themselves to keep a clean environment. They could go as far as saying the player is rehabilitated, that munster represents an attitude so diametrically opposed to cheating that it’s the ideal environment for him to emerge as a clean competitor, a warrior, and explain how theyll back him to share that salient learning with his peers.
@Simon Clarke: Good points all-round. I would also worry about the length of bans. Two years seems too neat a number without knowing the extent to which a convicted doper takes steroids.
At the same time, I don’t buy the ‘committed the crime, done the time argument’. Without getting too political, there are many crimes in Ireland which are inadequately punished by the legal system with terms that are too short e.g. 2.5 years for child defilement.
As I have said in other posts, it would be great to get a sports scientist to clear the air.
Finally, in defence of Murray Kinsella, I don’t think he has yet published an article on the Grobler case. He’s entitled to voice his opinions but I guess it’s damned if you do, damned if you dont.
@Simon Clarke: Very well said
Jesus… change the record.
@IrishOwl: exactly.
This is now becoming a witch hunt, every pundit and his dog now want their pound of flesh
@Chris Tobin: absolutely. It’s a joke now
@Chris Tobin: how do you define a witch hunt? Because he did it, he is not being summarily tried. What is your definition of witch hunt?
@Conor Paddington: I usually agree with most of what you post and in fairness most of it is without bias. But in this case I can’t agree with you. 3 articles on the issue today just on this site, this really is trial by media. Again, I would genuinely be concerned for the guys mental health with all this negative attention he’s receiving.
@James: I don’t think your angle is without merit, and I do really feel sorry for GG in the centre of it, but I think this is a watershed moment on doping in Irish rugby and goes far beyond the individual, however much he’s in the firing line.
@Conor Paddington: A witch hunt can be defined as “a campaign directed against a person or group holding views considered unorthodox or a threat to society” or “a rigorous campaign to round up or expose dissenters on the pretext of safeguarding the welfare of the public”. I think that’s a pretty accurate description of what this has become.
@Eddie Hekenui: yeah, but on that definition rapists ought to feel hard done by because they experience the exact same treatment. I think there needs to be an element of illegitimacy in the accusations for it to be considered a witch hunt.
@Chris Tobin: the purpose of this article is to empathise with Grobler. Far from a witch hunt.
The IRFU signing a PED offender is a story whether you like it or not. Virtually everyone agrees it is not personal about Grobler and all of the criticism is going to the administrators.
It is a story and as he has yet to play and the IRFU is yet to clarify its position it still has legs. It will take more of a backseat now with the Champions Cup and 6 Nations coming up.
@Conor Paddington: Well that’s your own personal opinion of what constitutes a witch hunt. When Chris described it as a witch hunt, which you questioned, he was perfectly accurate going by the dictionary definition of what is considered a witch hunt.
As for the rapists comment that’s a bizarre jump to make and frankly I don’t see the link at all.
@Eddie Hekenui: no, that is not my own personal opinion. It is not a witch hunt under anything but the broadest available definition which would capture many things we all agree are not witch hunts. Under any nuanced understanding of the term, this is not a witch hunt. That is just a popular rebuke at present.
@Conor Paddington: What I list as the definitions of a witch hunt are the Oxford and Cambridge definition’s of what constitutes a witch hunt. So while you, and many others, may not think it’s a witch hunt the use of the term is a perfectly accurate way to describe what’s going on. You don’t have to like it or agree but you can’t question his use of the phrase.
As for it not being based on you’re own personal opinion on what constitutes a witch you said – “I think there needs to be an element of illegitimacy in the accusations for it to be considered a witch hunt”. Surely the fact you prefaced the sentence with I think points to it being your opinion?
@Eddie Hekenui: you go into a debate and say “this is what the dictionary says, therefore this debate is over” and see how far you got. A secondary school first year would know there is more nuance to how we use words than what is in dictionaries. And “I think” is not a necessary prefix to the sentence. Witch hunts in their metaphorical usage are about eithwr persecution or summary convictions, neither are the care here.
@Eddie Hekenui: also, on your definition, this guy isn’t being accused of “holding unorthodox views” or being a “dissenter”. He is accused of having done something which is factually against the rules, which he admitted to and was convicted. The question of whether or not the punishment fits the crime is not a witch hunt.
@Conor Paddington:he is in the firing line is probably an understatement. The guy served his ban. Played in Paris after said ban. Got signed for Munster and can play for Munster. Probably would have last weekend if it wasn’t for all of this coverage. Most outlets and journalists aren’t making it emotive and personal. Some are. In particular Paul Kimmage, a drugs cheat himself and one who has refused to apologise for his cheating. Grobler apologised and admitted it straight away unlike a vast majority who make up weird and wonderful stories about how they got into their systems. They guy served his ban. The questions asked should be If The IRFU have a zero tolerance policy why did they allow this. Grobler should not be the issue here it’s the IRFU and Munsters zero tolerance policies.
@Paul O Mahony: I totally agree with you on everything you said.
@Conor Paddington: First off what is with the use of quotations for something I never said nor implied? I never tried to shut the debate down. Secondly it’s hilarious that your first responce goes on about there being nuance to how we use words and metaphorical usage of words then your second tries to use the literal meaning of words to argue against my point. Which one is it? Are you being literal or figurative? Or just hoping between them to suit your arguement?
As regards the discussion over the term witch hunt where does it state witch hunts are either about persecutions, summary judgements or that there needs to be illegitimacy in the accusations. Because that doesn’t fit with my understanding of the use of the term, nor how I’ve heard the term being used before nor how the usage of the term is defined. You’ve yet to offer any counter arguement other than your own personal opinion. And as you say there is nuance to how we use words, words are used in different ways by different people. Just because you disagree with someones use of a phrase doesn’t make it wrong
He done the crime then he done the time, get over it. Hope he has a great season
@Jon Walters: there should be zero tolerance for it, so he hasn’t done his time.
@GM: Maybe there should be zero tolerance, but thats for the IRB to sanction. Hate the system not the player.
@Kingshu: No I’m pretty sure it was the player himself who wilfully took the drugs
@Noel Ryan: okay I’m sorry I forgot that people aren’t allowed to make mistakes anymore
@Noel Ryan: He did and now he’s clear to play rugby by the IRB rules. If you think he should be banned for life its an issue with the IRB rules on doping. Hes not the only drug cheat playing rugby so why single him out? Its like Aki under the residency rules not many of us agreed with, its the rule we didn’t like one player benefiting from it shouldn’t be singled out.
@GM: there isnt. The ban was two years. He served his ban and admitted and apologised straight away unlike most who say their protein shake was spiked or they slipped on a syringe or some shite like that. The main aggressor in the press Paul Kimmage is a self confessed drugs cheat who refuses to apologise for taking them. The hypocrisy is sickening. I do think a second positive though should be a lifetime ban.
Yes it’s good to talk about a hugely relevant and important issue. This is a debate that needed to be had. But the coverage of it has been awful. After the initial report which was valid the majority of the coverage has been emotive hysteria that’s been hugely personal and bordering on vindictive. The fact that there wasn’t any mention of Carlo Del Fava in any of the reporting shows how little research they’ve done. They’ve just regurgitated their own reporting and that of their colleagues comments on said reports in an endless circle jerk. Article in Indo quoted by Off the Ball, who interview Kimmage who’s comments are then reference in an article and on and on. There’s been countless falsehoods reported as fact and dissenting opinions dismissed as nonsense without even consideration. Instead of discussing it rationally we’ve heard the what about the kids, what about player x who’s been passed over, this has damaged Munster’s standing in world rugby and so on. All unquantifiable and unproveable arguements.
Where has been the background on the drug he took and it’s effects? Or reporting of the comments he made regarding his suspension? Or interviews with SA journalists who might have more knowledge on the facts? Where has been an examination of the growing use of TUE’s in rugby and what players here have them and why? What about the how the growing professionalism of schools rugby is encouraging kids to take shortcuts and the lack of testing at that level? Lets have a rational debate about the issues. Lets not give into the hysteria and stop the witch hunt of a guy who did nothing wrong by joining Munster and has been bullied by the press.
@Eddie Hekenui: Great points all round. As you say, journalists have been appealing to people with emotive arguments like ‘what about the kids etc.’ While we all obviously care about children’s welfare, our opinions should be informed by solid research and reason rather than only emotions.
I’ve tried to make sense of this whole situation myself by reading journals and academic papers but I think I’ve gotten myself caught in a spin like many commentators here. It would be great to see journalists talk to a SA journalist as you’ve said, or a sports scientist who could clear the water around this topic.
My suspicion is that journalistic and scientific professionals do not want to truly pin their colours to the mast of a certain scientific opinion in public for fear of sabotaging their own careers.
@EK: It’s just indicative of the general decline in the quality of print (and online) journalism. Gone are the days where a story like this would be researched, fact checked, fleshed out and then expanded to help get at the wider issue. And people in the media wonder why people are losing trust in them and their viewer/reader figures are tanking.
Like you I tried to do a bit of research on the drug, it’s effects and steroids in general but since it’s not my area of expertise so quickly found myself out of my depth. Instead of hearing that blowhard Paul Kimmage stroking his own ego again isn’t their an articulate Sport Scientist that could paint an accurate picture of any gains Grobler may have made in the short/long term. The impression you get in the media is that he was Steve Rogers before he doped and Captain America after but from the bit of reading I did the drug he took is not used for bulking. I’d love to know the facts.
And the kids arguement is the one that really gets me. There’s been a sharp increase in doping at schools level in rugby in New Zealand, England and lots of other countries but we still don’t test kids in Ireland despite how professional the game has become and the demands it places on kids. I played schools cup rugby with and against a host of current Irish internationals and their physical makeup at the time would be barely good enough for junior cup let alone senior cup. Grobler’s signing will have next to no impact, if any at all, when it comes to kids in school/academies doping.
@Eddie Hekenui: The schools rugby issue is a big one both for players welfare and the game. I too played schools rugby and I’m sure we have both seen the player who is skinny in 3rd year, ‘does 4th year for the SCT’ and balloons. It’s an issue that has been mooted since as far back as 2011.
http://www.the42.ie/nothing-to-fear-from-teen-doping-tests-says-sports-council-271781-Nov2011/
Print journalism has really taken a dive in Ireland in the last few years. Gavin Cummiskey releasing an expose on the Irish women’s team the day before a World Cup game really took the biscuit for me.
In fairness, Murray Kinsella, is a very good journalist who bases his articles on solid evidence and typically has the welfare of Irish rugby on his mind when he writes.
@EK: Totally agree regards Murray Kinsella. He’s absolutely fantastic and I try to read everything he puts out. With a mind like his I wonder how long we’ll have the pleasure of reading his stuff. I wish they’re were more like him. I read rugby articles for intelligent analysis and insider knowledge and quotes I can’t gleam on my own. But the majority of the stuff these days is just people pushing their own opinions or agenda, gotcha smear pieces like Cummisky’s or click bait.
That’s an interesting article. Thanks for sharing. I didn’t realise the IRFU had been so lax on the issue. In it says the IRFU announced plans to introduce drug testing in the near future. Yet 6+ years later they’ve done nothing. The Ross O’Carroll Kelly books first came out in 2000 and they allude to kids at that level taking supplements but 18 years later we still don’t test. There was a study in NZ back in 2013 among school boy rugby players and out of 142 boys 70% had taken 4 or more supplements in the previous month and 5 had taken performance enhancing drugs. They’re staggering figures and yet in Ireland we do nothing. I know lads that were dong stuff back when I played that is questionable and given the size of players today and how seriously it’s taken I find it impossible to believe kids aren’t taking chances and doing stuff they shouldn’t. I just find it disgusting that we’re willing to go after a guy look Grobler and blame him for potentially influencing kids across the country to take drugs but have universally ignored what might be going on under our noses. The Indo did a massive schools rugby pull out recently. I imagine not a single mention of the lack of testing or the massive increase in speed and athleticism of the players>=.
@Eddie Hekenui: Paul Kimmage is a drugs cheat himself and refused to apologise for it. His gripe is that even when on drugs he was still unsuccessful.
We get it he isnt playing for the seniors just fook off and talk about the games coming up maybe
I think Alan Quinlan gave a good balanced insight from a professional rugby players point of view on Off The Ball this morning. While their coverage of the Grobler case has been a little hysterical at times,I still thought this was a good snippet that framed the situation well from an Irish players point of view.
Link below:
https://www.facebook.com/offtheball/videos/10159906413705441/?hc_ref=ARQWhkYH81BFx-DNItUwZ_rdSzpOro-dYdyZg2OpRoCVcRYkk2q5XtrmxWqoWzweQvk&fref=nf
@EK: Alan Quinlan said he knew about GG’s suspension when he was playing for Racing. He failed to bring any attention to it when the player arrived in Munster.
@Dave Kilmartin: I’m not here to argue on Quinlan’s behalf but I don’t think all of his opinions are invalid just because he’s making them after Grobler’s signed.
If he was putting on a mock-hysterical tone months after the fact I might, but he isn’t. He’s making a balanced judgement based on what he knows from experience.
@EK: fair point. I was just a bit disappointed, as a former Munster player, he didn’t raise the matter at the time. I agree it would be good to hear from the player and indeed a medical expert on the long term impact / benefits of the drug. .
@Dave Kilmartin: Fair enough and I’d be inclined to agree with you.
It’s seems at times that people are so reluctant to talk about this issue on their doorstep that they can do nothing but blame the medias timing “you didn’t say this in the summer so you can’t say it now”. I feel sorry for any person to be scrutinised this much, but at the end of the day the two-year ban isn’t the only punishment for drug cheats, the asterisk stays next to their name for life, like a name on a registry. Although, like a sex offender moving to a town and locals being outraged, they have to live somewhere. If a convicted drug cheat wants to pursue a sporting career after his ban, he has to play somewhere – for about 5 or so more months that somewhere is Irish rugby. Like it or lump it. The mistakes of this signing will be learned from, and the nuances in future deals set.
Having had time to think on it a while I feel sorry for GG. He probably thought it was over and hes in the limelight. I actually think its a lot like the residency rule maybe we didnt like it but we were not going to disadvantage ourselves when other teams used it, and we wanted the rule changed so no one could use it. This is much the same the guy has served his ban and is free to make a living, a province should not disadvanage itself having different rules to world rugby about time served bans. What needs changed it the rules. I also don’t think a ban for life would change much. Its not the punishment that deters people its the certainly of being caught that does. More testing in every sport and all age levels would do more to deter potential cheats than longer bans ever would.
@Kingshu: How can you feel sorry for the player himself? They all know the risks and he was looking to take an illegal shortcut to success in a highly lucrative sport. You might feel some small bit of sympathy if he got a lifetime ban, but otherwise no, there can and should be no sympathy.
@Noel Ryan: Not sorry about the cheating part, but that tou though it was over with in the media, I’m sure when he first played for Racing he faced it in the papers, then when he signed for Munster and played his first game. He prob that was it over with and then it comes back big time. Its hard not to have a bit of sympathy, if you think of it from his personal view, a mistake he made in the past bought up over and over again.
You’re all more worried about your teams reputation than a disgusting act of cheating that can lead to young guys getting heart attacks. Well done lads. Its just like the residency rules, we criticised big nations for stealing players, but when ireland did it most people were grand with it.
@Rudiger McMonihan: Where’s there a single mention of a clubs reputation?
@Eddie Hekenui: There are numerous comments implying this is simply an anti munster agenda. Im regularly making comments on this site against mma and athletics athletes that are cheats and nobody calls me on it, yet here when its one if our own teams with a drug cheat everyone is defending it and saying theres nothing to see here. Its hypocracy
@Rudiger McMonihan: There has been next to no comments on this thread about an Anti-Munster agenda. I’ve seen lots of those comments on other article and get the point you are making but don’t see why you mentioned it in this thread and said you all. Not everyone is defending it or saying theres nothing to see here so don’t paint everyone with the same brush
Strange none of my postings have been published here. This media attention to a single individual is akin to cyber bullying.
Theres 2 irish players up for rape at the moment and not an article about them. This kid made a mistake years ago and the D4 influence on the media make him out to be a murderer. Wise up lads. Its boring at this stage.
Well said Murray. Great job by yourselves and the other media. We’re not SA and we’re not France and we know it’s a slippy pole that will destroy Irish rugby if it gets a start.