1 2 3.....4 strikes and you're out?!

I cant believe a player will be allowed to get caught using ilicit drugs FOUR times before his contract gets terminated. May as well say,"You have to be a junkie before we stop employing you as a professional cricketer."

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/current/story/318033.html

Trev in 'It's the way Aussies are doing it so it must be wrong' shocker.

4 "lives" does seem a tad generous

For illicit drugs (as opposed to 'performance enhancing' drugs) I'm OK with it.

First offence seems to get off under many sports' codes.

Second offence gets a short suspension and the state being told.

Third offence gets a year off, and should a state be stupid enough to hire someone after a third off, then all parties concerned get what they deserve when the seemingly inevitable fourth offence comes.

It could be tougher, but strikes me as fair enough for ilicit drugs.

For steroids, etc, I have no problem with a tougher code.

Zat wrote:For illicit drugs (as opposed to 'performance enhancing' drugs) I'm OK with it.

First offence seems to get off under many sports' codes.

Second offence gets a short suspension and the state being told.

Third offence gets a year off, and should a state be stupid enough to hire someone after a third off, then all parties concerned get what they deserve when the seemingly inevitable fourth offence comes.

It could be tougher, but strikes me as fair enough for ilicit drugs.

For steroids, etc, I have no problem with a tougher code.

There are some recreational drugs that could be performance enhancing.

Less of that Drug Chat, remember when Warney did Drugs?

MidnightCowboy wrote:There are some recreational drugs that could be performance enhancing.

Yes there are. And to define them, I'm happy to defer to the gurus of sports medicine.