Quote Originally Posted by Syn View Post
You're right. The reward is very high and the margins of success are very small. There could be an incentive for trying to cheat the system. Drugs isn't the only way to do that - maybe other measures are less risky (though none come to mind).

But again, without wishing to go back to a rant about Arsenal, the success of the club on the pitch is not necessarily the club's major goal. Making money is. It matters that the club and players want to win at any cost for this to work. If the players are happy on their silly money they might not want to risk it. And the club can't really force them into it for fear of being heavily sued/destroyed.

I'd say the risks of getting caught for either player or club would be pretty severe now. I guess your initial point was that it could be easy not to get caught but, as I say, I don't know how rigorous the testing is - it's not something that's publicised too well but that doesn't mean it's not competitive.
If the Armstrong scandal has shown us anything, it is that given enough money and influence, the dopers are so far ahead of the testers that without whistleblowers, you can basically be confident of never getting caught.

Because of the risk of covers being blow, I'm not sure that clubs are likely systematically to be involved in doping. But with the sheer amount of money on hand for top footballers, it would not surprise me at all if individual players and their agents were involved in doping. People ask why would it be needed in football. Well, football is no different from any other sport - drugs will help athletes train harder, for longer, and therefore improve on pitch performance.

Also, players are often so thick, and greedy, that you can imagine them taking 'supplements' without ever really knowing or caring what they are.