Saido Berahino served ban for failing doping test.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/feb/03/saido-berahino-served-eight-week-fa-disciplinary-suspension-mark-hughes-confirms-stoke-city

So, while he was at West Brom Saido Berahino served an 8 week ban for testing positive for a recreational drug and hence failing a dope test.

I don't necessarily ant to criticise Berhaino here, sure its a stupi thing to do, but I doubt the last 18 months have been particularity easy for him, stuck in a sort of limbo where no one wanted him, but I am more alarmed by the attitudes of the FA and both clubs involved with his transfer

Both Stoke and West Brom brushed off failed doping tests like it was no big deal and the FA, when discovering a player was doping seemingly looked to cover it up and not tell anyone.

People say doping isn't a problem in football, but when it is quite clear the authorities and clubs really don't care if you do it, I find it incredibly hard to believe that people aren't.

Reply 1

bj27

Its a recreational drug that has no positive effect on his ability to play football.

There's a difference to that and having epo/steroids injected into your bloodstream. Its essentially the same thing as going on a bender the day before a drug test.

Reply 2

Zerforax

Drug would still be illegal even if recreational and therefore the ban but shows why only 8 weeks.

Berahino has thrown away ceiling of his potential career over the last 18 months. Frankly I'm not sure why Stoke bothered to take such a risk on him.

Reply 3

Aky786UK

FA's stance on Berahino is odd considering Jake Livermore's drug test fail was quickly publicised (even though it seems he was going through difficult personal problems which provided context). They could say they were trying to protect him incase there were extenuating circumstances but it seems clear there weren't in Berahino's case.

West Bromwich kept it quiet because they had an asset worth minimum of £10m that they wanted to make sure they got their money and it's unlikely a club would have bought him which would have meant getting nothing for him. It's the clinical approach I guess.

Stoke have taken a punt and Hughes has worked with difficult players previously but he's going to have issues with him like Pulis did. He's hoping he'll prove people wrong by scoring consistently however his scoring records suggests he won't.

Posted from TSR Mobile