July 22, 2012

Time to close the Rahul-Parnell case

By all accounts, Rahul and Parnell did what a pair of young men might do in a big city once the working day is done
44

Rahul Sharma and Wayne Parnell have joined the list of cricketers that will soon be caught up in the sporting world's hypocrisy and confusion when it comes to the D-word: drugs. If sentence will be passed on them, in all probability it will be done by those who are not averse to the occasional beer, wine, or whisky, and who in all certainty, start their days off with a liquid injection of caffeine. Some of them might, even in these enlightened times, puff on a cigarette or two. In short, a bunch of recreational drug users will pass judgment on a pair of recreational drug users.

Perhaps, from the sidelines, an equally hypocritical and sanctimonious crowd will ask for harsher punishment. Meanwhile, that same contingent, punishers and callers-for-heads alike, will cheer when cricketers spray champagne over each other after a win and talk about the 'big night' and 'sore heads' that lie ahead.

By all accounts, Rahul and Parnell did what a pair of young men might do in a big city once the working day is done (in their case, after their commitments to their IPL team were done and dusted). They went out to party. Perhaps they smoked a joint, perhaps they just took a drag on one as it made the rounds. Perhaps, they dropped a pill of Ecstasy, and even worse, danced to dubstep and techno, and would have stayed up all night, if the Mumbai police hadn't decided to crash the party.

From the back of the police wagon that carried them off to the thana that night, Rahul and Parnell might have glumly wondered why their buddies could drink beers in dressing rooms with opponents and be praised for doing so, while they would be forced to donate their bodily fluids as evidence of criminal wrongdoing. They would wonder why there exists a category of forbidden substances called 'in-competition prohibited substances' that includes marijuana, but not alcohol or tobacco.

As professional sportsmen Rahul and Parnell should know what works for them and what doesn't when it comes to ingesting substances that might adversely affect their on-field performances. Cannabis and Ecstasy are not performance-enhancing drugs in any sense; their effect on performance-diminishment remains to be scientifically ascertained. (Vikram Rathour confesses to being surprised that Rahul tested positive as he "doesn't even drink beer." Perhaps Rahul is smarter than Rathour imagines; perhaps he knows the occasional joint will do him far less damage than the gallons of beer that cricketers of yesteryear were said to have consumed.)

If Rahul and Parnell had smoked a joint in the dressing room, they would deserve censure. But under the present circumstances, when they are on their own time, and not in the workplace, their punishments should end with the hassles they have already been subjected to.

Samir Chopra lives in Brooklyn and teaches Philosophy at the City University of New York. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • usman on September 14, 2012, 22:42 GMT

    well....the author is realli stoned i guess....i mean,if marijuana is banned in india,it can not be consumed,and if you do and then get caught,you have to pay the penalty.Its simple common sense...having beere or whisky or spraying champagne is not illegal in india.Yes,hash is a C class drug,and its not realli harmful,but thats not the point here,its not even about the icc rules on banned substances,its just basically a crime in india for which they should be punished,besides,icc also needs to make it clear which drugs are banned and which are not,i feel there is no point stopping sportsmen taking recreational drugs,yess,performance enhancing drugs should be banned...taking recreational drugs or alcahol abuse is a personal thing and all these things affect the human body negitively,hash does kill ur brain cells and alcohol is bad for liver...but u cant officially stop them from using it....

  • Shyam Sunder Reddy on August 1, 2012, 4:33 GMT

    Rahul sharma should be sentenced to jail and this will be an warning to other players not to commit such offence.And later he should be given chance to play for indian cricket as he is a good found for india.

  • Tushar on July 25, 2012, 11:54 GMT

    Its a police matter, Mr Chopra. These guys have done something that is illegal to do in India. As for BCCI, they should not ban these guys if these drugs are just competition prohibited drugs (the point author completely missed, ignored, or was not even aware of).

  • Bez on July 25, 2012, 7:41 GMT

    @Joel - You still don't seem to get it. Samir is arguing - rightfully so, I believe - that these drugs should be as legal as alcohol, caffeine, and nicotine. He's not pretending they're legal - he's saying it's ridiculous that they're illegal. And it is. And this morality play over what two grown men did in their spare time is symptomatic of the same hypocritical he-said-she-said that pervades modern sport in all facets. Simply put, if a drug doesn't enhance your performance, then its use should be a non-factor to those bodies governing your sport. As for these drugs themselves (marijuana and MDMA), it's preposterous that they continue to be treated like sin. Evaluated per capita, alcohol's literally thousands of times more dangerous than both those drugs put together. But it's difficult for people to face these truths, and that's understandable - we spend our entire lives being brainwashed that "illegal" equates to "immoral" equates to "dangerous". It's all a farce. It's fiction.

  • Anonymous on July 25, 2012, 5:54 GMT

    Sorry Mate, but its a rubbish article. I don't drink or smoke and certainly don't do drugs. In fact, I don't even drink coffee. So I can be objective about this.

    You cannot compare drugs to coffee or even Beer. In fact your whole article is misleading. Instead of saying that drugs are wrong, you are basically saying that they are no more wrong than coffee or alcohol. You are telling people that if they can accept coffee, they should accept drugs too, they aren't any worse than that.

    These cricketers knew that drugs aren't legal. While I accept that its their own time and their choice to do what they want, but these are roll-models to other kids. Maybe not by choice, but that is still the reality. BCCI can set an example by punishing them not just for them, but to show the kids that its certainly not acceptable to do drugs. Its bad enough we accept alcohol, do we really need kids growing up thinking drugs are fine?

  • Vaidya on July 25, 2012, 4:11 GMT

    Morality is a very dodgy thing. I remember having an argument about drugs (recreational) with a friend who doesn't even touch alcohol. I was saying its wrong, while he was like "I could argue the same with alcohol". It all comes to where you draw the line and who does it. It could be perfectly acceptable for some to finish a long day with a can of beer. Surely its not addicting to have one occasionally based on the kind of day you had. Doesn't mean there won't be any who'd crucify anyone who consumes even a bit of alcohol. The same argument extends to recreational drugs. Just that the view from the other side is coloured similarly. Unfortunately for Rahul and Parnell, it doesn't matter where we draw the line, the Mumbai police draws it really far from where they were. You need a "permit" to even gulp a can of beer in Mumbai.

  • Sammy on July 24, 2012, 20:12 GMT

    There is a big difference between recreational drugs and performance enhancing drugs like nandrolone which Pakistani players have been caught using and still using on a regular basis! But then again common sense is a scarce commodity across the border.

  • Ravi Sharma on July 24, 2012, 19:37 GMT

    Have never read a more stupid and presumtious article than this. To equate coffee with ecstacy? I hope that you don't tell your child that if he drinks coffee then it is okay to use ecstacy. And for the hypocrates who condone this article - will yo let your sister or son use ecstacy if they drink coffee?

    Look at the swimming champ "M. Phelp" (I think that is how his name is spelt). For a joint of marajuana, he lost some major contracts....Clearly his sponsors understand what Western value system holds and therefore pull the contracts. You are surprising me because you clearly don't undestand "drugs'. To extrapolate coffee usage to ecstacy usage is VERY simplistic and NAIVE. They sgould be punished to the full extent of the law!!!

  • Joel on July 24, 2012, 11:18 GMT

    @Bez the effects of the the various drugs mentioned is irrelevent. The simple fact is that coffee, alcohol and nicotine are all legal substances. Ecstacy and canabis are not. Therefore both players committed a crime and should be punished accordingly in lines with Indian law for first time drug offences.

  • Atul Bhogle on July 24, 2012, 9:35 GMT

    Samir, I must ask - what were you smoking? Did I just read an article by the editor of my most loved site supporting the usage of recreational drugs? The question of why drugs are illegal doesnt come up. Simple fact is, they are illegal and people are expected to follow the law of the land. I wouldnt even go into the crime that drugs encourage, and in fact, sustain, in India and rest of the world. The police are unnecessarily being made out to be the bad guys here. They raided a party where they suspected illegal drugs were being consumed and have been proven right. Where is the big injustice they are supposed to have doled out?

  • usman on September 14, 2012, 22:42 GMT

    well....the author is realli stoned i guess....i mean,if marijuana is banned in india,it can not be consumed,and if you do and then get caught,you have to pay the penalty.Its simple common sense...having beere or whisky or spraying champagne is not illegal in india.Yes,hash is a C class drug,and its not realli harmful,but thats not the point here,its not even about the icc rules on banned substances,its just basically a crime in india for which they should be punished,besides,icc also needs to make it clear which drugs are banned and which are not,i feel there is no point stopping sportsmen taking recreational drugs,yess,performance enhancing drugs should be banned...taking recreational drugs or alcahol abuse is a personal thing and all these things affect the human body negitively,hash does kill ur brain cells and alcohol is bad for liver...but u cant officially stop them from using it....

  • Shyam Sunder Reddy on August 1, 2012, 4:33 GMT

    Rahul sharma should be sentenced to jail and this will be an warning to other players not to commit such offence.And later he should be given chance to play for indian cricket as he is a good found for india.

  • Tushar on July 25, 2012, 11:54 GMT

    Its a police matter, Mr Chopra. These guys have done something that is illegal to do in India. As for BCCI, they should not ban these guys if these drugs are just competition prohibited drugs (the point author completely missed, ignored, or was not even aware of).

  • Bez on July 25, 2012, 7:41 GMT

    @Joel - You still don't seem to get it. Samir is arguing - rightfully so, I believe - that these drugs should be as legal as alcohol, caffeine, and nicotine. He's not pretending they're legal - he's saying it's ridiculous that they're illegal. And it is. And this morality play over what two grown men did in their spare time is symptomatic of the same hypocritical he-said-she-said that pervades modern sport in all facets. Simply put, if a drug doesn't enhance your performance, then its use should be a non-factor to those bodies governing your sport. As for these drugs themselves (marijuana and MDMA), it's preposterous that they continue to be treated like sin. Evaluated per capita, alcohol's literally thousands of times more dangerous than both those drugs put together. But it's difficult for people to face these truths, and that's understandable - we spend our entire lives being brainwashed that "illegal" equates to "immoral" equates to "dangerous". It's all a farce. It's fiction.

  • Anonymous on July 25, 2012, 5:54 GMT

    Sorry Mate, but its a rubbish article. I don't drink or smoke and certainly don't do drugs. In fact, I don't even drink coffee. So I can be objective about this.

    You cannot compare drugs to coffee or even Beer. In fact your whole article is misleading. Instead of saying that drugs are wrong, you are basically saying that they are no more wrong than coffee or alcohol. You are telling people that if they can accept coffee, they should accept drugs too, they aren't any worse than that.

    These cricketers knew that drugs aren't legal. While I accept that its their own time and their choice to do what they want, but these are roll-models to other kids. Maybe not by choice, but that is still the reality. BCCI can set an example by punishing them not just for them, but to show the kids that its certainly not acceptable to do drugs. Its bad enough we accept alcohol, do we really need kids growing up thinking drugs are fine?

  • Vaidya on July 25, 2012, 4:11 GMT

    Morality is a very dodgy thing. I remember having an argument about drugs (recreational) with a friend who doesn't even touch alcohol. I was saying its wrong, while he was like "I could argue the same with alcohol". It all comes to where you draw the line and who does it. It could be perfectly acceptable for some to finish a long day with a can of beer. Surely its not addicting to have one occasionally based on the kind of day you had. Doesn't mean there won't be any who'd crucify anyone who consumes even a bit of alcohol. The same argument extends to recreational drugs. Just that the view from the other side is coloured similarly. Unfortunately for Rahul and Parnell, it doesn't matter where we draw the line, the Mumbai police draws it really far from where they were. You need a "permit" to even gulp a can of beer in Mumbai.

  • Sammy on July 24, 2012, 20:12 GMT

    There is a big difference between recreational drugs and performance enhancing drugs like nandrolone which Pakistani players have been caught using and still using on a regular basis! But then again common sense is a scarce commodity across the border.

  • Ravi Sharma on July 24, 2012, 19:37 GMT

    Have never read a more stupid and presumtious article than this. To equate coffee with ecstacy? I hope that you don't tell your child that if he drinks coffee then it is okay to use ecstacy. And for the hypocrates who condone this article - will yo let your sister or son use ecstacy if they drink coffee?

    Look at the swimming champ "M. Phelp" (I think that is how his name is spelt). For a joint of marajuana, he lost some major contracts....Clearly his sponsors understand what Western value system holds and therefore pull the contracts. You are surprising me because you clearly don't undestand "drugs'. To extrapolate coffee usage to ecstacy usage is VERY simplistic and NAIVE. They sgould be punished to the full extent of the law!!!

  • Joel on July 24, 2012, 11:18 GMT

    @Bez the effects of the the various drugs mentioned is irrelevent. The simple fact is that coffee, alcohol and nicotine are all legal substances. Ecstacy and canabis are not. Therefore both players committed a crime and should be punished accordingly in lines with Indian law for first time drug offences.

  • Atul Bhogle on July 24, 2012, 9:35 GMT

    Samir, I must ask - what were you smoking? Did I just read an article by the editor of my most loved site supporting the usage of recreational drugs? The question of why drugs are illegal doesnt come up. Simple fact is, they are illegal and people are expected to follow the law of the land. I wouldnt even go into the crime that drugs encourage, and in fact, sustain, in India and rest of the world. The police are unnecessarily being made out to be the bad guys here. They raided a party where they suspected illegal drugs were being consumed and have been proven right. Where is the big injustice they are supposed to have doled out?

  • dinesh on July 24, 2012, 6:29 GMT

    im Indian and don't want any mercy for rahul and sharma.....irrespective of what some1 named samir chopra or some die hard indians say. rules are rules...ban them for atleast 2 yrs. Might be some are supprting them cause they themselves are drugs consumers. But kids watch rahul they idolise him( though he doesn't have anythin in him. and rules are rules and there's code of conduct for players which they shld follow if not punished!

  • Theena on July 24, 2012, 6:13 GMT

    Samir, excellent article, well argued out. The hypocrisy is mind-boggling but unsurprising in a world where hypocrisy is the norm and not the exception. Has anyone thought of the possibility that the two cricketers in question might have been exposed to secondary smoke from joints being smoked and passed around them? And that the MDMA, which they have also apparently been tested for, was a result of a spiked drink? Know the facts before posting your high-minded (pun unintended) opinions and coming across as sanctimonious pricks.

  • Neel on July 24, 2012, 5:59 GMT

    There is nothing wrong with smoking a joint.. it is definitely not a performance enhancing drug..it is a lot less harmful than drinking beer... it has got nothing to do with cricket and there is no question of any ban...guys those who are against it why don't you try one and see..it will help you to get rid of your stubborn and idiotic views.

  • David on July 24, 2012, 5:13 GMT

    What a ridiculous article. For a start, if you are happy to accept the big bucks, you should be willing to accept the conditions that come with it. If tobacco and alcohol were on the list, the same censure should apply - but they are not.

    This is simply a question of self control. I have no sympathy for sportspeople who throw away their careers because they can't control themselves for the 10-15 years they have to make the most of their money making opportunities. All they have to do is wait until they retire and they can go wild.

    And, from a moral POV, the sames laws should apply to the famous as to the rest of us. I can't smoke dope or drop ectasy, why should they be allowed to?

    And, like it or not, one of the things sportspeople get paid so much for is because they are role models for the young. If they can't handle that scrutiny, or call it unfair, go play in the minors where noone is watching - just don't be upset to get paid accordingly.

  • Ganesh G on July 24, 2012, 3:23 GMT

    Samir Chopra,

    May I ask if you truly have lost it? Are you seriously saying that drinking beer and taking drugs are the same? If you haven't been around the world for the last few years, let me remind you that 'joints' are ILLEGAL. It is a criminal offence to possess or use one. You're saying that since men can flirt with women and take them home from parties, rapists should also be allowed!! Here's the deal - it is NOT OK to use and promote the use of illegal substances - whether it is cannabis, cocaine, heroin or even now Gutkha. Young people need to understand that recreation is not taking drugs - it is about exploring new things - travelling, learning a new sport, a talent, history, meeting people, understanding cultures etc.

    This is the most preposterous article I've seen from you in a long time and believe me, I HAVE seen a few.

  • Bez on July 24, 2012, 2:28 GMT

    Fantastic article. I'm amused (but not surprised) by the commentary that followed. Typical refrains of "it's immoral" and "they should set an example", etc. Did you people not *get* the article? Alcohol is a drug. Tobacco is a drug. Caffeine is a drug. All three those drugs, individually, are more health-destructive and more addictive than either marijuana or MDMA (typical active ingredient in E). That is evidence-supported *fact*, people. Chopra rightly points out the hypocrisy in judging someone for indulging from the latter category when everyone (including the judges) blithely continue to indulge from the former category. It's also notable that the only two drugs out of all five the aforementioned which have been shown to enhance physical performance are nicotine and caffeine. As for morality, that's absolutely irrelevant. Drugs aren't immoral. Drug laws and sanctions are usually divorced from the real effects of the drugs themselves. Study your history - educate yourselves.

  • Satadru Sen on July 24, 2012, 2:07 GMT

    What a bunch of sanctimonious moralists! Either they're all extravagantly law-abiding and pious, or sickeningly hypocritical. (I hope their families are all dowry-free, and none of them have had a drink in Gujarat, or bug***ed anyone prior to 2010, let alone smoked a joint.) Anyway, Samir raises several points that are entirely valid in how law-enforcement works in any democracy. Sharma and Parnell were arrested for...what exactly? Being at a dance party? Is that a crime? Unless it is, what grounds did the police have for requiring them to give their body fluids for testing? Were they caught passing drugs around? Were they caught selling? Sounds like unlawful search and seizure to me. And in any case, since neither Ecstasy nor pot has been known to improve a cover drive or an off-break, none of this is the business of cricket administrators.

  • VC on July 24, 2012, 1:10 GMT

    Salman Ali Rai, if people were arrested for illegality, then the entire nation would be in trail including the government for smoking pot as well as any teenager and adults under the age of 25( legal drinking age in India) -we would have a bit of an anarchy on our hands. Moreover, the entire Pakistan cricket team would be banned. Its time to get real... He should be fined and perhaps humiliated like he has been already but definitely not banned. Completely agree with the author.

  • Arshad Khan on July 23, 2012, 17:57 GMT

    Just for the sake of record, today's saints Waseem Akram and Waqar Younis were arrested in WI for smoking hash. Today, both of them are 'flawless' and successful commentators....different rules for different people

  • rayner on July 23, 2012, 15:47 GMT

    I think you need to be adressing the position of the modern world rather than the ICC or BCCI, this problem has far deeper roots than cricket. I agree completley with your point but people have set beliefs that are imprinted into them by government propaganda. Look at the UK, a huge research project was done into soft drugs, the outcome; make all illegal drugs legal. The government at the time just dismissed the findings, sacked the researchers and moved on beacuse this would not have been 'popular' and perhaps resulted in them not being elected again.

  • Faraz Paracha on July 23, 2012, 10:14 GMT

    Apologies but wouldn't agree with your piece my friend. Now that its an Indian and South African player involved, the penalties should be mild and soft, why exactly? And how innocently have you defended them as if they were underage rookies who were forced into it. As professional sportsmen they should know what they can and what they can not consume! A joint here and there should instead of might, cost them their place in their respective squads and rightly so, apart from their commitment to their countries and teams, they have a moral obligation as well towards all those who follow them or intend to follow their footsteps. Shame on both of them!

  • Sriram on July 23, 2012, 8:14 GMT

    This article is missing a core and most important point of all - "The quantity" - instead start belittling those who drink coffee and calls some as sanctimonious. In today's world it is nearly impossible to find a person not associated with the drugs in some form - be it the examples that you gave or in addition to those, the opioid pain killers that people take. However, the quantity defines the difference between the medicine, entertainment or simply ecstacy that will make you lose your balance. It is not justifiable in any form and one must draw reference to the cases where inappropriate behavior due to alcohol abuses have been reprimanded in a timely manner - Freddie and the NZ opener can provide testimonies here.

  • Venkat on July 23, 2012, 7:07 GMT

    It is illegal to smoke marijuana in India. And while you may moan about what a ridiculous law it is (I certainly don't agree with it myself), it is the law. And you've got to respect the law of that land when you are there. If Rahul Sharma and Wayne Parnell have tested positive for it, they deserve to be punished as the law deems fit. And if you have a problem with the law go and campaign to change it. But as it stands they face punishment and there should be no sympathy.

  • Shafiq on July 23, 2012, 6:59 GMT

    Yes sure it is not a big deal, because they are neither Shoaib and Asif, nor the Pakistanis! Case should be closed.

  • SMTG on July 23, 2012, 6:47 GMT

    All what you have written is a big load of crap. You either decide to weed out the problem of drugs from cricket, and for that you need to give out harsh penalties to the players, if they are found using the drugs. If idiots like you don't like this fact, that is just to bad. Next thing you know, a player gets caught using drugs in a world cup and the biggest fools and hypocrites like you will be the ones defending them and encouraging the players to abuse drugs.

  • Balumekka on July 23, 2012, 6:10 GMT

    Yes, recreational drug use and performance enhancer use cannot be considered same as far as any sport is considered.But if the stuff consumed by Rahul and Parnell are banned substance by BCCI, in any case what's the point of the argument against punishing them?

  • Vaibhav on July 23, 2012, 3:59 GMT

    I think that both marijuana and ecstasy pills are in competition prohibited drugs and both of them were found to have taken after the competition they were participating was already over. I do not think that they should be penelised heavily or harshly in this case.

  • Vivek on July 23, 2012, 2:17 GMT

    When people compare this to the Pakistani fast bowlers case they are wrong. They have to realize that those were performance enhancing drugs. I still believe that Parnell and Sharma should be banned for at least 5 years so that other cricketers learn that they can't get away with this. A professional athlete can't be smoking marijuana.It just doesn't work that way.

  • DarkKnight on July 22, 2012, 22:55 GMT

    Most people in the comments section who are taking the high ground have no idea what they are talking about.Occasional use of recreational drugs never hurt anyone.and i can't understand how weed is a "performance enhancing drug". if staring at stuff were an event sure it would help.

  • Desi on July 22, 2012, 22:05 GMT

    The author am sure had a joint in hand while compiling this article. Defense doesnt make sense just because they are in the limelight, almost anyone would get punished if tested positive on those drugs. Its a shame this article got through with the editors.

  • Woody Venkat on July 22, 2012, 21:48 GMT

    Anyone who doesn't think this article is anything but brilliant is completely ignorant to recreational drug use. Smoking a joint is far less damaging than being an alcoholic. Many past and present cricketers have severe alcohol problems.

  • Paul on July 22, 2012, 19:56 GMT

    I don't think the issue is the hypocrisy of certain drugs being acceptable and others not. Whatever the merits of the laws, public figures have a responsibility to be seen to be obeying them.

  • Paul on July 22, 2012, 19:56 GMT

    I don't think the issue is the hypocrisy of certain drugs being acceptable and others not. Whatever the merits of the laws, public figures have a responsibility to be seen to be obeying them.

  • shaukat on July 22, 2012, 19:42 GMT

    I don't think its nice article, have u forgoten when PAK's one of the best and dangerous fast bowlers couple in the world of cricket were suspended by PCB and it was a same situation. Don't you forgot they were despatched from India on first available flight just a day or two before champions trophy. This is ridiculous article. How can you close the case because there is one Indian involved? Do you have any answer?

  • ashu on July 22, 2012, 18:54 GMT

    are you kidding me? you are trying to say smoking a joint is acceptable just because one works hard .why is this article on cricinfo, it is completely against what cricinfo stands for. ridiculous article

  • vikram on July 22, 2012, 18:51 GMT

    what about the ambiguity in the test results?

  • Varun on July 22, 2012, 18:37 GMT

    Seems like you two fine fellas have never smoked a joint. Pity.

  • Ravi on July 22, 2012, 18:24 GMT

    Nice article that not only addressed the issue, but subtly justified the use of recreational drugs, by equating ecstacy with coffee. I totally agree that the cricketers have been punished enough by the adverse coverage they have received so far on this. Letting them go unpunished is setting a precedent. Letting them be punished is uncalled for. BCCI is in a catch-22 situation, and I would like to see how they handle this. I am not surprised to see the two other comments on this so far have asked for Rahul's head. Dont we all think that we are without sin, and want to always cast the first stone at the one person who is "caught" for his sin!?

  • first slip on July 22, 2012, 17:51 GMT

    this is the second incident involving SA cricketers and recreational drugs in the past month or so. first Rory Klienveld and now Parnell. Come on must we turn a blind eye. GET REAL. THERE IS A PATTERN HERE. CSA MUST ACT NOW AND QUICKLY

  • Santosh. Ch on July 22, 2012, 16:41 GMT

    Sharma & Parnell...Both are such talented guys..Both are professional cricketers for long time.. They should know what is legal and illegal substance even for recreation. I pity them..A lesson to learn for several young people of India..No matter, how talented they are, bad habits will doom you..

  • Chris on July 22, 2012, 16:31 GMT

    @Salman Ali Rai It does matter where and when it is taken!! go and read the rules. instead of announcing your judgement because he is an 'Indian'.

  • Sachin Agarwal on July 22, 2012, 16:15 GMT

    I would say this case should be decided on its merit , not by sentiments on either side of the decision line. I am sure this is not the first occurrence in the world of this kind. What does World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) rules say ? If the rules are fuzzy in BCCI and ICC land, this would be a good chance to create and enforce these rules.

    All though i am not in favor of a very harsh ban, a very light ban would mean set a very bad precedence for other cricketers and public. This is a tough one to crack for BCCI, but going by its past diktats, it will sleep on it for months, then have a ridiculous decision such as "3 months suspension, which you have already served waiting for the decision".

  • Salman Ali Rai on July 22, 2012, 15:41 GMT

    For your information both of these drugs for which Rahul is found guilty are in the banned substance list of BCCI. So no mercy for Rahul, no matter where and when this substance was taken.The fact is he used an illegal subtance and should be arrested and sent to trail.

  • Soulberry on July 22, 2012, 15:22 GMT

    I beg to disagree on this one Samir even though I understand your sentiments. Too many watch intricately the likes of Sharma-Parnell and very little of those you described as punishers. Hash and Ecstasy are pores that open out to let kids in to a deeper world.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Soulberry on July 22, 2012, 15:22 GMT

    I beg to disagree on this one Samir even though I understand your sentiments. Too many watch intricately the likes of Sharma-Parnell and very little of those you described as punishers. Hash and Ecstasy are pores that open out to let kids in to a deeper world.

  • Salman Ali Rai on July 22, 2012, 15:41 GMT

    For your information both of these drugs for which Rahul is found guilty are in the banned substance list of BCCI. So no mercy for Rahul, no matter where and when this substance was taken.The fact is he used an illegal subtance and should be arrested and sent to trail.

  • Sachin Agarwal on July 22, 2012, 16:15 GMT

    I would say this case should be decided on its merit , not by sentiments on either side of the decision line. I am sure this is not the first occurrence in the world of this kind. What does World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) rules say ? If the rules are fuzzy in BCCI and ICC land, this would be a good chance to create and enforce these rules.

    All though i am not in favor of a very harsh ban, a very light ban would mean set a very bad precedence for other cricketers and public. This is a tough one to crack for BCCI, but going by its past diktats, it will sleep on it for months, then have a ridiculous decision such as "3 months suspension, which you have already served waiting for the decision".

  • Chris on July 22, 2012, 16:31 GMT

    @Salman Ali Rai It does matter where and when it is taken!! go and read the rules. instead of announcing your judgement because he is an 'Indian'.

  • Santosh. Ch on July 22, 2012, 16:41 GMT

    Sharma & Parnell...Both are such talented guys..Both are professional cricketers for long time.. They should know what is legal and illegal substance even for recreation. I pity them..A lesson to learn for several young people of India..No matter, how talented they are, bad habits will doom you..

  • first slip on July 22, 2012, 17:51 GMT

    this is the second incident involving SA cricketers and recreational drugs in the past month or so. first Rory Klienveld and now Parnell. Come on must we turn a blind eye. GET REAL. THERE IS A PATTERN HERE. CSA MUST ACT NOW AND QUICKLY

  • Ravi on July 22, 2012, 18:24 GMT

    Nice article that not only addressed the issue, but subtly justified the use of recreational drugs, by equating ecstacy with coffee. I totally agree that the cricketers have been punished enough by the adverse coverage they have received so far on this. Letting them go unpunished is setting a precedent. Letting them be punished is uncalled for. BCCI is in a catch-22 situation, and I would like to see how they handle this. I am not surprised to see the two other comments on this so far have asked for Rahul's head. Dont we all think that we are without sin, and want to always cast the first stone at the one person who is "caught" for his sin!?

  • Varun on July 22, 2012, 18:37 GMT

    Seems like you two fine fellas have never smoked a joint. Pity.

  • vikram on July 22, 2012, 18:51 GMT

    what about the ambiguity in the test results?

  • ashu on July 22, 2012, 18:54 GMT

    are you kidding me? you are trying to say smoking a joint is acceptable just because one works hard .why is this article on cricinfo, it is completely against what cricinfo stands for. ridiculous article